What Happens after Death (and before Resurrection)

The elders of our church discussed this very issue last night as we are reading Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology.  It is an argument against soul sleep.This post is adapted from Kim Riddlebarger’s chapter, "Eschatology," in Reformation Theology: A Systematic Summary edited by Matthew Barrett.

---

"On the Sleep of the Soul"

John Calvin’s first published work of theology was the Psychopannychia (“On the Sleep of the Soul”), published in 1542, although the first draft of the manuscript was written as early as 1534, and Calvin revised it several times before publication.¹

Ironically, even as Calvin took issue with those Anabaptists who held that the soul is deprived of consciousness after death, this view was quite similar to Luther’s “soul sleep.” Calvin never mentioned Luther’s view, and both Martin Bucer and Wolfgang Capito (1478–1541) urged Calvin not to publish the Psychopannychia so as to avoid exposing any differences between the Reformed and Lutherans and thus keep Roman or Anabaptist critics from pouncing.²

Distinguishing Body and Soul

In his critique of the doctrine of soul sleep, Calvin began with philology. He pointed out that Scripture uses the words “spirit” and “soul” in different ways, while the creation account in Genesis 1 clearly affirms that the image of God in man must be identified with the human spirit. Furthermore, if one follows the course set out by the church fathers, Calvin argued, the interpreter of Scripture must distinguish between the soul and the body, something Anabaptist writers were apt to confuse.³

Calvin contended, “We, following the whole doctrine of God, will hold for certain that man is composed and consisteth of two parts, that is to say, body and soul.” He continued, adding, “What is the estate of the souls after the separation from their bodies? The Anabaptists do think that they be asleep like dead. We say they have life and feeling.”⁴

The great irony is that the doctrine of soul sleep affirms the very thing Paul disparages: “For the Apostle [Paul] himself says that we are miserable if we have Christ in this life only.” Calvin added, “True, there is the declaration of Paul, that we are more miserable than all men if there is no Resurrection; and there is no repugnance in these words to the dogma, that the spirits of the just are blessed before the Resurrection, since it is because of the Resurrection.”⁵ The soul is created immortal and lives on after death, but the body is mortal and must be raised imperishable to undo the consequences of the curse.

Immortal Soul, Resurrection Body

For Calvin, the very idea that the soul “sleeps” until the resurrection made no sense, given the unique properties of the human soul. As a creationist, Calvin affirmed that the human soul is not eternal but is uniquely created by God at the moment of conception and possesses independent and immortal existence apart from the body.

Although the soul is the primary location of the divine image in humanity, nevertheless, “the state of man was not perfected in the person of Adam; but it is a peculiar benefit conferred by Christ, that we may be renewed to a life which is celestial, whereas before the fall of Adam, man’s life was only earthly.”⁶ Even though created innocent, human nature must be perfected. This made perfect sense in light of the fact that redemptive history culminates in the resurrection of the body and the renewal of the heavens and the earth, for this is what God had decreed and had then revealed in the person and work of Christ.

After Death, Consciously and Contentedly Waiting for Resurrection

Redemption from sin and the overturning of the consequences of the fall on human nature (death) are therefore necessarily eschatological in their orientation. The redeemed soul has been given eternal life through the work of Christ, by the Holy Spirit, who is the “earnest of our inheritance, that is, of eternal life, unto redemption, that is, until the day of this redemption comes. . . . And we who have received the firstfruits of the Spirit . . . shall enjoy it in reality, when Christ shall appear in judgment.”⁷

The nature of the soul and the divine purpose in the resurrection mean that “earthly life from the beginning is destined to eternity” and that “the delivered soul that is conscious after death awaits its consummation of the day of judgment.”⁸ According to Balke, in contrast to the Anabaptists,

Calvin held that the soul in its essence is immortal. The rest after death consists of complete fellowship with God. . . . The Bible assures us that we already have eternal life here on earth and that cannot be interrupted. To say that the soul sleeps is tantamount to saying that God forsakes his work.⁹

Notes:
1. For a discussion of Calvin’s early contact with Anabaptists and a literary history of the Psychopannychia, see Willem Balke, Calvin and the Anabaptist Radicals, trans. William J. Heynen (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1981), 17–38; see also Quistorp, Calvin’s Doctrine of the Last Things, 55–107.
2. Balke, Calvin and the Anabaptist Radicals, 31.
3. Ibid., 304.
4. John Calvin, A Short Instruction for to Arm All Good Christian People against the Pestiferous Errors of the Common Sect of Anabaptists (London, 1549), 113–14; quoted in Balke, Calvin and the Anabaptist Radicals, 305.
5. Calvin, Psychopannychia, 471, 472.
6. Calvin on Gen. 2:7 in John Calvin, Commentary on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis, trans. John King (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1984), 112–13.
7. Calvin on Eph. 1:14, in CNTC 11:132.
8. Quistorp, Calvin’s Doctrine of the Last Things, 67, 87.
9. Balke, Calvin and the Anabaptist Radicals, 307.
10. Calvin, Institutes, 3.25.2.
11. Calvin, Psychopannychia, 490

---

Kim Riddlebarger (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) is senior pastor of Christ Reformed Church, and is cohost of the  Horse Inn radio program, which is broadcast weekly on more than fifty radio stations.

The Fear of Death

Why does humanity naturally fear death, especially those who do not profess faith in Christ?  It is because we are made in the image of God so eternity is in our hearts and scripture tells us that when we die we face God's judgement against our sin.

And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, (Heb 9:27 ESV)

Yet for those who process faith in Christ, there is no fear of judgement as Christ took the judgment for our sin!  To be saved means that God has delivered us from his righteous wrathful judgment do us because of our sin against him.  It means that we will not be judged for our sins and sentenced to eternal damnation!

