"Sectarian
Belief." The annihilation view of hell has been associated mostly with
"sects" like the Seventh-day Adventists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and
smaller Sabbatarian churches (Church of God Seventh-day, Worldwide Church of
God, United Church of God, Global Church of God, International Church of God).
This fact has led many evangelicals and Catholics to reject annihilationism a
priori, simply because it is a "sectarian" belief and not a
traditional Protestant or Catholic belief. Such a belief is regarded as an
"absurdity"67 and the product of secular sentimentality.68
To a large extent, all
of us are children of tradition. The faith we received was mediated to us by
Christian tradition in the form of sermons, books, Christian education at home,
school, and church. We read our Bible in the light of what we have already
learned from these various sources. Thus, it is hard to realize how profoundly
tradition has moulded our interpretation of Scripture. But as Christians, we
cannot afford to become enslaved to human tradition, whether it be "Catholic"
tradition, "Evangelical" tradition, or even our own "denominational" tradition.
We can never assume the absolute rightness of our beliefs simply because they
have been hallowed by tradition. We must retain the right and duty of testing
our beliefs and reforming them in the light of Scripture when necessary.
Tactics of Harassment. The strategy of
rejecting a doctrine a priori because of its association with "sectarian"
churches is reflected in the tactics of harassment adopted against those
evangelical scholars who in recent times have rejected the traditional view of
hell as eternal conscious torment, and adopted instead the annihilation view of
hell. The tactics, as already noted in chapter I, consist in defaming such
scholars by associating them with liberals or with sectarians, like the
Adventists. Respected Canadian theologian Clark Pinnock writes: "It seems that a
new criterion for truth has been discovered which says that if Adventists or
liberals hold any view, that view must be wrong. Apparently a truth claim can be
decided by its association and does not need to be tested by public criteria in
open debate. Such an argument, though useless in intelligent discussion, can be
effective with the ignorant who are fooled by such rhetoric."69
Despite the tactics of harassment, the
annihilation view of hell is gaining ground among evangelicals. The public
endorsement of this view by John R. W. Stott, a highly respected British
theologian and popular preacher, is certainly encouraging this trend. "In a
delicious piece of irony," writes Pinnock, "this is creating a measure of
accreditation by association, countering the same tactics used against it. It
has become all but impossible to claim that only heretics and near-heretics
[like Seventh-day Adventists] hold the position, though I am sure some will
dismiss Stott’s orthodoxy precisely on this ground."70
John Stott expresses anxiety over the
divisive consequences of his new views in the evangelical community, where he is
a renowned leader. He writes: "I am hesitant to have written these things,
partly because I have great respect for long-standing tradition which claims to
be a true interpretation of Scripture, and do not lightly set it aside, and
partly because the unity of the worldwide evangelical community has always meant
much to me. But the issue is too important to be suppressed, and I am grateful
to you [David Edwards] for challenging me to declare my present mind. I do not
dogmatize about the position to which I have come. I hold it tentatively. But I
do plead for frank dialogue among evangelicals on the basis of Scripture."71
Emotional and Biblical reasons have
caused John Stott to abandon the traditional view of hell and adopt the
annihilation view. Stott writes: "Emotionally, I find the concept [of eternal
torment] intolerable and do not understand how people can live with it without
either cauterizing their feelings or cracking under the strain. But our emotions
are a fluctuating, unreliable guide to truth and must not be exalted to the
place of supreme authority in determining it. As a committed Evangelical, my
question must be and is not what my heart tells me, but what does God’s word
say? And in order to answer this question, we need to survey the Biblical
material afresh and to open our minds (not just our hearts) to the possibility
that Scripture points in the direction of annihilationism, and that ‘eternal
conscious torment’ is a tradition which has to yield to the supreme authority of
Scripture."72
In response to Stott’s plea to take a
fresh look at the Biblical teaching on the final punishment, we briefly examine
the witness of the Old and the New Testament by considering the following
points: (1) death as the punishment of sin, (2) the language of destruction, (3)
the moral implications of eternal torment, (4) the judicial implications of
eternal torment, and (5) the cosmological implications of eternal torment.
1. Death as the Punishment of Sin
"The Wages of Sin Is Death." A logical
starting point for our investigation is the fundamental principle laid down in
both Testaments: "The soul that sins shall die" (Ezek 18:4, 20);"The wages of
sin is death" (Rom 6:23). The punishment of sin, of course, comprises not only
the first death which all experience as a result of Adam’s sin, but also what
the Bible calls the second death (Rev 20:14; 21:8), which, as we have seen, is
the final, irreversible death experienced by impenitent sinners. This basic
principle sets the stage for studying the nature of the final punishment because
it tells us at the outset that the ultimate wages of sin is not eternal torment,
but permanent death.
Death in the Bible, as noted in chapter
4, is the cessation of life not the separation of the soul from the body. Thus,
the punishment of sin is the cessation of life. Death, as we know it, would
indeed be the cessation of our existence were it not for the fact of the
resurrection (1 Cor 15:18). It is the resurrection that turns death into a
sleep, from being the final end of life into being a temporary sleep. But there
is no resurrection from the second death. It is the final cessation of life.
This fundamental truth was taught in
the Old Testament, especially through the sacrificial system. The penalty for
the gravest sin was always and only the death of the substitute victim and never
a prolonged torture or imprisonment of the victim. James Dunn perceptively
observes that "The manner in which the sin offering dealt with sin was by its
death. The sacrificial animal, identified with the offerer in his sin, had to be
destroyed in order to destroy the sin which it embodied. The sprinkling,
smearing and pouring away of the sacrificial blood in the sight of God indicated
that the life was wholly destroyed, and with it the sin and the sinner."73 To
put it differently, the consummation of the sin offering typified in a dramatic
way the ultimate destruction of sin and sinners.
