Is Death Sleep?

[herev]

That denies the Resurrection however and the Judgement, which is in violation of the Nicene Creed.

Not necessariy, there are a numer of ways of putting those together. One can believe in individual resurrection and judgement, or one can believe in two judgements, or and the list goes on. My question to you is this. Is there any harm in her believing that her child is with God now? Will it change anything to correct her? If, when we die, we go straight to heaven, the next thing we know, we are there. If when we die, we sleep until the rapture, then the next thing we know--its the rapture. Either way, the next place I see will be heavenly.
I know in a previous post, you have said that the dead are aware they are dead, but I asked for a scripture to back that up and didn't get one back.
AS for me, I posted an answer to a woman who asked, Do we know our loved ones in heaven? It also has influenced my belief--and it is just a belief--that we go to be with Jesus when we die--not later.
REgards, Tommy

http://www.christianforums.com/t710130

 

[PaladinValer]

Not necessariy, there are a numer of ways of putting those together. One can believe in individual resurrection and judgement, or one can believe in two judgements, or and the list goes on.

That is still contrary to the Creeds. They state 1 Resurrection and 1 Judgement only.

 

[herev]

That is still contrary to the Creeds. They state 1 Resurrection and 1 Judgement only.

actually the nicene and the Apostles' creeds only mention one, they do not say ONLY one.
Nicene Creed
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through Him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
He came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
He became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
He suffered death and was buried.
On the third day He rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and His kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father.*
With the Father and the Son He is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. AMEN.

*Roman Catholics and Protestants add ‘and the Son’ at this point.

Apostles' Creed
I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.

And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into hell; the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic Church; the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. AMEN
Does this mean there is ONLY one? Good point, though!

 

[PaladinValer]

The very word "the" signifies and implies a single Resurrection and Judgment.

In addition, the idea of multiple resurrections or multiple second comings was declared heretical when apollinarianism and chiliasm were nixed together in the Ecumenical Councils from orthodoxy.

 

[Philip]

The Creed also states that Christ will come again to judge. If you accept individual judgements occuring at each death, how do you reconcile this?

 

[PaladinValer]

The Creed also states that Christ will come again to judge. If you accept individual judgements occuring at each death, how do you reconcile this?

Oops! I forgot that!

Excellent catch!

 

[herev]

The very word "the" signifies and implies a single Resurrection and Judgment.

In addition, the idea of multiple resurrections or multiple second comings was declared heretical when apollinarianism and chiliasm were nixed together in the Ecumenical Councils from orthodoxy.

Ok, I really understand the word "the" argument, but "the" resurrection of the body could be interpreted to suggest that "the" resurrection of the body was one thing and then there could be "the" resurrection of the soul.
As to: In addition, the idea of multiple resurrections or multiple second comings was declared heretical when apollinarianism and chiliasm were nixed together in the Ecumenical Councils from orthodoxy. I'm not sure wht apollinarianism or chiliasm would have to do with that.
Look, I too have studied around the notion of how to reconcile the disputes that can be found in the Bible as to what happens when we die. My point is simply that we really don't know and that believing that the sould goes to heaven and the body is resurrected upon the return of Christ and rejoined with the soul is a valid interpretation. The lady has some peace in her beliefs after a difficult loss, let's not call her a heretic for it.
Thanks for sharing your insights with me young man, you're very intelligent.
Rev. Tommy Conder

 

[herev]

The Creed also states that Christ will come again to judge. If you accept individual judgements occuring at each death, how do you reconcile this?

I'm not sure what you mean. each death? don't believe in more than one death--didn't mean suggest I did. I personally do not beleive in more than one judgement. I have heard argued quite well, though, that there is a judgement of salvation that happens at death--and another judgement based on our works that comes with rewards. each death--I don't get it. Sorry. I'll check in again later.

 

[Symes]

Hello Symes

A few questions for you.


Why do you think the child is watching in the first place?


Regardless of loosing someone or not , don't you wish you could be with Jesus right now?


Regardless of the issue of soul sleep, would you still notlong today to be with your loved ones when Christ returns?



Why would you complain about being being a part of the greatest event in history? The physical return and establishment of Christ's rule.

Yours in Christ
DEU58

Let's assume I am having a hard time on this earth. Would I want one of my children in heaven watching me go through that?

