———————–
Annihilationism. The belief that all the wicked will be judged by God and thrown into the lake of fire, where they will cease to exist. Some annihilationists suggest that this will occur instantaneously, while others believe that the unrighteous may experience a brief period of awareness. However, all annihilationists agree that no individual, however wicked, will suffer eternally a conscious existence in hell. [Pocket Dict. Theological Terms]
————————
The Eternality of Future Punishment
Not only is the future judgment of unbelievers irreversible, but their punishment is eternal. We do not reject merely the idea that all will be saved; we also reject the contention that none will be eternally punished. The school of thought known as annihilationism, on the other hand, maintains that although not everyone will be saved, there is only one class of future existence. Those who are saved will have an unending life; those who are not saved will be eliminated or annihilated. They will simply cease to exist. While granting that not everyone deserves to be saved, to receive everlasting bliss, this position maintains that no one deserves endless suffering…
The problem with all of the forms of annihilationism is that they contradict biblical teaching. Several passages assert the endlessness of the punishment of the wicked. Both the Old and New Testaments refer to unending or unquenchable fire. Isaiah 66:24, for example, says, “And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind.” Jesus uses the same images to describe the punishment of sinners: “If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where ‘their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched’ ” (Mark 9:43–48). These passages make it clear that the punishment is unending. It does not consume the one upon whom it is inflicted and thus simply come to an end.
In addition, there are several instances where words like “everlasting,” “eternal,” and “forever” are applied to nouns designating the future state of the wicked: fire or burning (Isa. 33:14; Jer. 17:4; Matt. 18:8; 25:41; Jude 7), contempt (Dan. 12:2), destruction (2 Thess. 1:9), chains (Jude 6), torment (Rev. 14:11; 20:10), and punishment (Matt. 25:46). To be sure, the adjective αἰώνιος (aiōnios) may on a few occasions have reference to an age, that is, a very long period of time, rather than to eternity. Usually, however, in the absence of a contrary indication in the context, the most common meaning of a word is the one in view. In the cases we have cited, nothing in the contexts justifies our understanding αἰώνιος as meaning anything other than “eternal.” The parallelism found in Matthew 25:46 is particularly noteworthy: “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” If the one (life) is of unending duration, then the other (punishment) must be also. Nothing in the context gives us warrant to interpret the word αἰώνιος differently in the two clauses.
…F. D. Maurice said many years ago…writing to F. J. A. Hort: “I did not see how aionios could mean one thing when it was joined with kolasis [punishment] and another when it was joined with zoe [life]”. To admit that the two phrases are not parallel is at once to treat them with unequal seriousness.
A problem arises from the fact that Scripture speaks not merely of eternal death (which one might interpret as meaning that the wicked will not be resurrected), but of eternal fire, eternal punishment, and eternal torment as well. What kind of God is it who is not satisfied by a finite punishment but makes humans suffer for ever and ever? This seems to be beyond the demands of justice; it appears to involve a tremendous degree of vindictiveness on the part of God. The punishment seems to be out of all proportion to the sin, for presumably, all sins are finite acts against God. How does one square belief in a good, just, and loving God with eternal punishment? The question must not be dismissed lightly, for it concerns the very essence of God’s nature. The fact that hell, as often understood, seems to be incompatible with God’s love, as revealed in Scripture, may be an indication that we have misunderstood hell.
We should note, first, that whenever we sin, an infinite factor is invariably involved. All sin is an offense against God, the raising of a finite will against the will of an infinite being. It is failure to carry out one’s obligation to him to whom everything is due. Consequently, one cannot consider sin to be merely a finite act deserving finite punishment.
…And it may well be that those creatures that God intended to live forever in fellowship with him had to be fashioned in such a way that they would experience eternal anguish if they chose to live apart from their Maker. Humans were designed to live eternally with God; if they pervert this their destiny, they will experience eternally the consequences of that act.
