Hell - no rest for the wicked? (Luke 12:1-10; Rev 20:11-21:8; Psalm 37:1-13)
Billy Milton - July 9, 2006
I think in the past 10 years I have heard only one sermon that had Hell as its central theme. That particular sermon wasn’t particularly sensitively handled and in fact, to my mind, was preached with a certain amount of glee, that the wicked would eventually get their come-up-ance. My own recollection of a childhood spent in Brethren gospel meetings is of hearing Hell preached with monotonous regularity, since no gospel message was complete without a good bit of hellfire thrown in. I can think of many uncomfortable Sunday evenings where I was ‘dangled over the pit’ and warned in no uncertain terms that if Christ were to return that evening, my mum and dad would be taken and I would burn in Hell for ever and ever. To a young and impressionable mind these were difficult images to cope with and its no wonder that many of my friends were ‘scared into heaven’ only to completely reject it all years later when they discovered that they only feared Hell but did not love Jesus.
I believe that part of the reason why there is such a dearth of preaching on Hell nowadays is because of a reaction to that type of church background, but also to a growing sense of unease with the idea of loved ones, perhaps, burning in eternal torment whilst we, the saved, look on with some degree of satisfaction from Heaven.
This morning I would like to take a fresh look at the subject of Hell and examine carefully what the Bible actually says about it as opposed to what our tradition has taught us to believe.
Problems in the Concept of Eternal Punishment
The basic problem which I suppose most of us might have with Hell, if we do perceive a problem at all, is how can we harmonise the concept of a loving, gracious God with a God who is so righteous and unforgiving?
What I would like to do this morning is to look at 3 views of Hell. I’m going to look at:
- The literal view - flames, worms, darkness and eternal punishment etc.
- The metaphorical view - eternal punishment but the flames, worms etc are only metaphors for something beyond our imaginings.
- The annihilationist view - the impenitent will be punished but then will simply cease to exist after being consumed in Hell.
There are a number of other options which I won’t have time to address, amongst them would be universalism - there is no Hell because God will save everyone, and purgatory - the prevalent view in the Roman Catholic church of an interim stage where the person is punished before being allowed into heaven, if and when there is genuine repentance.
Both universalism and purgatorial views are widely held in non-evangelical circles but I want to concentrate on the literal, the metaphorical and the annihilationist views. Obviously all three views base their beliefs on the Bible but they choose to interpret the same ideas differently. So before we look at each view in detail lets take an overall look at Hell in the Bible.
Hell in The Old Testament
The principal term used to refer to existence after this life in the OT is ‘sheol’ which is used 65 times. The NIV usually translates it as ‘grave’, or, as in Deut 32:22, ‘the realm of death below’. However, it has to be said that the OT does not really have a clearly developed doctrine of Hell and because of that we see the thirst for blessing and punishment for wrong doing being expected in the here and now.
Hell in the New Testament
The Teachings of Jesus
Jesus spoke of hell more than any NT prophet. All references (except James 3:6) to gehenna, which is normally translated ‘Hell’ in the NT, are from the lips of Christ. The term ‘gehenna’ is derived from a geographical site - the Valley of Hinnom which was located just south of Jerusalem. The valley was used as a place for burying criminals and for burning garbage and it is recorded that a perpetual pall of smoke hung over it and a continual smell of burning assaulted the nostrils. Human sacrifices to the god Molech were supposed to have been offered here as well. Gehenna was traditionally considered by the Jews as the place of final punishment for the ungodly, and many references to Christ talking about gehenna can be found throughout Matthew, often in the context of burning as a punishment.
The Book of Revelation
Rev. 20:13-14
John implies here that the grave will some day give up the bodies of the wicked dead and that they will be resurrected in order to enter into the eternal punishment of the lake of fire. Hades seems to be an intermediate place whose occupants will be emptied into the lake of fire.
With that very sketchy background let’s take a look at the 3 views.
The Literal View
Is The Fire Of Hell To Be Understood Literally?
Those who would support this view argue that the frequent mention of fire in connection with eternal punishment supports the conclusion that this is the obvious meaning of Scriptures.