I do not think so.

If a child is in heaven I see no reason to think that the child would not see and be aware of what goes on here.

We will get the chance to be with our loved ones at the Second Coming, but not before.

 

[PaladinValer]

I'm not sure what you mean. each death? don't believe in more than one death--didn't mean suggest I did. I personally do not beleive in more than one judgement. I have heard argued quite well, though, that there is a judgement of salvation that happens at death--and another judgement based on our works that comes with rewards. each death--I don't get it. Sorry. I'll check in again later.

Basically, it goes like this:

If each person is individually judged at death, then the Second Coming is of no consequence since He is Coming to Judge the living and the dead. Both all at once. It is a critical part of the Secoming Coming of the Christ.

But for the dead to be Judged, they must be Resurrected. And if they are in heaven already, there is no need for that. But since they must and then be Judged, they obviously cannot be in heaven, since only the Judge can allow access to heaven, and he won't do that until He comes. And until He comes, the dead are neither in heaven or hell but are in sheol, the realm of the dead.

So it goes Life -> Death -> Sheol -> Resurrection -> Judgement -> Heaven or Hell if you died before Jesus comes back. If you are alive, skip steps 2-4, or Life -> Judgment -> Heaven or Hell.

 

[PaladinValer]

Ok, I really understand the word "the" argument, but "the" resurrection of the body could be interpreted to suggest that "the" resurrection of the body was one thing and then there could be "the" resurrection of the soul.

Read on why

As to: In addition, the idea of multiple resurrections or multiple second comings was declared heretical when apollinarianism and chiliasm were nixed together in the Ecumenical Councils from orthodoxy. I'm not sure wht apollinarianism or chiliasm would have to do with that.

The apollinarians were chiliasts; it is one reason why they were declared heretical. They taught of multiple resurrections and judgments. So that is why such beliefs aren't considered orthodox.

 

[deu58]

Hello Symes

Let's assume I am having a hard time on this earth. Would I want one of my children in heaven watching me go through that?

I do not think so.

If a child is in heaven I see no reason to think that the child would not see and be aware of what goes on here.

For one I do not believe they are watching us. Unless you tell me otherwise I am going to assume the reason you believe this is because of the Adventist belief that there are alien beings on other worlds created by God who were not affected by the fall and they are watching our daily activities because God is proving to them he is really just and truly deserves to rule. A belief which I am sure you already know I totally reject

How hard of a time are you going to have in the kingdom of Christ knowing that friends and family of yours who never accepted Christ are lost forever in hell with no chance of redemption. Gone forever.

Isa 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.

Isa 66:23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.

Isa 66:24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

This is a prophecy that is fulfilled in the New Heavens and the New Earth spoken of in Revelation. He uses the same words that Jesus uses in Mark 9. " Their worm shall not die".

Mr 9:44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

It seems pretty plain to me. I do not think it takes a degree in theology to get the point Jesus is making here. They do not die and they do not sleep. Now if they are not sleeping during the second death which is the death we should truly fear then why should it be so difficult to accept that the departed believers are awake in the Lord Jesus today?

Yours in Christ
DEU58

 

[herev]

Read on why

[/color][/size][/font]

The apollinarians were chiliasts; it is one reason why they were declared heretical. They taught of multiple resurrections and judgments. So that is why such beliefs aren't considered orthodox.

source: http://mb-soft.com/believe/txn/apollin.htm
Apollinarianism was a 4th-century explanation of the nature of Jesus Christ that was rejected by the Christian church. Its author, Apollinaris of Laodicea (310-90), trying to arrive at a formula that would explain how Jesus could be both human and divine, taught that human beings were composed of body, soul, and spirit, and that in Jesus the human spirit was replaced by the Logos, or the second person of the Trinity. This teaching was opposed by Athanasius, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory of Nyssa because they thought it implied that Christ was not fully human. Apollinarianism was declared a heresy by the First Council of Constantinople in 381.
source: http://members.aol.com/twarren14/reformedchil.html
Chiliasm is the belief that Christ will return to establish a glorious kingdom of peace on this earth for one thousand years. The term comes from a Greek word that means one thousand, and arises out of the reference in Revelation 20 to a thousand-year period in which Satan is bound and the souls of martyrs reign with Christ. Chiliasm is distinct from the present day premillennialism in that chiliasm does not teach a secret rapture or emphasize dispensations. Some of the early church fathers held to a form of chiliasm. However, it died out in the church after Augustine came to understand that the millennium is not a literal one thousand-year period, but is the era from Christ's ascension to His second coming.
I am truly interested, so help me understand. I still see no understanding of either of these relating.
Thanks

 

[herev]

Basically, it goes like this:

If each person is individually judged at death, then the Second Coming is of no consequence since He is Coming to Judge the living and the dead. Both all at once. It is a critical part of the Secoming Coming of the Christ.

