ATHEISM AND THE LOGIC OF ETERNAL DAMNATION

A Research Paper

Submitted to Dr. Robert Stewart

Of the

New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Course

The Problem of Evil

For the Defend the Faith Christian Apologetics Conference

Austin K. DeArmond

B.A., Southeastern Bible College, 2012

1

INTRODUCTION

Some Christian doctrines are viewed as congenial with secular and societal trends and

worldviews. Society tends to enjoy and celebrate such truths like the unconditional love of God,

the goodness of Creation, and the spirituality of humanity. Yet, there are a handful of doctrines

within the Christian belief system that cause the unbeliever to recoil in disdain. One such

doctrine is the orthodox viewpoint of eternal punishment or Hell. The traditional viewpoint

concerning the belief is that adults who refuse to submit to the lordship of Christ are punished

eternally in a place of conscious separation from God and the blessings of his presence.1

Although most conceive of him typically as a kind and uncontroversial teacher of rabbinic

wisdom, Jesus taught more about hell than other throughout Scripture. Reformed scholar

Michael S. Horton notes that:

From the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, he was announced as the judge who baptizes with the Spirit and also with fire (Matt. 3:11-12). In fact, Jesus speaks more directly and vividly of the reality of hell than any Old Testament prophet or New Testament apostle (Matt. 5:30, 8:10-12, 13:40-42, 22:13, 24:51, 25:30; Luke 16:19-31). In his Olivet Discourse Jesus explained, “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.” Echoing Isaiah 2 and 10, Jesus says that the nations will appear before the Son of Man in judgment and all will be separated, as sheep and goats, “into eternal life” and “into eternal punishment” (Matt. 25:31, 41, 46). If we have trouble with Joshua and his campaigns, we should be more unsettled still by Jesus.2

The belief however appears elsewhere in the rest of the New Testament (Rom. 2:6-8; 2 Thess.

1:9-10; Phil. 3:9; Heb. 6:1-2; Rev. 14:11). It was subsequently taught almost immediately within

the early Church and persists even today.3

1 Wayne A. Grudem, Systematic Theology. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2008), 1149.

2 Michael S. Horton, The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2011), 975.

2

The doctrine is not without its opposition. The loudest objections stream from a new

group of unbelievers deemed the “New Atheists.” As he frequently does in his printed works, the

evolutionist Jerry Coyne scoffs that “The Achilles heel of all theistic religion is the existence of

evil. The ludicrous ways that theologians bob and weave in their theodicean attempts to explain

it convince nobody but the already deluded—and gives the rest of us a good laugh.”4 Richard

Dawkins, the Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understand of Science chair at Oxford

University, says that hell’s existence is so unlikely to be true that “it has to be advertised as very

very scary indeed to balance its implausibility and retain some deterrence value.”5 The late

Christopher Hitchens notes that “The other man-made stupidities and cruelties of the religious

are easy to detect…Nothing proves the man-made character of religion as obviously as the sick

mind that designed hell…”6 The writer goes on to assert that teaching children the doctrine of

hell is tantamount to child abuse. For the writer, the doctrine of Hell is incorrigible evidence that

Christianity is not just amoral, but positively immoral.7 Not to be outdone in rhetoric, Sam Harris

asserts that “There is, in fact, no worldview more reprehensible in its arrogance than that of a

religious believer: the creator of the universe takes an interest in me, approves of me, loves me,

and will reward me after death; my current beliefs, drawn from scripture, will remain the best

3 Gregg R. Allison, Historical Theology: An Introduction to Christian Doctrine. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2011), 703-708. See also J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines. (New York, NY.: Harper, 1959), 483.

4 Jerry Coyne, "William Lane Craig and the Incoherence of (and Prevalence of Belief in) Hell ." Why Evolution Is True, http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/04/22/william-lane-craig-and-the-incoherence-of-and-prevalence-of-belief-in-hell/ (accessed March 27, 2013).

5 Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion. (Boston, MA.: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2006), 361.

6 Christopher Hitchens, God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. (New York, NY. : Twelve, 2007), 218-219.

7 Ibid., 205.

3

statement of the truth until the end of the world; everyone who disagrees with me will spend

eternity in hell…”8 The doctrine is maligned as grotesque, demonstrably false, and an example of

totalitarian fear-mongering utilized as a power ploy over the weak willed.