Matt 5:22 - “…whoever calls his brother a worthless fool will be in danger of going to the fire of hell.”
Matt.18:8-9 - “It is better for you to enter life without a hand or a foot than …be thrown into the eternal fire.”
Jude 7 - Sodom and Gomorrah … eternal fire.
Rev 20:14-15 - a Lake of Fire
Luke 16 - the rich man requested water to cool his tongue.
We can see therefor that fire is generally accepted throughout the NT as being the method of punishment for the sinner. The literalist would use this as a spur to preaching the gospel to those who need to be ‘snatched as brands from the burning’.
Is The Punishment Of The Wicked Everlasting?
The Greek word used for eternal is ‘aionios’. W.R. Inge states, “No sound Greek scholar can pretend that aionios means anything less than eternal.” In evangelical Christianity the eternal life of those who are saved is universally recognised, but can we carry this concept of eternity over into eternal punishment? Rev. 20:10 talks of the beast and the false prophet being tormented, “day and night for ever and ever,” which seems fairly clear. The literalist would say that doubting the matter of eternal punishment requires either doubting the Word of God or denying its literal, normal interpretation. This is a strong deterrent for most people who would prefer to just believe in a literal, eternal burning in flames rather than be accused of not believing the Bible. So, the literalist would say that yes, eternal punishment should be understood literally. The punishment will be partly mental, partly emotional and partly physical and will last forever.
THE METAPHORICAL VIEW
A picture’s worth a thousand words. There is a solid body of sound evangelical opinion, amongst which you might be happy to position yourself, which doubts whether the traditional teaching about streets of gold in Heaven or individual mansions with our names on the front doors should be taken literally. But it still seems to be the case that when anyone questions whether or not Hell could be anything other than eternal conscious punishment in flames, their whole faith is called into question. They are accused of not holding to the innerrancy of Scriptures and of being soft on the justice aspect of God’s character.
But the person taking a metaphorical view of Hell would claim to hold to the innerrancy of Scripture whilst at the same time claiming that hellfire and brimstone cannot be taken literally but are obviously figurative expressions warning the wicked of impending doom of some horrible and indescribable intensity. No less a scholar than John Calvin believed that the eternal fire is best understood metaphorically, and more recently, J.I. Packer wrote of Hell, “…the mistake is to take such pictures as physical descriptions, when in fact they are imaginary symbolising realities…far worse than the symbols themselves.”
As we saw earlier, sulphur fires were part of life for those who lived in the Jerusalem of Bible times. The Valley of Hinnom & sacrifices to Molech; a place to dump and burn rubbish- what more natural an image to use?
Graphic Views Of Hell
The holders of the metaphorical view claim that our views of Hell owe much to the fertile imaginations of the artists and writers rather than the Scriptures. We just need to think of Dante’s ‘Inferno’ to see that point well illustrated. A number of early theologians also taught that the saints in Heaven would be able to see the torments of the damned (based on Luke 16)! This was supposed to add to their pleasure at being saved. A grotesque theatre, perhaps starring their own families? As Celsus, the second century critic of Christianity, put it, if we take the view that Hell is flames etc etc then God becomes the cosmic cook.
The Symbolic Use Of Words
The metaphoricalists are keen to point out that non-literal doesn’t mean a softer approach. Words in the NT did have symbolic use, or what is called rabbinic hyperbole. Rabbis (including Jesus) often used colourful and exaggerated speech to bring home a point. Read the Sermon on the Mount if you want examples of this. Vivid pictures of Hell would fall under the heading of hyperbole and are given, not to be taken literally, but rather to show that God has ordained an end to wickedness.
Problems with the Literal View
The metaphorical view would submit that the main problem with the literal view is that in its desire to be faithful to the Bible, it makes the Bible say too much. We just don’t know, nor can imagine, what kind of punishment will be meted out to the wicked. How can hell be dark and flames (Jude 7&13)? How can a body burn forever and be consumed by worms (Isa 66:24)? How does a body burn but the worms eating it do not? The metaphoricalist would say that these descriptions are obviously just imageries designed to convey the casting out of the rebellious from the presence of God, without any hope of restoration.