But for the dead to be Judged, they must be Resurrected. And if they are in heaven already, there is no need for that. But since they must and then be Judged, they obviously cannot be in heaven, since only the Judge can allow access to heaven, and he won't do that until He comes. And until He comes, the dead are neither in heaven or hell but are in sheol, the realm of the dead.

So it goes Life -> Death -> Sheol -> Resurrection -> Judgement -> Heaven or Hell if you died before Jesus comes back. If you are alive, skip steps 2-4, or Life -> Judgment -> Heaven or Hell.

Ah, I see where you're coming from. I don't agree, but thanks
God bless

 

[@@Paul@@]

Ah, I see where you're coming from. I don't agree 100% yet, but thanks
God bless

Are all of the above arguments assuming man has a duel nature ? i.e. Body>Soul? vs. Body>Soul>Spirit?

 

[PaladinValer]

Body-Soul-Spirit is an apollinarian heresy.

Apollinaris according to what I've learned was a Chiliast. In addition, modern day premillennialism really is just a simply modified verion of Chiliasm, just like Semi-Pelagialism is with full Pelagialism.

 

[seangoh]

Ok back to the original question.

Why? Take Lazarus for example. When Christ raised him from the dead, there was no mention of him being in Heaven. Was there? I mean, wouldn't Lazarus of said something like "Hey, I was Heaven enjoying a perfect eternity and you brought me back here?" I think he was sleeping just like the Adventists believe.

Agreed. Sometimes silence in the bible can be significant. Furthermore, if you read the story carefully, Jesus equates sleep to death.

"After he had said this, he went on to tell them, ‘‘Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up." His disciples replied, ‘‘Lord, if he sleeps, he will get better.” Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep. So then he told them plainly, ‘‘Lazarus is dead, ""John 11:11-14

Another similar incident is Matt 9:24 where sleep is used to describe death.

It's not surprising that sleep is often used as a euphemism for death for 3 reasons.
1) First, there is a similarity between the "sleep" of the dead and the "sleep" of the living. Both are characterized by a condition of unconsciousness and inactivity which is interrupted by an awakening. Thus, the "sleep" metaphor fittingly represents the unconscious state of the dead and their awakening on the day of Christ's return.

2) A second reason for the use of the "sleep" metaphor is suggested by the fact that it is a hope-inspiring figure of speech to represent death. It implies the assurance of a later awakening. As a person goes to sleep at night in the hope of awakening in the morning, so the believer falls asleep in the Lord in the assurance of being awakened by Christ on resurrection morning.

3) A third reason for the use of the "sleep" metaphor is suggested by the fact that there is no consciousness of the elapse of time in sleep. Thus, the metaphor provides a fitting representation of the unconscious state of the deceased between death and resurrection. They have no awareness of the passing of time.

Many at my church respond with "How about the thief on the cross?" When Christ said, "Today, you will be in paradise". Well, it's possible to be in paradise and be asleep isn't it? Maybe you do indeed go to Heaven when you die, but you're not immediately aware of it. What do you think?

The text where you took that from is Luke 23:43 and it says
"Jesus answered him, ‘‘I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.”

Well, your reasoning is new..but there are some problems.
Notice two things wrong with this assumption that ppl go to heaven immediately upon death. First: Even though Jesus told the thief, "Verily I say unto thee, today shalt thou be with me in paradise," three days later He told Mary that He had not yet ascended to His Father.

Here is the evidence that His Father was in Paradise: Revelation 2:7 says the tree of life "is in the midst of the paradise of God," and Revelation 22:1,2 describes the tree of life by the side of the river of life which flows, in turn, from the throne of God. So there is no question about the Father's throne being located in Paradise. The question is: How could Jesus have told the thief that He would be with him in Paradise that day when He did not go there until three days later?