Unfortunately, there exists a paucity of actual arguments against the doctrine in the

writings of the “New Atheists.” Statements of immorality are mere examples of conjecture. Scott

F. Aikin and Robert B. Talisse offer a more strident case against the doctrine noting that no

amount of sins within one’s lifetime could possibly be proportionate to an eternal litany of divine

punishments. The authors write that “Humans can do serious and lasting harm to themselves,

each other, and the environment, but none of these harms are ever extensive enough to merit

infinite punishment. We are finite creatures, and our powers are too small to do infinite harm.”9

They remark that God is immune to the harm caused by human sinfulness because he possesses

all the omniproperties and is incapable of damage. No harm, no foul. Furthermore, a belief in

eternal punishment is unjust and also unloving at its core.10 No loving God would allow those he

created to suffer unduly for all eternity. David Mills also asserts that hell exists fundamentally

for no reason other than to inflict suffering because surely the punishment does not fit the

crime.11

For the atheist, the doctrine of hell is morally reprehensible and emotionally trying. One

writer declares that “Hell stands as a constant reminder of the essence of Christianity: God is to

be obeyed because, in the final analysis, he is bigger and stronger than we are; and, in addition,

8 Sam Harris, Letter to a Christian Nation. (New York, NY.: Knopf, 2006), 24.

9 Scott F. Aikin and Robert B. Talisse. Reasonable Atheism: A Moral Case for Respectful Disbelief. (Amherst, NY.: Prometheus Books, 2011), 195.

10 Ibid., 196-199.

11 David Mills, Atheist Universe. (Berkeley, CA.: Ulysses Press, 2006), 188.

4

he incomparably more vicious.”12 Ultimately, evil is attributed to God if the doctrine of hell is

true. The goal of this paper is to offer some theological and biblical rejoinders to common atheist

attacks on the doctrine of hell.

THE LANGUAGE OF HELL

There are several words translated as hell within the Bible: sheol, hades, gehenna, and

tartarus. The most common term in the Old Testament is the Hebrew word sheol. At times, the

word merely denotes the grave (Isa. 14:11; Job 17:13-16) or death itself (Hos. 13:14; Hab. 2:5;

Isa. 28:15) but it also began to take on the specialized connotations of a realm of the dead (Isa

14:9-10; Job 26:5-6), moving closer to the notions surrounding the concept of hell.13 In the LXX,

the Greek term “hades” usually appears as the rendering of “sheol” and likely takes on the varied

theological dimensions. Within the NT, hades is used to refer to the underworld, the region of

the departed.14 Hades was used as a place not of repose or rest for the dead (contrary to

Hellenistic Jewish Literature) but punishment for those who refused to repent.15 The most

common word translated hell is the term “gehenna.” The name gehenna is from Aramaic words

for the “valley of Hinnom” (Josh. 15:8, 18:16), a despised place to the southwest of Jerusalem

where at one time human sacrifices were offered to the god Molech (2 Kings 23:10; Jer. 31) and

12 George H. Smith, Atheism: The Case Against God. (Buffalo, NY.: Prometheus Books, 1979), 300.

13 J. Lunde, “Hell” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, Joel B. Green, Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall. (Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 309.

14

R.P. Lightner, “Hell” in The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Walter A. Elwell. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1984), 548.

15 David E. Garland, Luke. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2011), 671.

5

where in later times the city’s refuse was burned.16 By the time of the NT, there was a strong

negative connotation associated with the valley after the many horrid practices occurred there

which merited the judgment of Yahweh (Jer. 7:30-33; 19:1-13; 32:34-35). It was viewed as a

perpetual sign of God’s judgment and retributive punishment against degrading and sinful

actions. Furthermore, the continual burning of refuse gave rise to its metaphorical use as a

symbol for the eternal, fiery judgment awaiting the wicked (2 Esd. 7:36; 1 Eno. 27:2-3; 2 Bar.

59:5-11).17 For the gospel writers, hell encompassed all the unfortunate results that were

associated with the valley of Hinnom and hades. The Gospels do not confine themselves to its

specific names: the word hades only occurs there four times (Matt 16:18; 11:2; Luke 10:15,

16:23), and gehenna eleven times (Mark 9:43, 45, 47; Matt. 5:22, 29-30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33;

Luke 2:5).18 Scripture also uses the term “tartarus” in 2 Pet. 2:4 as a place of torment for wicked

angels.

The Bible describes hell utilizing a host of different images: as a place of outer darkness

(Matt. 8:12, 22:13, 25:30), a lake of fire (Rev. 20:7-15), a place of weeping and gnashing of teeth

(Matt. 13:42, 50; Luke 13:28), a place of eternal separation from the blessings of God (Matt.

25:41; 2 Thess. 1:5-10), fire (Matt. 3:12, 25:41; Mark 9:43), a prison (Matt. 5:25), and a place of

torment where the worm does not turn or die (Mark 9:48). A common question normally asked is

“Is the language for hell literal or symbolic?” Is God literally going to let people burn for eternity

or are the images of hell figurative metaphors for something else? Most interpreters recognize

16 Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1-13. (Dallas, TX.: Word Books Pub., 2000), 117.

