========================================================================
  DOCTRINE ETERNAL PUNISHMENT
  by Harry Buis
========================================================================

Buis's theological study of the biblical doctrine of eternal punishment,
examining the scriptural evidence, historical development, and theological
arguments concerning the nature, duration, and purpose of divine judgment.

  Chapters: 12

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  TABLE OF CONTENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. 00 Buis - Doctrine of Eternal Punishment
    2. 01 The Teaching of the Old Testament
    3. 02 The Inter-Testamental Period
    4. 03 The Teaching of the New Testament
    5. 04 The Pre-Reformation Period
    6. 05 Reformation and Post-Reformation Thought
    7. 06 Post-Reformation Thought
    8. 07 Denials and Their Answers
    9. 08 Present-Day Conservative Position
   10. 09 Infant Salvation or Damnation
   11. 10 The Heathen Who Have Not Heard The Gospel
   12. 11 Denial By The Cults

========================================================================
  CHAPTER 1: 00 BUIS - DOCTRINE OF ETERNAL PUNISHMENT
========================================================================

The Doctrine of Eternal Punishment by Harry Buis 01 The Teaching of the Old
Testament 02 The Inter-Testamental Period 03 The Teaching of the New Testament
04 The Pre-Reformation Period 05 Reformation and Post-Reformation Thought 06
Post-Reformation Thought 07 Denials and Their Answers 08 Present-Day
Conservative Position 09 Infant Salvation or Damnation 10 The Heathen Who Have
Not Heard The Gospel 11 Denial By The Cults The Reverend Harry Buis in a
comprehensive yet popular treatment demonstrates this conclusively. Written to
meet a very real need in church and school, the discussion traces belief in the
doctrine of eternal punishment historically from the age of the Old Testament to
the present. The Biblical position is well-expounded and numerous variations
therefrom in past and contemporary thought are cited. The treatment should be of
benefit to many.

M. EUGENE OSTERHAVEN Professor of Systematic Theology Western Theological
Seminary Holland, Michigan About the Author

Mr. Buis was born in Fairlawn, New Jersey. A graduate of Hope College and
Western Theological Seminary of the Reformed Church in America, he has studied
at the Graduate School of Theology of Oberlin College. Mr. Buis’ first pastorate
was at the Brooklyn Community Reformed Church in the suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio.
He is now the pastor of the Vriesland Reformed Church of Zeeland, Michigan.

Preface This book is not written because the author takes delight in the
subject. The thought of hell terrifies. It ought to make us all shudder. But it
is a fact taught in God’s Word. To deny or to ignore any Scriptural teaching is
a serious matter.

We have been led to a serious study of this subject for several reasons. One is
that there is no other doctrine that is clearly taught in Scripture which is so
generally denied or ignored in our modern theological world. In our generation
we have witnessed an increased belief in the deity of Christ and in the
authority of the Word of God. We have witnessed a trend toward orthodoxy with
regard to many other cardinal doctrines. But the doctrine of eternal punishment
is strongly denied by many.

During the preparation of this book, the doctrine of eternal punishment was
publicly denied by several leaders in the church in Norway. Bishop Kristian
Schjelderup of Hamar declared that "The doctrine of eternal punishment is not at
home in a religion of love." The resulting controversy still rages. Even in the
Roman Catholic church there are some who question this doctrine. An example of
this is the recently publicized statement of the late Giovanni Papini, well
known as the writer of the Life of Christ. His statement expressed some doubt
with regard to the commonly accepted teaching of the Roman Catholic church.