In the second place, Jesus and the thief did not even die on the same day. When the soldiers came just before sunset to take the bodies off the cross, Jesus was already dead (John 19:32-34). The thieves were very much alive, and their legs were broken to hasten death and to prevent them from escaping. They undoubtedly lived past sunset into the hours of the Sabbath and possibly longer. So how could Jesus assure the thief of being with Him in Paradise that day when they did not both die on "that day"?

The apparent contradictions clear up when we consider that the punctuation of Luke 23:43 was added by uninspired men when our English Bible was translated. They placed a comma before the word "today," when in reality it should have been placed after the word "today." Then the verse would correctly read: "Verily I say unto thee today, Thou shalt be with me in Paradise." In other words, Jesus was saying: "I give you the assurance today, when it seems I can save no man--today, when my disciples have forsaken me and I'm dying as a criminal dies, I assure you of salvation."

Please notice that the thief did not ask to be taken to Paradise then. He asked, "Lord remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom." That's exactly when he will be remembered and taken into that kingdom.

The second issue. Hell. I always had trouble believing God would send someone to burn forever. I mean, what would be accomplished by this? This issue was never a real concern for me because I don't plan on going, so it's kind of a mute point. But it does show I agree more with the Seventh-day Adventists on this point then my own church.

God is love and God is fair. A lifetime of sinning does't even deserve an eternity of hell. God always comes up with the best methods for the sake of everyone. The best method is not eternal hellfire but eternal annihillation.

The only issue I found that I disagreed with was the issue of baptism. Now, maybe I read it wrong, but the site seemed to imply that you have to be baptized after you have come of age. And, also, you must be baptized by immersion. I was baptized as a child. So this issue is a stickler for me.

Baptism if often linked to the idea of marriage. When we love someone, the expression of our mutual love is marriage. This can be seen as an outward declaration of love not only to each other but to everyone else. God requires that as far as possible, if we enter into a relationship with God, then baptism would be the next step. Why do i say as far as possible? coz there are some incidents where repentence occurs on the deathbed and you can't do anything about it. eg..thief on the cross.

Repent, and be baptized every one of you. Acts 2:38.

They that gladly received his word were baptized. Acts 2:41.

Other then the baptism question, I agree quite a bit with the Seventh-day Adventists theology. I was raised a Presbyterian. How do you feel about the above issues?

That's how i feel. Thanks for asking.

 

[hraedisc]

I was reading the beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventists on a Website this morning. I was surprised to find that I agree with almost everything they believe. Two of the beliefs that I personally agree with but was not taught growing up, are:

1) Death is an unconscious state until Christ returns.

2) When the unrighteous die, they are gone forever. No Hell for eternity. Just gone.

I tend to agree with these two statements...

These 2 beliefs are biblical and were believed before Seventh-day Adventists were denominated.

Truth is not, and never has been, established by human majorities. Theological truth is ever, and only, based upon the immutable Word of God and determined by its inspired precepts and principles. But always there have been godly and scholarly champions of genuine truth. And this is definitely the case with the doctrine of immortality in, and only in and through, Jesus Christ at His second advent.

The next posts are from this site:

http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/books/qod/q44.htm

 

[hraedisc]

The Historical Setting

On December 19, 1513, in connection with the eighth session of the fifth Lateran Council, Pope Leo X issued a Bull (Apostolici regimis) declaring, "We do condemn and reprobate all who assert that the intelligent soul is mortal" (Damnamus et reprobamus omnes assertentes animam intellectivam mortalem esse). This was directed against the growing "heresy" of those who denied the natural immortality of the soul, and avowed the conditional immortality of man. The Bull also decreed that "all who adhere to the like erroneous assertions shall be shunned and punished as heretics." The decrees of this Council, it should be noted, were all issued in the form of Bulls or constitutions (H. J. Schroeder, Disciplinary Decrees of the General Councils, 1937, pp. 483, 487).

In 1516 Pietro Pomponatius, of Mantua, noted Italian professor and leader among the Averrorists (who denied the immortality of the soul), issued a

570

book in opposition to this position called Treatise on the Immortality of the Soul. This was widely read, especially in the Italian universities. As a result, he was haled before the Inquisition, and his book publicly burned in Venice.