17 Robert H. Stein, Mark. (Grand Rapids, Mi.: Baker Academic, 2008), 448-449.18

Lunde, 310.

6

that there is a substantial metaphorical element in the Bible’s descriptions of hell.19 They arrive

at this conclusion for a host of reasons. First, the nature of the images seems to contradict if they

were meant to be literal. If the images are literal, how can there be the blackest of darkness

alongside an eternal fire (Jude 7 [eternal fire] and 13 [blackest darkness]; Matt. 25:30 [outer

darkness] and 25:41 [fire]? Fire necessarily illuminates. Second, there is ample evidence that the

language utilized to express the realities of hell is used figuratively elsewhere. William V.

Crocket rightly notes that:

Fire is often nonliteral in Jewish writings; they use colorful language to make a point. Even the Torah was said to have been written with 'black fire on white fire' (Jerusalem Talmud, Shekalim 6:1, 49d), and the tree of life was described as gold-looking in 'the form of fire' (2 Eno. 8:4). There are mountains of fire (Pseudo-Philo 11:5), rivers of fire (1 Eno. 17:5), thrones of fire (Apoc. Abram. 18:3), lashes of fire (T. Abram. 12:1)—even angels and demons of fire (2 Bar. 21:6; T. of Sol. 1:10). In the Scriptures God is said to be a 'consuming fire' (Deut. 4:24), who has a throne 'flaming with fire' that has a 'river of fire' issuing from beneath the throne (Dan. 7:9-10). Sometimes the images of fire approximate our understanding of material fire on earth. God speaks out of fire that does not consume a desert bush (Exo. 3:1-6) and carries a prophet to heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kings 2:11). In the New Testament, John says of the exalted Christ, 'his eyes were like blazing fire' (Rev. 1:14). Fire is also used figuratively for discord (Luke 12:49), judgment (1 Cor. 3:15), sexual desire (1 Cor. 7:9), and unruly words (Jas. 3:5-6).20

Third, the most vivid language is often employed to underscore an urgent truth a teacher desired

his pupil to understand. Hyperbole was a common tool utilized amongst rabbis of the day.21

Fourth, the pictures of hell outside the Bible in Jewish literature are vivid and mostly symbolic

19 D.A. Carson, The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 1996), 524.

20 William V. Crockett, Four Views on Hell. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 1992), 53.

21 Ibid., 30. An example of this idea not connected with hell is the cost and call of discipleship: To be a disciple you must 'hate' your father and mother (Luke 14:26), 'gouge out' an offending eye (Matt. 5:29), and let the dead 'bury their own dead' (Luke 9:60).

7

intended to paint the most awful picture possible, no matter how incompatible the images: 'black

fire' (2 Eno. 10:2), 'blazing flames worse than fire' (1 Eno. 100:9), and a place where the wicked

burn eternally, even though at the same time their bodies rot with maggots (Jud. 16:17;

Sir.7:17).22 Fifth, physical fire works on physical bodies with physical nerve endings, not on

spirit beings.23 The fire is said to be intended for the devil and his angels (Matt. 25:41) who

themselves are solely spiritual beings. Fire likely is then figurative for the judgment of God.

A danger to avoid is to surmise that just because the language of hell is figurative or

metaphorical, the reality itself must be also. The fact that fire, darkness, and gnashing of teeth are

symbols or figurative descriptions of judgment does not detract from the immense reality to

which they point. The function of symbols is to point beyond themselves to a higher or more

intense state of actuality than the symbol itself can contain.24 So what then is the nature of the

punishment? The apostle Paul says those who are victorious in their willful disobedience to the

end “will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and

from the glory of his might. (2 Thess. 1:9)” The fact that eternal life is not a mere quantity of

time but a quality of life (John 17:3) has bearing on what it means to suffer eternal destruction.25

The separation from God is the perishing of the nonbeliever for all eternity.