Many theological libraries contain numerous books denying the doctrine, but very
few that defend it. In fact, to our knowledge, no major work has been printed in
defense of the doctrine in recent years. Some of the best books on the subject,
written many years ago, are no longer accessible to the Bible student. Dr.
Pusey’s book What is of Faith as to Eternal Punishment (1880) is an important
work, yet the writer found it very difficult to obtain a copy, and when one was
finally located in a seminary library, it was discovered that it had only been
checked out on two occasions, in 1902 and in 1912! (see note below) But more
serious than the widespread denial of the doctrine is the attitude of many
evangelicals toward it. Many dare not preach it; while others go to the opposite
extreme, describing hell in such gross and lurid terms that they often do more
harm than good. As Robert Mackintosh says: in The Dictionary of Christ and the
Gospels, "Besides all these changes or innovations in belief, the growing
reticence, and one may say reluctance, among those who maintain full traditional
orthodoxy is even more significant."1

Another reason for our writing on the subject is that the man on the street
fails to take this doctrine seriously, as is shown by his constant use of the
word "hell" in a thoughtless and meaningless way. That keen European thinker
Berdyaev says, "It is remarkable how little people think about hell or trouble
about it. This is the most striking evidence of human frivolity."2 Schilder
makes a similar and more detailed analysis of the situation when he says, "What
is hell? When you place this question before the modern cosmopolitan man of our
day, who is satiated with hyper-culture, then his answer is ready: Hell is a
figment of the imagination! Hell? Well, this shadowy frightfulness which is
implied in the word, as man says, can’t be anything other than a notion of
founders of religions and of priests and lying prophets, wherewith they deceive
the masses, and the world which wants to be deluded, in order to fill their
empty pockets in this life with the preaching of the total emptying of the
sinner in the hereafter . . . they tell you bluntly, that the world doesn’t
believe any more in hell."3 For these reasons, we write on the subject of hell,
with the earnest prayer that our work on the subject may be used of God in
keeping some precious souls from experiencing hell’s terrible reality.

1. R. Mackintosh, in Hastings The Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, II
"Universalism" (Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark, 1909), p. 785.

2. N. Berdyaev, The Destiny of Man (New York, Charles Scribners’ Sons, 1937), p.
338.

3. K. Schilder, Wat Is De Hel? (Kampen, J.H. Kok, 1920).

Webmaster’s Note: Dr. Pusey’s book is held by 136 libraries


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 2: 01 THE TEACHING OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
========================================================================

The Teaching of the Old Testament The plan in presenting the subject of the
Doctrine of Eternal Punishment will be primarily that of an historical survey.
We shall not attempt to be exhaustive in treatment lest we get lost in a maze of
details. To find out what the Bible teaches, and what Christians have believed
about the subject are the major concerns. Since Christian belief is rooted in
Hebrew teaching, it is necessary to determine exactly what the Hebrews believed
about eternal punishment. That portion of the history of Hebrew belief which is
most important is found in the Old Testament. Here we have not only the record
of Hebrew beliefs over a period of many centuries, but most important of all, we
have the beginning of divine revelation on the subject. Those, however, who
expect to find a great deal of material dealing directly with the doctrine of
eternal punishment will be disappointed. The Old Testament contains little
information about the eschatological future of the individual, and almost all of
this is concerned with the future of the godly rather than that of the ungodly.
In the study of this subject one must not read back into the Old Testament
concepts which were not held until much later in the history of doctrine. On the
other hand, even the critical scholar Burney points out that "Those who believe
that in the Old Testament we have the record of a revelation, partial and
fragmentary indeed, but divinely inspired and leading up to the manifestation of
our Lord in the fulness of time, will realize that in many cases the statements
of Old Testament writers and the ideas which they embody are susceptible of a
deeper significance when read in the fuller light of New Testament revelation."1
That there is little material dealing directly with the doctrine of eternal
punishment does not mean that there is little or no valuable information in the
Old Testament regarding the study of our subject. General information in the Old
Testament with regard to the subject of the life after death provides a
background for the study of the doctrine of eternal punishment. The common
conception of the life after death held by the Israelites in the Old Testament
period was existence in a place called Sheol. This was a shadowy, limited
existence compared to this life, but it was a very real existence. Belief in
Sheol was a doctrine of immortality, not of annihilation. Furthermore, side by
side with this common conception of the life after death, passages exist here
and there that reveal glimpses of a more wonderful life after death for the
believer, and a few which hint at a more terrible life after death for the
unbeliever. Also, great concepts are revealed in the Old Testament which led the
Jews of the Inter-testamental period from the general concept of Sheol to a more
developed doctrine of individual destiny including a clearly defined doctrine of
eternal punishment.