Then, on October 31, 1517, Luther posted his famous Theses on the church door in Wittenberg. In his 1520 published Defence of 41 of his propositions, Luther cited the pope's immortality declaration, as among "those monstrous opinions to be found in the Roman dunghill of decretals" (proposition 27). In the twenty-seventh proposition of his Defence Luther said:

However, I permit the Pope to establish articles of faith for himself and for his own faithful—such are: That the bread and wine are transubstantiated in the sacrament; that the essence of God neither generates nor is generated; that the soul is the substantial form of the human body; that he [the pope] is emperor of the world and king of heaven, and earthly god; that the soul is immortal; and all these endless monstrosities in the Roman dunghill of decretals—in order that such as his faith is, such may be his gospel, such also his faithful, and such his church, and that the lips may have suitable lettuce and the lid may be worthy of the dish. Martin Luther, Assertio Omnium Articulorum M. Lutheri per Bullam Leonis X. Novissimam Damnatorum (Assertion of all the articles of M. Luther condemned by the latest Bull of Leo X), article 27, Weimar edition of Luther's Works, vol. 7, pp. 131, 132 (a point-by-point exposition of his position, written Dec. 1, 1520, in response to requests for a fuller treatment than that given in his Adversus execrabilem Antichristi Bullam, and Wider die Bulle des Endchrists).

​

Archdeacon Francis Blackburne states in his Short Historical View of the Controversy Concerning an Intermediate State, of 1765:

Luther espoused the doctrine of the sleep of the soul, upon a Scripture foundation, and then he made use of it as a confutaion of purgatory, and saint worship, and continued in that belief to the last moment of his life.—Page 14.

​

571 In support, Blackburne has an extended Appendix section dealing with Luther's teaching as set forth in his writings, and discusses the charges and counter-charges.*

Here follow certain of the leading witnesses of recent centuries, with Luther and Tyndale in some detail

 

[hraedisc]

Sixteenth Century
​

Martin Luther (1493-1546), German Reformer and Bible translator

The immediate cause of Luther's stand on the sleep of the soul was the issue of purgatory, with its postulate of the conscious torment of anguished souls. While Luther is not always consistent, the predominant note running all through his writings is that souls sleep in peace, without consciousness or pain. The Christian dead are not aware of anything—see not, feel not, understand not, and are not conscious of passing events. Luther held and periodically stated that in the sleep of death, as in normal physical sleep, there is complete unconsciousness and unawareness of the condition of death or the passage of time.** Death is a deep, sound, sweet sleep.*** And the dead will remain asleep
______ [size=-1]
*The Lutheran scholar Dr. T. A. Kantonen ([/size]The Christian Hope, 1594, p. 37), likewise referred to Luther's position in these words:
"Luther, with a greater emphasis on the resurrection preferred to concentrate on the scriptural metaphor of sleep. For just as one who falls asleep and reaches morning unexpectedly when he awakes, without knowing what has happened to him so we shall suddenly rise on the last day without knowing how we have come into death and through death.' 'We shall sleep, until He comes and knocks on the little grave and says, Doctor Martin, get up! Then I shall rise in a moment, and be happy with Him forever.' "

**See "Auslegung des ersten Buches Mose" (1544) in Schriften, vol. 1, col. 1756; "Kirchen-Postille" (1528) in Schriften, vol. 11, col. 1143; Schriften, vol. 2, col. 1(169; Deutsche Schriften (Erlangen ed.), vol. 11, p. 142ff.; vol. 41 (1525), p. 373.

*** "Catechetische Schriften" 1542), in Schriften, vol. 11, pp. 287, 288.

572

until the day of resurrection,* which resurrection embraces both body and soul, when both will come together again.**

Here are sample Luther citations. In the quaint 1573 English translation we read:

Salomon iudgeth that the dead are a sleepe, and feele nothing at all. For the dead lye there accompting neyther dayes nor yeares, but when they are awaked, they shall seeme to haue slept scarce one minute.—An Exposition of Salomon's Booke, Called Ecclesiastes or the Preacher, 1573, folio 151v.