Does it last forever?
Regardless of what it physically is, will it last for ever? In other words, should we take gehenna (the lake of fire) to be a place of extended suffering or should we view it as annihilation? Annihilation suggests that everyone outside of Christ will just be snuffed out and cease to exist at the end of time. One problem that the annihilationists need to explain away though is the various scriptures that refer to graduations of punishment in Hell. (Luke 12:47-48; Matt 11:24). Annihilationists have no sense of distributive justice, in other words both Hitler & Gandhi receive the same punishment.
THE ANNIHILATIONIST VIEW (AV)
According to the larger picture, the traditional view of the doctrine of Hell is that we are asked to believe God endlessly tortures sinners by the million. These people are sinners who perish because the Father has decided not to elect them to salvation, though he could have done so, and whose torments are supposed to gladden the hearts of believers in heaven. For the annihilationists the problems with this doctrine are both extensive and profound.
The AV does not deny the reality of Hell, nor the fact that the finally impenitent wicked will suffer in it, but it only wants to question the traditional literal theory about the nature of hell. The great strength of the AV is that it does not portray God as being a sadistic and vindictive punisher. Hell is final destruction. The AV arose because of:
Difficulties With The Traditional View.
1. How can you reconcile this doctrine of eternal conscious punishment with the revelation of God seen in Jesus Christ?
2. What does this view do to the moral goodness of God? Torturing people for ever is an action one would associate more with Satan than with God.
The AV provides an alternative interpretations of Hell.
The Annihilationist would ask - does hell fire torment or consume? Let’s look at a few verses. Psalm 37 says they will be consumed, or destroyed, or that they will just disappear as does Mal. 4:1-2, “…there will be nothing left of them.”
This sets the tone for NT doctrine. Matt 13:30, 42, 49-50 implies that the impenitent wicked will be destroyed as we would destroy unwanted garbage in a furnace. Paul also made it clear that Hell would mean termination - 2 Thess1:9; Rom 6:23. Peter also followed this route as well - 2 Peter 3:7 & 2:1-3 - talks of ‘sudden destruction’. The AVs would say that eternal punishment serves no purpose at all and exhibits a vindictiveness totally out of keeping with the love of God revealed in the gospel.
Examination of Proof Texts of both the Literal and Metaphorical Views
1. Mark 9:48 “Their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched”. If we go back to Isaiah 66:24 from which this phrase is drawn, the dead bodies of God’s enemies are being eaten by maggots and burned up. The fire and the worm in this picture are destroying the dead bodies, not tormenting conscious persons. By calling the fire unquenchable, the Bible is saying that the fire is not quenched until the job is finished. It does not necessarily speak of everlasting punishment.
2. Matt. 25:46 “They will go away to eternal punishment but the righteous to eternal life.” This phrase could mean either everlasting conscious torment (eternal punishing) or irreversible destruction (eternal punishment).
3. Rev. 14:9-11 “…tormented in fire and sulphur before the holy angels and the Lamb. The smoke of the fire that torments them goes up for ever and ever. There is no relief day or night for those who worship the beast…”
For a start, the genre of Revelation makes it a difficult book to base a proof text on. Notice that whilst the smoke goes up for ever, the text does not say that the wicked are tormented for ever. It does say that they have no relief from their suffering as long as the suffering lasts. But how long that will be the text does not say. Before oblivion there may be a period of suffering, but not unending.
So after all that what can we say?
1. Each view believes that it is founded in Scripture.
2. Each believes that it most accurately reflects the teaching of Scripture.
3. Each view believes that the sinner will be lost, whether to an eternal punishment of some description, or to annihilation.
and finally,
4. It is no use being ‘fuzzy’ about Hell. Fuzzy is very comfortable but as evangelicals we need to come to the Scriptures with open eyes and open minds and study for ourselves what we believe it is saying about Hell.
There is so much more I could say and probably so much more I should have said but I hope that, as a result of what you have heard tonight, perhaps you might read a little further yourselves?