First the concept of Sheol must be studied. This concept was similar to that
held by other contemporary peoples. All of the civilization of the Middle East
believed in a place where the dead went to live in a rather shadowy type of
existence. The Egyptians called this place Amenti, the Babylonians called it
Arallu, the Greeks called it Hades, and the Israelites called it Sheol. The
Egyptians especially had a rather completely developed eschatology, including
the concept of judgment of evil. In the centuries which the Israelites spent in
bondage in Egypt, they must have come into contact with these ideas.

It must be recognized that the word Sheol translated "hell" in the King James
Version of the Old Testament does not refer to a place of eternal punishment,
but to this place of shadowy existence where the good and the evil continued to
exist together after death. That the latter idea is intended is recognized by
the more accurate rendering of the American Standard Version where the word
"hell" is not used in the Old Testament, and Sheol is left untranslated. The
etymology of the word "Sheol" is uncertain. Some scholars believe that it is
derived from the verb "to ask," and connect this derivation with the practice of
consulting the dead. Others consider this derivation as describing the
insatiable nature of Sheol, always asking for more inhabitants (Proverbs 30:16).
Others believe the derivation comes from the verb "to be hollow," referring to
the idea that Sheol is a hollow place under the earth. A careful study of the
Old Testament will indicate the common conception of Sheol to be that of a
continued existence in a very dreary underworld.

Numerous passages of the Old Testament give such a description, of which the
following are examples: a. Sheol was a place of darkness. "Before I go whence I
shall not return, even to the land of darkness . . . as darkness itself/ and of
the shadow of death, without any order, and where the light is as darkness"2
(Job 10:21-22). "For the enemy hath persecuted my soul; he hath smitten my life
down to the ground; he hath made me to dwell in dark places, as those that have
been long dead" (Psalms 143:3). b. Sheol was a place of silence. "Unless Jehovah
had been my help, my soul had soon dwelt in silence" (Psalms 94:17). The dead
praise not Jehovah, Neither any that go down into silence" (Psalms 115:17). c.
Sheol was a place of forgetfulness. "Shall thy wonders be known in the dark? And
thy righteousness in the land of forgetfulness" (Psalms 88:12)? d. Sheol was a
place of separation from God. "For in death there is no remembrance of thee; in
Sheol who shall give thee thanks" (Psalms 6:5)? e. Sheol was a place without
knowledge of what transpires on earth. "His sons come to honour, and he knoweth
it not; and they are brought low, but he perceiveth it not of them" (Job 14:21).
"For the living know that they shall die; but the dead know not any thing,
neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. As
well their love, as their hatred and their envy, is perished long ago, neither
have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.
Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work,
nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in Sheol, whither thou goest"
(Ecclesiastes 9:5-6; Ecclesiastes 9:10). The above passages reveal that the
individual, upon his entrance into Sheol, was but a shadow of his former self.
However, as we have already mentioned, we have here a doctrine of immortality,
not of annihilation. Existence in Sheol may have been limited in comparison to
this life, but it was very real existence. There are other passages describing
the state of the dead which present this side of the truth. "Abraham was
gathered to his people" (Genesis 25:8). Sheol was a place of reunion: Jacob said
regarding Joseph, "I will go down to Sheol to my son mourning" (Genesis 37:35).
David said of the child that was smitten, "I shall go to him, but he will not
return to me" (2 Samuel 12:23). The Hebrew word for those who were inhabitants
of Sheol is Rephaim. "They that are deceased tremble beneath the waters and the
inhabitants thereof" (Job 26:5). The marginal translation for "they that are
deceased" (Rephaim) is "shades." The next verse is rendered: "Sheol is naked
before God, and Abaddon hath no covering." Evidently Abaddon is another name for
Sheol, and here the marginal note has "Destruction." Speaking of the effect on
the Rephaim of the descent of the King of Babylon, Isaiah 14:10-11a says, "All
they shall answer and say unto thee, Art thou become like unto us? Thy pomp is
brought down to Sheol." Ezekiel 32:17-32 consists of a long passage describing
the inhabitants of Sheol, and also implies recognition among its inhabitants.
These passages as well as others show that those in Sheol are sentient beings,
that they recognize and can talk to each other. This is further evidence of the
fact that although existence in Sheol was considered less active than life on
earth, it was still a state of continuing existence, and certainly not
annihilation.