Biblical scholar and theologian N.T. Wright suggests that the punishment of hell is

intricately tied up with one of the fundamental, ontological realities of humanity—bearing the

22 Ibid., 31.

23 Ibid., 30.

24 R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith. (Wheaton, IL.: Tyndale House, 1992), 216.

25 Leon Morris, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 1991), 204-205.

8

image of God (Gen. 1:26-27, 5:1-3, 9:5-6; Psa. 8:3-8; 1 Cor. 11:7; Col. 3:8-11; Jas. 3:7-9). From

the onset, humanity was made to image the triune glory of the infinite Creator-God until “… the

earth [was] filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.” As

one became like what he worshipped, he or she would also reflect what one worshipped not only

back to the object itself but also outward to the world around. Sin is the turning away from the

knowledge of God to turning inwardly worshipping false idols of self and creature (Rom. 1). The

theologian suggests that:

… When human beings give their heartfelt allegiance to and worship that which is not God, they progressively cease to reflect the image of God...My suggestion is that it is possible for human beings so to continue down this road, so to refuse all whispering of good news, all glimmers of the true light, all prompting to turn and go the other way, all signposts to the love of God, that after death they become at last, by their own effective choice, beings that once were human but now are not, creatures that have ceased to bear the divine image at all. With the death of that body in which they inhabited God's good world, in which the flickering flame of goodness had not been completely snuffed out, they pass simultaneously not only beyond hope but also beyond pity. There is no concentration camp in the beautiful countryside, no torture chamber in the palace of delight. Those creatures that still exist in an ex-human state, no longer reflecting their maker in any meaningful sense, can no longer excite in themselves or others the natural sympathy some feel even for the hardened criminal.26

Sinners for all eternity are left to themselves in such a way that everything human about them

ceases to exist. All joy, community, love, comfort, and familiarity are eternally lost as the soul

loses all contact with the Giver of those blessings. The Princeton theologian Charles Hodge lists

the consequences of persistent rejection of God’s grace:

The sufferings of the impenitent, according to the Scripture, arise: (1) From the loss of all earthly good. (2) From the exclusion from the presence and favor of God. (3) From utter reprobation, or the final withdrawal from them of the Holy Spirit. (4) From the consequent unrestrained dominion of sin and sinful passions. (5) From the operations of 26 N.T. Wright, Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission

of the Church. (New York, NY: HarperOne, 2008), 182-183.

9

conscience. (6) From despair. (7) From evil associates. (8) From their external circum-stances; that is, future suffering is not exclusively the natural consequence of sin, but also includes positive inflections. (9) From their perpetuity.27

Hell then is the final abode for the perishing of an image bearer away from the presence of the

Lord.

THE CAUSE OF HELL

What is the cause of Hell? How do people end up in the place of punishment? While not

denying there is some divine aspect to the number of those cut off from God, Scripture chiefly

assigns the reason people perish to the misuse and abuse of human freedom both in the New and

Old Testaments.28 The accent of the biblical witness is clear:

For you will render to a man according to his work. (Psa. 62:12)

According to their way I will do to them, and according to their judgments I will judge them, and they shall know that I am the LORD. (Ezek. 7:27)

I will punish them for their ways and repay them for their deeds. (Hos. 4:9)

As the LORD of hosts purposed to deal with us for our ways and deeds, so has he dealt with us. (Zech. 1:6)

For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. (Matt. 16:27)

But for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek. (Rom. 2:8-9)

27 Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology. (Grand Rapids, Mi.: Eerdmans, 1952), 868.

28 Robert A. Peterson, “Systematic Theology: Three Vantage Points” in Hell Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents Eternal Punishment, Christopher W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2004), 161-162.

10

Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. (Gal. 6:7-8)

And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. (Rev. 20:13)

Judgment in Scripture is in accordance with the life lived (Matt. 10:15; 11:22, 24; 12:36; 25:31-

46; Acts 17:30-31; Rom. 2:5; 1 Cor. 4:5; Heb. 6:2; 2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6; Rev. 20:11-15). From the

vantage point of the writers, judgment is merited based upon the meaningful words and actions

displayed within a human’s short time of life. In one passage where the punishment allocated is

“going away to eternal punishment”, the grounds for meriting such a fate are evidenced by a lack

of deeds of mercy such as caring for the sick, visiting those in prison, and feeding and giving

water to those in dire straits.29 Eternal loss is predicated by moral and physical failures to do

what is right and necessary in this life.30

Hell then is the ultimate abode of those who refuse to bend their wills to the reality of

God’s joyful rule and reign. It is a failure to suspend human autonomy and self-centeredness in

such a way that one works in their actions, dispositions, and thoughts for the felicity of others

(both God and man). Scripture teaches that God eventually gives people up to their own pursuits

and this results in a myriad of selfish desires and deeds (Rom. 1:24-31; 2 Thess. 2:11). Hell is a

process that begins in this life and ends eternally in the next. Recognizing this consistent

scriptural portrait, C.S. Lewis notes:

29 This is not to deny justification by faith. The good works point to symbolic, deeper realities. See Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 14 - 28. (Dallas, TX.: Word Books Pub., 1995), 746-747.

30 Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 1992), 640-641.