But we Christians, who have been redeemed from all this through the precious blood of God's Son, should train and accustom ourselves in faith to despise death and regard it as a deep, strong, sweet sleep; to consider the coffin as nothing other than our Lord Jesus' bosom or Paradise, the grave as nothing other than a soft couch of ease or rest. As verily, before God, it truly is just this; for he testifies, John 11:11: Lazarus, our friend sleeps; Matthew 9:24: The maiden is not dead, she sleeps. Thus, too, St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, removes from sight all hateful aspects of death as related to our mortal body and brings forward nothing but charming and joyful aspects of the promised life. He says there [vv. 42ff]: It is sown in corruption and will rise in incorruption; it is sown in dishonor (that is, a hateful, shameful form) and will rise in glory; it is sown in weakness and will rise in strength; it is sown in natural body and will rise a spiritual body.—"Christian Song Latin and German, for Use at Funerals," 1542, in Works of Luther (1932), vol. 6, pp. 287, 288.

Thus after death the soul goes to its bedchamber and to its peace, and while it is sleeping it does not realize its sleep, and God preserves indeed the awakening soul. God is able to awake Elijah, Moses, and others, and so control them, so that they will live. But how can that be? That we do not know; we satisfy ourselves with the example of bodily sleep, and with what God says: it is a sleep, a rest, and a peace. He who sleeps naturally knows nothing of that which happens in his neighbor's house; and

​

_______
*[size=-1]"Auslegungen uber die Psalmen [31" in 1533 in Schriften, vol. 4, pp. 323, 324.[/size]

** [size=-1]"Am Zweiten Sonntage nach Trinitatis," "Haus-Postille," in Schriften, vol. 13, Col. 2153; "Predigt uber 1 Cor. 15: (54-57)," (1533), "Auslegung des neuen Testament," in Schriften, vol. 8, col. 1340[/size]

573

nevertheless, he still is living, even though, contrary to the nature of life, he is unconscious in his sleep. Exactly the same will happen also in that life, but in another and a better way.*—"Auslegung des ersten Buches Mose," in Schriften, vol. 1, cols. 1759, 1760.

​

Here is another sample:

We should learn to view our death in the right light, so that we need not become alarmed on account of it, as unbelief does; because in Christ it is indeed not death, but a fine, sweet and brief sleep, which brings us release from this vale of tears, from sin and from the fear and extremity of real death and from all the misfortunes of this life, and we shall be secure and without care, rest sweetly and gently for a brief moment, as on a sofa, until the time when he shall call and awaken us together with all his dear children to his eternal glory and joy. For since we call it a sleep, we know that we shall not remain in it, but be again awakened and live, and that the time during which we sleep, shall seem no longer than if we had just fallen asleep. Hence, we shall censure ourselves that we were surprised or alarmed at such a sleep in the hour of death, and suddenly come alive out of the grave and from decomposition, and entirely well, fresh, with a pure, clear, glorified life, meet our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in the clouds. . . .

Scripture everywhere affords such consolation, which speaks of the death of the saints, as if they fell asleep and were gathered to their fathers, that is, had overcome death through this faith and comfort in Christ, and awaited the resurrection, together with the saints who preceded them in death.—A Compend of Luther's Theology, edited by Hugh Thomson Ker, Jr., p. 242.

William Tyndale (1484-1536), English Bible translator and martyr

In Britain William Tyndale, translator of the Bible into English, came to the defense of the revived
_______
*[size=-1]In his Master of Arts thesis (1946), "A Study of Martin Luther's Teaching Concerning the State of the Dead," T. N. Ketola, tabulating Luther's references to death as a sleep—as found in Luther's Sammtliche Schriften, Wash's Concord, 1904 ed.—lists 125 specific Luther references to death as a sleep. Ketola cites another smaller group of references showing Luther believed in the periodic consciousness of some. But the main point is that, while the dead live, they are unconscious—which is stated some seven times.[/size]

​

574

teaching of conditional immortality. This, as well as other teachings, brought him into direct conflict with the papal champion, Sir Thomas More, likewise of England. In 1529 More had strongly objected to the "pestilential sect" represented by Tyndale and Luther, because they held that "all souls lie and sleep till doomsday." In 1530 Tyndale responded vigorously, declaring:

And ye, in putting them [the departed souls] in heaven, hell, and purgatory, destroy the arguments wherewith Christ and Paul prove the resurrection. . . . And again, if the souls be in heaven, tell me why they be not in as good case as the angels be? And then what cause is there of the resurrection?—William Tyndale, An Answer to Sir Thomas More's Dialogue (Parker's 1850 reprint), bk. 4, ch. 4, pp. 180, 181

​

Tyndale went to the heart of the issue in pointing out the papacy's draft upon the teachings of "heathen philosophers" in seeking to establish its contention of innate immortality.