There was, however, little distinction between the good and the evil people in
Sheol; both together were engulfed in comparative gloom. The fine conservative
scholar, Oehler, says, "In no part of the Old Testament is a difference in the
lot of those in the realm of death distinctly spoken of. Job 3:17-19 describes
them there as all alike. Only in Isaiah 14:15, Ezekiel 32:23, where the fallen
conquerors are relegated to the uttermost depths can we find an indication of
different grades in the realm of the dead — perhaps in the sense in which
Josephus (Bell. Jud. iii, 8.5) speaks of an outer darkness for self-murderers.
Elsewhere, only a division into peoples and races, and not a division of the
just and unjust, is spoken of. ’Tomorrow,’ says Samuel to Saul, ’shalt thou and
thy sons be with me’ (1 Samuel 28:19). The inhabitants of the kingdom of the
dead ’have no more reward’ (Ecclesiastes 9:5 ff). In itself, the condition in
Sheol, which is in the main the most indefinite existence possible, is neither
blessedness (although longed for as a rest by him who is weary of life), (Job
3:13-19) nor positive unblessedness: for to those who are swept away in the
midst of the enjoyment of life the punishment consists in being thus carried
away (Numbers 16:30 ff., Psalm 4:16). The Mosaic retribution has its sphere
entirely on this side of the grave."3 Later there emerged a clear distinction
between the compartment where the good dwelt in Sheol, and that where the evil
existed; but that distinction took place after the Old Testament period closed.
As to the location of Sheol, it was generally believed to be somewhere
underground.