We should also observe that God does not send anyone to hell. He desires that none should perish (2 Pet. 3:9). God created humans to have fellowship with him and provided the means by which they can have that fellowship. It is a human’s choice to experience the agony of hell. His or her own sin sends the person there, and his or her rejection of the benefits of Christ’s death prevents escape. As C. S. Lewis has put it, “the doors of hell are locked on the inside.”1C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain (New York: Macmillan, 1962), p. 127-128. Sin, then, is the human being in effect saying to God throughout life, “Go away and leave me alone.” Hell is God’s finally replying, “You may have your wish.” It is God’s leaving the person to himself or herself, as that individual has chosen.
Degrees of Punishment
We should observe, finally, that Jesus’s teaching suggests that there are degrees of punishment in hell. He upbraided those cities that had witnessed his miracles but failed to repent: “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida!… If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you” (Matt. 11:21–24). There is a similar hint in the parable of the faithful and faithless stewards: “That servant who knows his master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked” (Luke 12:47–48).
The principle here seems to be, the greater our knowledge, the greater is our responsibility, and the greater will be our punishment if we fail in our responsibility. It may well be that the different degrees of punishment in hell are not so much a matter of objective circumstances as of subjective awareness of the pain of separation from God [Emphasis added]. This is parallel to our conception of the varying degrees of reward in heaven. To some extent, the different degrees of punishment reflect the fact that hell is God’s leaving a sinful human with the particular character that the person fashioned for himself or herself in this life. The misery one will experience from having to live with one’s wicked self eternally will be proportionate to one’s degree of awareness of precisely what one was doing when choosing evil.
Source: Millard Erickson, Systematic Theology 3e (Baker, 2013), pp. 1135–1138.
——————————————
Comments
1) Robert Gundry’s gives an apt and succinct explanation why punishment of hell fire is eternal for unrepentant sinners. Gundry’s comments on (Matt. 25:46): ““Eternal punishment” tells the purpose of “the eternal fire,” and “eternal life” defines “inheriting the kingdom.” Fire wouldn’t need to be eternal if the punishment weren’t everlasting any more than life would need to be eternal if inheriting the kingdom weren’t everlasting. So punishment needs to be understood as everlasting in its suffering just as life needs to be understood as everlasting in its enjoyment.”2Robert Gundry, Commentary on the New Testament (Hendrickson, 2010), p. 115.
2) The tragic reality is that sinners in hell will NOT repent even as they suffer punishment in hell. Jesus said, “everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin” (John 8:34). They share the same spirit of rebellion of Satan which was vividly captured by John Milton, “Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven.” The lost in hell continue to hate God; to remain eternally in hell is their ultimate act of defiance against God. Given their choice, endurance of endless punishment is therefore not overpunishment. The duration of the punishment matches the nature of the offender (the incorrigible soul) and the offence (sin against the eternal God).
3) Erickson’s phrase, “It may well be that the different degrees of punishment in hell are not so much a matter of objective circumstances as of subjective awareness of the pain of separation from God” must not be interpreted to be in agreement with liberal theologians who reject the reality of hell. These liberal theologians assert that “hell” does not refer to some form of objective existence with consciousness after death. Since there is no afterlife, the dead are no more. Instead, hell is a figurative description of severe experience of alienation in present life. In contrast, Erickson maintains both the objective reality of hell and the denizen’s subjective experience of their separation from God in hell.
4) It would be simplistic hermeneutics to take fire of hell literally, especially if it is applied to non-physical beings. Nevertheless, the fire causes pain and torment in proportion to the guilt of those who sinned. Scripture is also unequivocal in stressing that the fire is eternal (Matt. 13: 40-42; Rev. 14:10-11; 20:10).
Gundry comments on Rev. 14:11, “The going up of the smoke of the beast-worshipers’ torment “forever and ever” indicates burning without burning up. The present tense of “goes up” adds emphasis; and “don’t have rest day and night” excludes any interruptive spells of relief, again with emphasis added by the present tense. It’s as though the ceaseless torment is already going on (compare Rev. 19:3; 20:10; Isaiah 34:9-10).”3Robert Gundry, Commentary on the New Testament, p. 1042. The passsage gives no indication that the toment of the worshippers who received the mark of the beast and worship him will end. Instead, they won’t find rest day or night. This verse is a fitting parallel of Rev. 20:10 which says that the devil, beast, and false prophet will be tormented in the lake of fire day and night forever and ever.