11

…it [hell] begins with a grumbling mood, always complaining, always blaming others... but you are still distinct from it. You may even criticize it in yourself and wish you could stop it. But there may come a day when you can no longer. Then there will be no you left to criticize the mood or even to enjoy it, but just the grumble itself, going on forever like a machine.31

Ultimately, the self-caused process changes an individual in such a way that he or she refuses

good until the very end. The Oxford scholar says:

There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened.32

Those that are in hell ultimately refuse the offer of heaven. No amount of pleading, urging, or

dialogue could move the will turned inwards away from self to the joys of heaven. Lewis again

aptly writes:

In the long run the answer to all those who object to the doctrine of hell is itself a question: “What are you asking God to do?” To wipe out their past sins and, at all costs, to give them a fresh start, smoothing every difficulty and offering every miraculous help? But He has done so, on Calvary. To forgive them? They will not be forgiven. To leave them alone? Alas, I am afraid that is what He does.33

The primary cause of the fate of those in hell lies in the self-defacing abuse of creaturely

autonomy.

THE EQUITY OF HELL

31 C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce. (New York, NY.: HarperOne, 2001), 77-78.

32 Ibid., 75.

33 C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain. (New York, NY.: Macmillan Co., 1962), 128.

12

How can a limited number of sins result or require an eternity of punishment away from

the presence of God? One possible answer is to deny the eternality of existence in hell.

Accepting a position known as conditional immortality, Clark Pinnock writes:

Humans were not created with a natural capacity for everlasting life- Jesus Christ brought immortality to light through the gospel (2 Tim. 1:10). The soul is not an immortal substance that has to exist eternally. Let us just accept exactly what Jesus says: God is able to destroy both the body and soul in hell (Matt. 10:28). The idea of natural immortality seems to have skewed the Christian teaching about hell. It was a mistake and we should correct it.34

Hell then is viewed as a place where ultimately the fire annihilates or burns up the individual.

The eternality of hell is its judgment; not its duration. The problems with this view are

multifaceted: the language of eternal punishment and eternal life extends beyond the idea of

mere judgment (duration is included),35 the conditionality of the soul is a moot point if everyone

is given a resurrected body,36 and Pinnock’s description of destruction does not take into account

the full breadth of biblical teaching concerning that process and reality.37 Because of those

factors and more, Pinnock’s view does not present itself as a live option.

34 Clark H. Pinnock and Robert Brow, Unbounded Love: A Good news Theology for the 21st Century. (Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 92.

35 See Moses Stuart, Exegetical Essays on Several Words Relating to Future Punishment. (Andover, MA.: Perkins and Marvin, 1830) and Robert A. Morey, Death and the Afterlife. (Minneapolis, MN.: Bethany House, 1984)

36 Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 1977), 360.

37 Craig S. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 1999), 327. See also John Piper, Let the Nations Be Glad! The Supremacy of God in Missions. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Academic, 2010), 138-145 and Robert L. Reymond, A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith. (Nashville, TN.: T. Nelson, 1998), 1068-1083.

13

Is one left to assume then that hell is fundamentally unjust? Following Scripture’s

consistent witness (Rev. 16:7, 19:2), Christian theology has affirmed the justness of God’s

retributive punishment.38 How can this notion be consistently affirmed? An answer lies in the

nature of sin itself. Sin fundamentally is not an assault on the goodness and value of humanity.

When King David committed adultery with Bathsheba which resulted in the shame of his

kingship and the deaths of both his son and Uriah, he remarks “…Against you, you only, have I

sinned and done what is evil in your sight (Psa. 51:4).” David was not denying the social and

individual repercussions of sin. He understood however that sin was disobedience and defiance

to God. The disobeying of a command is not an arbitrary, trivial matter. It is a personal

disdaining of the dignity and worth of God. John Piper rightly articulates this point well saying:

What makes sin sin is not first that it hurts people, but that it blasphemes God. This is the ultimate evil and the ultimate outrage in the universe: the glory of God is not honored, the holiness of God is not reverenced, the greatness of God is not admired, the power of God is not praised, the truth of God is not sought, the wisdom of God is not esteemed, the beauty of God is not treasured, the goodness of God is not savored, the faithfulness of God is not trusted, the promises of God are not relied upon, the commandments of God are not obeyed, the justice of God is not respected, the wrath of God is not feared, the grace of God is not cherished, the presence of God is not prized, and the person of God is not loved. The infinite, all-glorious Creator of the universe, by whom and for whom all things exist, who holds every person’s life in being at every moment; is disregarded, disbelieved, disobeyed, and dishonored among the peoples of the world. That is the ultimate outrage of the universe.39

God, as the fountainhead and standard of all beauty and excellence in the universe, pursues with

infinite passion and power that which is most glorious in the universe. He also punishes a failure

to delight and reflect such a pursuit in his creatures. His holiness and righteousness requires he

38 Jonathan Edwards, and Perry Miller. The Works of Jonathan Edwards. (New Haven, CN.: Yale University Press, 2006), 668-669.