Two possible views are tenable regarding the facts just described. One is that
at death the Old Testament saints actually did go to this dreary place called
Sheol, and that they remained there until the time when Christ paid the price
for sin, descended into Sheol, and brought the redeemed into heaven. In Lange’s
Commentary, E.R. Craven has a very detailed discussion supporting this view.4
This was the prevalent view held by the early Church, and it was such a descent
into Sheol which was originally intended by the words of the Apostles’ Creed,
"He descended into hell." It is, however, significant that this article was
evidently one of the last to be added to the Creed. Vast literature has been
written on the subject to which reference will be given later. This view has
this to commend it: it connects the salvation of Old Testament believers
directly with the cross of Christ. There is also here a close connection with
the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory. This, however, is beyond the scope of
our present study. The other possible view of Sheol is based on the fact that
revelation in the Bible is progressive. As Hodge states: "The progressive
character of divine revelation is recognized in relation to all the great
doctrines of the Bible. One of the strongest arguments for the divine origin of
the Scripture is the organic relation of its several parts. They comprise more
than sixty books written by different men in different ages, and yet they form
one whole; not by mere external historical relations, nor in virtue of the
general identity of the subject of which they treat, but by their internal
organic development. All that is in a full-grown tree was potentially in the
seed. All that we find unfolded in the fulness of the gospel lies in a
rudimental form in the earliest books of the Bible. What at first is only
obscurely intimated is gradually unfolded in subsequent parts of the sacred
volume, until the truth is revealed in its fulness. This is true of the
doctrines of redemption; of the person and work of the Messiah, the promised
seed of the woman; of the nature and office of the Holy Spirit; and of a future
state beyond the grave."5 (Italics are mine.) At the beginning of the Old
Testament, God’s people naturally shared more or less the erroneous conceptions
of the pagans on many subjects; only gradually the light of Divine Revelation
was shed on these subjects. According to this view, the passages describing
Sheol are a record of the conceptions of the Israelites before they had learned
the wonderful truth that at death the souls of God’s people go immediately to
heaven. This second view has its problems, yet it fits in more fully with the
way in which we would expect God to treat those who lived close to Him in Old
Testament days. "Surely goodness and loving kindness shall follow me all the
days of my life; and I shall dwell in the house of Jehovah forever" (Psalms
23:6). Under this conception it would follow that the souls of the ungodly in
the old dispensation also went directly to the place of punishment, in keeping
with later revelation, rather than to the more neutral Sheol of the Old
Testament. In the Old Testament, side by side with the descriptions of the
shadowy form of the immortality of Sheol, there are clear intimations of the
revelation of a more wonderful life after death for God’s people. These passages
tend to confirm the second of the two views just described. On the other hand,
most of these passages can possibly be interpreted as a future rescue from
Sheol, which took place at the time of the descent into Sheol, and which Christ
effected at his death according to the advocates of that view. The first of such
references is found in the very description of the creation of man, in the fact
that he was created "in the image of God" (Genesis 1:26), and that God himself
"breathed into his nostrils the breath of life" (Genesis 2:7), so that man
became a "living soul." Although this cannot be considered absolute proof of the
natural immortality of man, it certainly points in that direction. Of the first
passage, the critical scholar Oesterley says, "It means that the breath breathed
in by a Creator who was immortal conferred thereby on man the faculty of
becoming immortal."6 He also says, "In all the three accounts referred to, the
immortality of man will be accounted for because of the mode of his creation, a
part of his partook of the divine, and therefore immortal nature."7 Bartlett,
the author of a very fine book refuting the doctrine of annihilationism, comes
to this conclusion: "The Hebrew view of the nature of the soul was such as to
lay a natural foundation for a belief in its continued existence after death.
The human being is specially distinguished from the animal world in his
creation, and the soul is specially distinguished from the body, and allied to
God, its creator."8

Another intimation of immortality is found in the existence of the Tree of Life
in the Garden of Eden. It is mentioned in Genesis 2:9, "And out of the ground
made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for
food: the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of
knowledge of good and evil." Even more significantly, after the Fall it is
recorded, "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to
know good and evil, and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the
tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth
from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he
drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims,
and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life"
(Genesis 3:22-24). The translations of Enoch and Elijah are especially
significant. They clearly demonstrate the possibility of continued fellowship
with God, and the possibility of the total being, body as well as soul, escaping
the penalty of death. The phrase "to go to one’s fathers" also speaks of
immortality. It is often descriptive of death in the Old Testament, and meant
more than simply burial in an ancestral tomb, for in several instances the
phrase is used where no such common burial took place. Gerlach, commenting on
Genesis 15:15 says that this phrase is "the gracious expression for a life after
death." Baumgarten says "a continuance after death is assuredly expressed
therein." Delitzsch commenting on Genesis 25:8 says "The union with the fathers
is not a mere union of corpses, but of persons."9 The fact that the magical
invocation of the dead persisted in Israel in spite of clear prohibitions
indicates the popular belief in a life after death, and in a form of life which
included certain power and knowledge.

Jesus’ refutation of the doctrine of the Sadducees also has a bearing on the
subject. The fact that long after the patriarchs died, God called Himself the
God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was for Jesus proof that "God is not a God of
the dead, but of the living" (Matthew 22:32). Though the average Old Testament
Israelite may not have grasped this implication, this in no way invalidates the
reality of its truth. As Oehler comments, "To him who has an eternal value for
God an eternal existence is assured."10