Thus:

The true faith putteth [setteth forth] the resurrection, which we be warned to look for every hour. The heathen philosophers, denying that, did put [set forth] that the souls did ever live. And the pope joineth the spiritual doctrine of Christ and the fleshly doctrine of philosophers together; things so contrary that they cannot agree, no more than the Spirit and the flesh do in a Christian man. And because the fleshly-minded pope consenteth unto heathen doctrine, therefore he corrupteth the Scripture to stablish it.—Ibid., p. 180.

​

In yet another section of the same treatise, dealing with the "invocation of saints," Tyndale uses the same reasoning, pointing out that the doctrine of departed saints being in heaven had not yet been introduced in Christ's day:

575

And when he [More] proveth that the saints be in heaven in glory with Christ already, saying, "If God be their God, they be in heaven, for he is not the God of the dead;" there he stealeth away Christ's argument, wherewith he proveth the resurrection: that Abraham and all saints should rise again, and not that their souls were in heaven; which doctrine was not yet in the world. And with that doctrine he taketh away the resurrection quite, and maketh Christ's argument of none effect.—Ibid., p. 118.

​

Tyndale presses his contention still further by showing the conflict of papal teaching with St. Paul, as he says in slightly sarcastic vein:

"Nay, Paul, thou art unlearned; go to Master More, and learn a new way. We be not most miserable, though we rise not again; for our souls go to heaven as soon as we be dead, and are there in as great joy as Christ that is risen again." And I marvel that Paul had not comforted the Thessalonians with that doctrine, if he had wist it, that the souls of their dead had been in joy; as he did with the resurrection, that their dead should rise again. If the souls be in heaven, in as great glory as the angels, after your doctrine, shew me what cause should be of the resurrection?— Ibid.

​

John Frith (1503-33), associate of Tyndale and fellow martyr

A Disputacyon of Purgatorie . . . divided into three Bokes, c. 1530
An Answer to John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester
Notwithstanding, let me grant it him that some are already in hell and some in heaven, which thing he shall never be able to prove by the Scriptures, yea, and which plainly destroy the resurrection, and taketh away the arguments wherewith Christ and Paul do prove that we shall rise; . . . and as touching this point where they rest, I dare be bold to say that they are in the hand of God. An Answer to John Fisher.

​

576

George Wishard (1500-1546), Greek scholar, friend of Latimer, tutor of John Knox, and martyr

Wishart was charged with attacking auricular confession, transubstantiation, extreme unction, holy water, invocation of saints (who couldn't hear their supplications anyway), and purgatory. Charge "XVI" was for promulgating the doctrine of the sleep of the soul.

Charge "XVI": Thou false heretic has preached openly saying, that the soul of man shall sleep to the latter day of judgment and shall not obtain life immortal until that day.—Blackburne, Historical View, p. 21.

​

"General Baptists"

In his Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, chancellor of the University of Gottingen, Johann L. von Mosheim, records that the "General Baptists" were spread in large numbers over many of the provinces of England (Murdock tr., bk. IV, cent. XVI, sec. III, pt. 2, ch. III, par. 23). As one article of faith they held "that the soul, between death and the resurrection at the last day, has neither pleasure nor pain, but is in a state of insensibility."—Ibid.

On the other hand, Calvin, deeply disturbed over the spread of this teaching in different lands, in 1534 wrote a militant tract, Psychopannychia (Soul Sleep). It was issued to refute the teaching that the "soul dies or sleeps," and stated that this concept had "already drawn thousands" into its acceptance.

Dr. Joseph Priestley, after observing that many of the early reformers held to "soul-sleep," declared:

Had it not been for the authority of Calvin, who wrote expressly against it [soul sleep], the doctrine of an intermediate conscious state would, in all probability, have been as effectually exploded as the doctrine of purgatory itself.—Corruptions Christianity, in Works (1818), vol. 5, p. 229.

​