39 Piper, 230-231.

14

punish that which dishonors what is supremely lovely and worthy of total fidelity.40 Sin primarily

is not merely an anthropocentric malady that causes social and ethical evils; it’s a theocentic

crisis that causes the just punishment of God.

When the theocentric nature of sin is considered, the eternality of hell’s retribution can be

understood and rightly perceived. The Puritan theologian Jonathan Edwards notes:

Rebellion against God’s authority and contempt of his majesty, which every sin contains, is an infinite evil, because it has that infinite aggravation of being against an infinitely excellent and glorious majesty and most absolute authority. A sin against a more excellent being is doubtless greater than against a less excellent; and therefore, sins against one infinite in majesty, authority, and excellency must be infinite in aggravation, and so deserves not a finite, but an infinite punishment, which can be only by its being infinite in duration. And then one sin deserves that the punishment should be to that degree of intenseness as to be the destruction of the creature, because every sin is an act of hostility, and ‘tis fit that God’s enemies should be destroyed.41

Edwards reasons that the severity of the punishment rises with the dignity of the person being

spurned. Because God is infinite, a sin against him possesses infinite consequences. Scripture

also presents those who go to hell as continuing in their disobedience and defiance of

recognizing and appreciating God’s worth (Rev. 22:10-11; Luke 16:24). Their disobedience

extends even into eternity which merits more judgment. Furthermore, adequate evidence exists to

believe there are differing degrees of punishment in hell (Dan. 12:3; Matt. 11:20-21; Luke 12:47-

48; Rom. 1-2; 2 Cor. 9:6; Heb. 10:26-29).42 God, as a just and righteous being, would not inflict

arbitrary, undeserved punishments on creatures that were innocent.

40 Daniel P. Fuller, The Unity of the Bible: Unfolding God's Plan for Humanity. (Grand Rapids, Mi.: Zondervan, 1992), 188-194.

41 Edwards quoted in Owen Strachan and Douglas A. Sweeney, Jonathan Edwards on Heaven & Hell: The Essential Edwards Collection. (Chicago, IL.: Moody Publishers, 2010), 70

42 Louis Berkhof, Summary of Christian Doctrine. (London, U.K.: Banner of Truth Trust, 1960), 165.

15

THE VALUE OF HELL

What role or value does the doctrine of hell possess within Christian theology? Why

affirm such a doctrine in the face of such frequent attacks and misunderstandings? Christian

theology has generally asserted the doctrine of hell contains a litany of moral applications: (1) it

satisfies our sense of justice, (2) it testifies to the doctrine of the love of God, (3) it emboldens

evangelism and provides a motive for moral living, and (4) it creates a basis for peaceful non-

violence in the face of suffering.

The doctrine of hell satisfies humanity’s inward sense of justice and moral accountability.

N.T. Wright asks:

How does it happen that, on the one hand, we all share not just a sense that there is such a thing as justice, but a passion for it, a deep longing that things should be put to rights, a sense of out-of-jointness that goes on nagging and gnawing and sometimes screaming at us—and yet, on the other hand, after a millennia of human struggle and searching and love and longing and hatred and hope and fussing and philosophizing, we still can’t seem to get much closer to it than people did in the most ancient societies we discover?43

The writer ultimately answers that the gnawing sense or calling of justice is built into the system

by God. We are moral creatures who desire rightness and moral purity because we are made in

the image of One who desires those things also. The doctrine of hell provides comfort for the

man or woman who loses heart over the mass evil and moral depravity of the world around them.

Paul affirms that “…the wrongdoer will be paid back for the wrong he has done, and there is no

partiality. (Col. 3:25)” God is righteous in his judgment and will put his good Creation back in

its right order (Rom. 8; 1 Pet. 1:17; Rom. 2:11, 3:19).

43 N.T. Wright, Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense. (San Francisco, CA.: HarperSanFrancisco, 2006), 6.