For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. (2Co 5:21 ESV)

Do All Infants Go to Heaven?

This is a difficult issue because we have very limited biblical information about it, nor is it directly addressed in Scripture.  On top of this, it is a very emotionally charged topic.  These two factors make this discussion hard to be objective about when discussing and thinking it through biblical eyes.  Sam does a good job reasoning this through, originally from Gospel Coalition.

Recent revelatory videos about the practices of Planned Parenthood have stirred many to ask about the eternal destiny of these precious unborn babies. So are those who die in infancy lost? The same question applies to those who live beyond infancy but, because of mental disability or some other handicap, are incapable of moral discernment, deliberation, or volition.

This is more than a theoretical issue designed for speculation. It touches one of the most emotionally and spiritually unsettling experiences in all of life: the loss of a young child.

The view I embrace is that all those who die in infancy, as well as those so mentally incapacitated they’re incapable of making an informed choice, are among the elect of God, chosen for salvation before the world began. The evidence for this view is scant, but significant. 

1. In Romans 1:20 Paul describes recipients of general revelation as being “without excuse.” They can’t blame their unbelief on a lack of evidence. There is sufficient revelation of God’s existence in the natural order to establish the moral accountability of all who witness it. Might this imply that those who are not recipients of general revelation (i.e., infants) are therefore not accountable to God or subject to wrath? In other words, wouldn’t those who die in infancy have an “excuse” in that they neither receive general revelation nor have the capacity to respond to it?

2. There are texts that assert or imply that infants don’t know good or evil and hence lack the capacity to make morally informed—and thus responsible—choices. According to Deuteronomy 1:39 they are said to “have no knowledge of good or evil.” This in itself, however, doesn’t prove infant salvation, for they may still be held liable for the sin of Adam.

3. We must take account of the story of David’s son in 2 Samuel 12:15–23 (especially verse 23). The firstborn child of David and Bathsheba is struck by the Lord and dies. In the seven days before his death, David fasts and prays, hoping that “the Lord may be gracious to me, that the child may live.” Yet following the child’s death, David washes, eats, and worships. Asked why he’s responding this way, David says, “Since he has died, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me” (v. 23).

What does it mean when David says “I shall go to him”? If this is merely a reference to the grave or death in the sense that David, too, shall one day die and be buried, one wonders why he’d say something so patently obvious. Also, it appears that David draws some measure of comfort from knowing that he will “go to him.” It’s the reason why David resumes the normal routine of life. It appears to be the reason he ceases from the display of grief. It appears to be a truth from which he derives comfort and encouragement. How could any of this be true if David will simply die like his son? It would, therefore, appear David believed he would be reunited with his deceased infant. Does this imply that at least this one particular infant was saved? Perhaps. But if so, are we justified in constructing a doctrine in which we affirm the salvation of all who die in infancy?

4. There is the consistent testimony of Scripture that people are judged on the basis of sins committed voluntary and consciously in the body (see 2 Cor. 5:10; 1 Cor. 6:9–10; Rev. 20:11–12). In other words, eternal judgment is always based on conscious rejection of divine revelation (whether in creation, conscience, or Christ) and willful disobedience. Are infants capable of either? There is no explicit account in Scripture of any other judgment based on any other grounds. Thus, those dying in infancy are saved because they do not (indeed cannot) satisfy the conditions for divine judgment.

5. Related to the above point, is what R.  A. Webb states:

[If a deceased infant] were sent to hell on no other account than that of original sin, there would be a good reason to the divine mind for the judgment, but the child’s mind would be a perfect blank as to the reason of its suffering. Under such circumstances, it would know suffering, but it would have no understanding of the reason for its suffering. It could not tell its neighbor—it could not tell itself—why it was so awfully smitten; and consequently the whole meaning and significance of its sufferings, being to it a conscious enigma, the very essence of penalty would be absent, and justice would be disappointed of its vindication. Such an infant could feel that it was in hell, but it could not explain, to its own conscience, why it was there.

6. We have what would appear to be clear biblical evidence that at least some infants are regenerate in the womb, such that if they died in their infancy they would be saved. This provides at least a theoretical basis for considering whether the same may be true of all who die in infancy. As Ronald Nash points out, “If this sort of thing happens even once, it can certainly happen in other cases.” Supporting texts include Jeremiah 1:5 and Luke 1:15.

7. Some have appealed to Matthew 19:13–15 (also Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17) where Jesus declares, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” Is he simply saying if one wishes to be saved one must be as trusting as a child (i.e., devoid of skepticism and arrogance)? In other words, is Jesus merely describing the kind of people who enter the kingdom? Or is he saying these very children were recipients of saving grace? If the latter were true, it would seem to imply Jesus knew that the children he was then receiving would all die in infancy. Is that credible?

8. Let me close with an argument that’s entirely subjective (and therefore of questionable evidential value). Given our understanding of God’s character as presented in Scripture, does he appear as the kind of God who would eternally condemn infants on no other ground than that of Adam’s transgression? Again, this is a subjective (and perhaps sentimental) question. But it deserves an answer, nonetheless.

I can only speak for myself, but I find the first, third, fourth, fifth, and eighth points sufficiently convincing. Therefore, I do believe in the salvation of those dying in infancy. I affirm their salvation, though, neither because they are innocent nor because they have merited forgiveness, but solely because God has sovereignly chosen them for eternal life, regenerated their souls, and applied the saving benefits of the blood of Christ to them apart from conscious faith.

---

Editors’ note: This essay has been adapted and shortened from Tough Topics: Biblical Answers to 25 Challenging Questions (Crossway, 2013). 

Sam Storms is lead pastor for preaching and vision at Bridgeway Church in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. He also serves as a Council member of The Gospel Coalition.