Greg Beale elaborates, “the word βασανισμός (basanismos, “torment”) in Rev. 14:10–11 is used nowhere in Revelation or biblical literature in the sense of annihilation of personal existence…Therefore, ὁ καπνὸς τοῦ βασανισμοῦ (ho kapnos tou basanismou, “the smoke of torment”) is a mixed metaphor, with “smoke” figurative of an enduring memorial of God’s punishment involving a real, ongoing, eternal, conscious torment.”4Greg Beale, G. K. (1999). The Book of Revelation NICGNT (Eerdmans, 1999), pp. 762, 763.) Beales concludes, “The phrase “the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever” (Rev. 14:11) is not a mere reminder of past judgment, but ongoing judgment as well. It is not the smoke of a completed destruction that goes up, but “the smoke of their torment.”…Therefore, the smoke is metaphorical of a continued reminder of the ongoing torment of restlessness, which endures for eternity.”5Greg Beale, “The Revelation on Hell,” in Christopher Morgan & Robert Peterson, Hell Under Fire (Zondervan,2004), pp. 118-119.
5) It is common for critics to reprise the picture of hell as a “torture chamber” in order to impute excessiveness and indefensible cruelty to the traditional doctrine of eternal punishment. Since their objection to the doctrine is based on meagre exegetical data, the critics appeal to human sentiment by resorting to “abuse of the metaphor” to evoke strong emotional rejection of the doctrine.
The truth is that God remains measured and just even in his execution of judicial punishment in hell. There are degrees of suffering in hell. William Shedd elaborates, “These degrees of sin [observed among sinners] call for degrees of suffering. And there are degrees in future suffering, because it is infinite in duration only. In intensity, it is finite. Consequently, the lost do not all suffer precisely alike, though all suffer the same length of time…And two persons may suffer infinitely in the sense of endlessly, and yet one experience[sic] more pain than the other.”6William Shedd, Dogmatic Theology 3e. Alan Gomes ed. (Presb. & Ref., 2003), pp. 916, 922.
6) Heaven and hell are not to be conceived as contrasting and opposite equivalents. Hell with all the suffering therein, is an infinitesimal speck compared to heaven filled with everlasting joy of the saints in the presence of the infinite God. C.S. Lewis gives a graphic contrast between hell and heaven in his book, The Great Divorce which describes a journey by the narrator from a grey, grim and joyless town (representing hell) to a bright, beautiful land (representing heaven). In one incident, a solid radiant heavenly guide explains the insignificance of hell to the narrator: “Yes. All Hell is smaller than one pebble of your earthly world: but it is smaller than one atom of this world, the Real World [heaven]. Look at yon butterfly. If it swallowed all Hell, Hell would not be big enough to do it any harm or to have any taste’…‘And yet all loneliness, angers, hatreds, envies and itchings that it contains, if rolled into one single experience and put into the scale against the least moment of the joy that is felt by the least in Heaven, would have no weight that could be registered at all. Bad cannot succeed even in being bad as truly as good is good. If all Hell’s miseries together entered the consciousness of yon wee yellow bird on the bough there, they would be swallowed up without trace, as if one drop of ink had been dropped into that Great Ocean to which your terrestrial Pacific itself is only a molecule.’…‘Nothing like small enough. For a damned soul is nearly nothing: it is shrunk, shut up in itself.”7C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce (HarperOne, 2001, rev. ed), pp. 138-139.
Further Reading
– Robert Peterson, Hell on Trial (Pesb. & Reformed, 1995).
– Christopher Morgan & Robert Peterson ed., Hell Under Fire (Zondervan, 2004).
– William Shedd, The Doctrine of Endless Punishment (Solid Ground reprint. Original pub., 1886).
– Edward Fudge & Robert Peterson, Two Views of Hell (IVP, 2000). An irenic yet frank debate between between Edward Fudge (the standard bearer of annihilationism) and Robert Peterson (a Reformed theologian representing the traditional view of hell).