16

Far from being evidence against the character of God, the doctrine of hell testifies to the

love of God. Christian theology from its beginning has affirmed that the death of Christ was

substitutionary in its nature and sought to placate the wrath of God. The apostle John writes “For

God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not

perish but have eternal life.” God’s love is the basis for his sending of his beloved Son.44 As the

following verses show (vv. 17-21), God’s sending of his Son in love is for the express purpose of

avoiding condemnation. Eternal separation and judgment can be avoided by coming to Christ.45

How can this be? The cross is construed by the NT writers as the place where the Son bore the

wrath of God. Jesus prayed asking if the cup could be taken from him if the Lord should will

(Luke 22:42). The image of the cup is the chalice of God’s divine wrath for sin in the Old

Testament (Psa. 11:6, 75:8-9; Isa. 51:17, 19, 22). The agonizing cry from Jesus on the cross of

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? (Matt. 27:46)” is the cry of one inwardly

bearing the pains of hell. Elsewhere Paul the apostle writes that people can be accepted before

God because Christ was “…put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.

This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over

former sins. (Rom. 3:24-25)” For Jesus to be put forward as a “propitiation” denotes being

sacrificed as a wrath-bearing substitute that averts divine judgment.46 Jesus is the propitiatory

sacrifice that satisfies God’s righteous indignation towards sin. Sin is dealt with in the universe

in two ways: either on the cross or in hell. God’s love provided a means to avoid the ghastly

44 Andreas J. Kostenberger, John. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Academic, 2004), 128-129.

45 J. Ramsey Michaels, The Gospel of John. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 2010), 200-208.

46 Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 1996), 230-240.

17

reality of hell. The doctrine also testifies to the holiness, righteousness, and dignity of God. The

horrors of sin are magnified by its eternal consequences in hell.

The doctrine of hell provides incentive for Christian ministers to preach to all nations

urging them to turn to God (2 Pet. 3:9; Ezek. 33:11).47 Recognizing the eternal consequences of

sin should provoke the Christian to active proliferation of the truth he or she knows. Hell also

serves as a possible basis for ethical and moral living. The New Testament is fraught with

examples of rewards being offered to believers who live and do right in the world (Matt. 6:10,

20-21; Luke 6:22-23; 1 Cor. 3:8; Col. 3:23-24; 2 John 8). The final judgment is an incentive to

faithfulness and good works, not as a means of earning forgiveness of sins, but as a means of

gaining greater eternal reward.48 The fear of eternal loss might also prevent one from committing

atrocious acts against others. That a judge exists to reward or punishment good and evil deeds

forms the basis for avoiding certain activities and participating in others.

Hell also provides the sustainable basis for nonviolence in the face of evil. Recognizing

that “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord” (Rom. 12:19) frees the individual up to

sincerely forgive and work for justice in the world. One Yale theologian writes:

If God were not angry at injustice and deception and did not make a final end to violence—that God would not be worthy of worship…The only means of prohibiting all recourse to violence by ourselves is to insist that violence is legitimate only when it comes to God…My thesis that the practice of non-violence requires a belief in divine vengeance will be unpopular by many…in the West…[But] it takes the quiet of a suburban home for the birth of the thesis that human non-violence [results from the belief in] God’s refusal to judge. In a sun-scorched land, soaked in the blood of the innocent, it will invariably die…[with] other pleasant captivities of the liberal mind.49

47 Grudem, 1148.

48 Ibid., 1148.

49 Miroslav Volf quoted in Timothy J. Keller, The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism. (New York, NY.: Dutton, 2008), 76-77.

18

Understanding that God will ultimate render eternal justice for the injustices of the world

prevents immature reigns of human terror where “justice” can so easily become an example of

more evil. Christians can work for social harmony while appreciating the truth that God will

radically and meaningfully administer what it true and right. At the end of the day after all our

labors are finished and there is more work to be done, the sovereign equity of God will suffice a

believing heart to not abandon hope and carry on with the Lord’s work.

CONCLUSION

The doctrine of hell is often put forward as a moral stain on the Christian message. Yet, a

philosophical problem, even a vexing problem, need not sink an entire worldview.50 The

Christian possesses a very rational worldview even while affirming a traditional understanding of

eternal punishment. The language of hell is highly stylized and symbolic so common caricatures

should be avoided. The Christian doctrine’s rationale is there exists an infinitely perfect and

worthy being who is fully deserving of all praise, adoration, and worship. Humanity, through

their own abuse of freedom, has decided to praise other things less deserving thus procuring the

holy and righteous indignation of the highest of Beings. God freely allows those rebel creatures

to go on in self-worshipful degradation for all eternity under his divine retributive tutelage as an

expression of his moral character. The doctrine of hell possesses beneficial roles within Christian

theology that include the satisfaction for the desire for justice, a testimony to the person and

work of Christ, an incentive for both evangelism and ethical living, and a basis for non-violence

50 Douglas R. Groothuis, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith. (Downers Grove, IL.: IVP Academic, 2011), 654.