The final disposition of sin and the
destruction of sinners was revealed especially through the ritual of the Day of
Atonement, which typified the execution of God’s final judgment upon believers
and unbelievers. The genuine believers were those Israelites who, throughout the
year, repented of their sins, bringing appropriate sin offerings to the
sanctuary, and who on the Day of Atonement rested, fasted, prayed, repented, and
humbled their hearts before God. At the completion of the purification rites,
these persons were pronounced "clean before the Lord" (Lev 16:30).
The false believers were those
Israelites who, during the year, chose to sin defiantly against God (cf. Lev
20:1-6) and did not repent, thus failing to bring atoning sacrifices to the
sanctuary. On the Day of Atonement, they did not desist from their toil nor did
they engage in fasting, prayer, and soul searching (cf. Num 19:20). Because of
their defiant attitude on the Day of Atonement, these persons were "cut off"
from God’s people. "For whoever is not afflicted on this same day shall be cut
off from his people. And whoever does any work on this same day, that person I
will destroy from among his people" (Lev 23:29-30).74
The separation that occurred on the Day
of Atonement between genuine and false Israelites typifies the separation that
will occur at the Second Advent. Jesus compared this separation to the one that
takes place at harvest time between the wheat and the tares. Since the tares
were sown among the good wheat, which represents "the sons of the kingdom" (Matt
13:38), it is evident that Jesus had His church in mind. Wheat and tares,
genuine and false believers, will coexist in the church until His coming. At
that time, the drastic separation typified by the Day of Atonement will occur.
Evildoers will be thrown "into the furnace of fire," and the "righteous will
shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father" (Matt 13:42-43).
Jesus’ parables and the ritual of the
Day of Atonement teach the same important truth: False and genuine Christians
will coexist until His coming. But at the Advent judgment, typified by the Day
of Atonement, a permanent separation occurs when sin and sinners will be
eradicated forever and a new world will be established. As in the typical
service of the Day of Atonement impenitent sinners were "cut off"
and"destroyed," so in the antitypical fulfillment, at the final judgment,
sinners "shall suffer the punishment of eternal destruction" (2 Thess 1:9).
Jesus’ Death and the Punishment of
Sinners. In many ways, the death of Jesus on the Cross reveals how God
ultimately will deal with sin and sinners. Christ’s death on the Cross is a
supreme visible manifestation of the wrath of God against all human ungodliness
and unrighteousness (Rom 1:18; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Mark 15:34). What Jesus, our
sinless Savior, experienced on the Cross was not just the physical death common
to humanity, but the death that sinners will experience at the final judgment.
This is why He was "greatly distressed, troubled . . . very sorrowful, even to
death" (Mark 14:33-34).
Leon Morris reminds us that "It was not
death as such that He feared. It was the particular death that He was to die,
that death which is ‘the wages of sin’ as Paul puts it (Rom 6:23), the death in
which He was at one with sinners, sharing their lot, bearing their sins, dying
their death."75 It is no wonder that Jesus felt forsaken by the Father, because
He experienced the death that awaits sinners at the final judgment. At the time
of His passion, Jesus went through a period of increasingly excruciating agony
culminating in death. The suffering lasted several hours.
"There is no reason why we should not
take this [Christ’s death] as the model and example of the final punishment of
sin. We are not likely to go far wrong if we conclude that His suffering was the
most extreme that will be inflicted on the most defiant and responsible sinner
(?Judas Iscariot) and comprised therefore in itself, and covered, all lower
degrees of desert. When the Lord Jesus at last died, full satisfaction was made
for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2), God’s holy law was vindicated and
all sins potentially or actually atoned for. If He bore the punishment of our
sins, that punishment cannot under any circumstances be eternal conscious
suffering or misery, for He never suffered this and it is impossible that He
could have. Thus the facts of the suffering and death of Christ Jesus prove
conclusively that the punishment of sin is death in its natural sense of the
deprivation of life."76
Some argue that Christ’s death cannot
be equated with the final punishment of sinners in hell because He was an
infinite Person who could absorb infinite punishment in a single moment. By
contrast, sinners must suffer eternal torment because they are finite. This
artificial distinction between "finite" and "infinite" punishment and victims
does not derive from Scripture but from medieval speculations based on
feudalistic concepts of honor and justice.77 It also consists of adding,
subtracting, multiplying, and dividing infinities, which mathematically speaking
is non-sense.
There are no indications in the Bible
that God changed the nature of the punishment for sin in the case of our Lord
from everlasting torment to literal death. Edward White correctly states: "If it
be asserted that it was the presence of the Godhead within which dispensed with
the infliction of endless pains, through the substitution of an Infinite Majesty
for the infinitely extended misery of a finite being, we reply, that this is an
‘afterthought of theology’ which finds no place in the authoritative record."78
The Cross reveals the nature of hell as
the manifestation of God’s wrath that results in death. If Jesus had not been
raised, He like those who have fallen asleep in Him would simply have perished
(1 Cor 15:18), and not experienced unending torment in hell. His resurrection
reassures us that believers need not fear eternal death, because Christ’s death
marked the death of Death (2 Tim 1:10; Heb 2:14; Rev 20:14).