19

in the face of evil. While erroneously being called a terminal wound in the Christian worldview,

the doctrine of hell does not further the problem of evil but alleviates it.51

51 Steven B. Cowan, “It Would Have Been Good for That Man if He Had Not Been Born: Human Sinfulness and Hell as Horrendous Evil,” Philosophia Christi, Vol. 10 No. 1 (2008): 247.

20

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aikin, Scott F., and Robert B. Talisse. Reasonable Atheism: A Moral Case for Respectful Disbelief. Amherst, NY.: Prometheus Books, 2011.

Allison, Gregg R.. Historical Theology: An Introduction to Christian Doctrine. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2011.

Berkhof, Louis. Summary of Christian Doctrine. London, U.K.: Banner of Truth Trust, 1960.

Carson, D. A.. The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 1996.

Cowan, Steven B.. 2008. “It Would Have Been Good for That Man if He Had Not Been Born: Human Sinfulness and Hell as Horrendous Evil,” Philosophia Christi, Vol. 10 No. 1: 239-247.

Coyne, Jerry. "William Lane Craig and the Incoherence of (and Prevalence of Belief in) Hell ." Why Evolution Is True. http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/04/22/william-lane-craig-and-the-incoherence-of-and-prevalence-of-belief-in-hell/ (accessed March 27, 2013).

Crockett, William V.. Four Views on Hell. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 1992.

Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. Boston, MA.: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2006.

Edwards, Jonathan, and Perry Miller. The Works of Jonathan Edwards. New Haven, CN.: Yale University Press, 2006.

Elwell, Walter A.. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1984.

Fuller, Daniel P.. The Unity of the Bible: Unfolding God's Plan for Humanity. Grand Rapids, Mi.: Zondervan, 1992.

Garland, David E.. Luke. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2011

Green, Joel B., Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1992.

Groothuis, Douglas R.. Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith. Downers Grove, IL.: IVP Academic, 2011.

Grudem, Wayne A.. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2008.

Hagner, Donald A.. Matthew 1-13. Dallas, TX.: Word Books Pub., 2000.

21

_______. Matthew 14 - 28. Dallas, TX.: Word Books Pub., 1995.

Harris, Sam. Letter to a Christian Nation. New York, NY.: Knopf, 2006.

Hitchens, Christopher. God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. New York, NY. : Twelve, 2007.

Hodge, Charles. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, Mi.: Eerdmans, 1952.

Horton, Michael S.. The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2011.

Keener, Craig S.. A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew. Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 1999.

Keller, Timothy J.. The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism. New York, NY.: Dutton, 2008.

Kelly, J. N. D.. Early Christian Doctrines. New York, NY.: Harper, 1959.

Kostenberger, Andreas J.. John. Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Academic, 2004.

Lewis, C. S.. The Great Divorce,. New York, NY.: HarperOne, 2001.

_______. The Problem of Pain. New York, NY.: Macmillan Co., 1962.

Michaels, J. Ramsey. The Gospel of John. Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 2010.

Mills, David. Atheist Universe. Berkeley, CA.: Ulysses Press, 2006.

Moo, Douglas J.. The Epistle to the Romans. Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 1996.

Morey, Robert A.. Death and the Afterlife. Minneapolis, MN.: Bethany House, 1984.

Morgan, Christopher W., and Robert A. Peterson. Hell Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents Eternal Punishment. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 2004.

Morris, Leon. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 1991.

_______.The Gospel According to Matthew. Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 1992.

Mounce, Robert H.. The Book of Revelation. Grand Rapids, MI.: Eerdmans, 1977.

Pinnock, Clark H., and Robert Brow. Unbounded Love: A Good News Theology for the 21st Century. Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 1994.

22

Piper, John. Let the Nations Be Glad! The Supremacy of God in Missions. Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Academic, 2010.

Reymond, Robert L.. A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith. Nashville, TN.: T. Nelson, 1998.

Smith, George H.. Atheism: The Case Against God. Buffalo, NY.: Prometheus Books, 1979.

Sproul, R. C.. Essential Truths of the Christian Faith. Wheaton, IL.: Tyndale House, 1992.

Stein, Robert H.. Mark. Grand Rapids, Mi.: Baker Academic, 2008.

Strachan, Owen, and Douglas A. Sweeney. Jonathan Edwards on Heaven & Hell: The Essential Edwards Collection. Chicago, IL.: Moody Publishers, 2010.

Stuart, Moses. Exegetical Essays on Several Words Relating to Future Punishment. Andover, MA.: Perkins and Marvin, 1830.

Wright, N. T.. Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense. San Francisco, CA.: HarperSanFrancisco, 2006.

_______. Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church. New York, NY: HarperOne, 2008.