Moreover there are a number of passages in the poetic section of the Old
Testament that express hope of a life beyond death of a higher nature than the
gloom of Sheol. Abraham’s words to his servants, "I and the lad will go yonder
and we will worship, and come again to you" (Genesis 22:5) are interpreted in
Hebrews 11:19 as implying that Abraham believed that God would restore Isaac to
him and at least suggest belief in a life beyond death. Another such passage is
Job 19:25-27, "For I know that my Redeemer lives, And He shall stand at last on
the earth; And after my skin is destroyed, this I know, That in my flesh I shall
see God, Whom I shall see for myself, And my eyes shall behold, and not as a
stranger." The Hebrew is difficult to translate, and there is a wide range of
interpretation of these verses; nevertheless it is difficult to see how anyone
can miss the sense that Job expected a vision of God in the world beyond. Burney
accepts this interpretation. He says, "The idea of a future life using the
expression in the sense of an existence after death not wholly removed from the
presence of God — has been hinted at, as we have seen, earlier in the book,
though to the writer it seemed beyond the reach of aspiration. Here it bursts
forth into an expression as a conviction."11

Psalms 16:1-11 states, "My flesh also shall dwell in safety. For thou wilt not
leave my soul to Sheol; Neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption.
Thou wilt show me the path of life: In thy presence is fulness of joy: In thy
right hand there are pleasures for evermore (verses 9b-11). Again there are
differences of opinion as to exactly what David’s hope as expressed here was,
whether to be kept from death, or of a fuller life beyond Sheol. The context
certainly seems to favor the latter interpretation. In Psalms 17:1-15 we read,
"As for me, I shall behold thy face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied, when
I awake, with beholding thy form" (vs. 15). There is a difference of opinion
whether this awakening refers to ordinary sleep or the sleep of death. The idea
of beholding God, however, certainly fits the latter idea rather than the
former. The skeptical scholar De Wette denied the basis of the Davidic
authorship of this Psalm on the ground that it clearly expresses the hope of
immortality.12

Psalms 49:1-20 contains the following passage: "But man being in honour abideth
not: he is like the beasts that perish. This their way is their folly: yet their
posterity approve their sayings. Like sheep they are laid in the grave; death
shall feed on them; and the upright shall have dominion over them in the
morning; and their beauty shall consume in the grave from their dwelling. But
God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he will receive me."
(verses 12-15). It is significant that the verb in verse 15, "he will receive
me," is the same in the Hebrew as the one which describes the translation of
Enoch. As Burney says, while warning against the danger of reading New Testament
doctrine back into the Old Testament, "The more I examine this Psalm the more
does the conviction force itself upon me that the writer has in view something
more than the mere temporary recompense of the righteous during this earthly
life."13

Psalms 75:1-10 records "Thou wilt guide me with thy counsel, And afterward
receive me to glory. Whom have I in heaven but thee? And there is none upon
earth that I desire besides thee. My flesh and my heart fails; But God is the
strength of my heart and my portion for ever" (verses 24-26). In verse 24 the
verb is the same as that describing Enoch’s translation. In summary: the Old
Testament clearly teaches a life after death, commonly in the form of an
existence in Sheol, where good and evil alike share a similar dreary fate.
However, there are also passages of inspired hope in a better life beyond death
for the believer, a life of glorious fellowship with his God. Although there is
in these passages no direct teaching with regard to the eternal punishment of
the unbeliever, there is the beginning of a differentiation between the lot of
the unbeliever and that of the believer. While the believer is rescued from
Sheol, no such hope is expressed for the unbeliever. In the light of the highly
ethical teaching of the Old Testament with its strong emphasis on reward and
punishment, it should not cause surprise that in the Inter-Testamental period
there should be a further development of a more detailed description of the
blessed condition of the believer and of the severe punishment of the
unbeliever.

We now turn to passages in the Old Testament which hint at future retribution.
One very clear reference to future punishment is found in Daniel 12:2, "And many
of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting
life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." A few more verses should be
noted. One is Isaiah 24:21, "And it shall come to pass in that day, that the
Lord shall punish the host of the high ones that are on high, and the kings of
the earth upon the earth." A.B. Davidson states that he believes that this verse
contains the germ of the idea of future punishment. The last verse of Isaiah
says: "And they shall go forth and look upon the carcasses of the men that have
transgressed against me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire
be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." This passage
contains some of the phrases later used to describe eternal punishment. Exactly
what they signify in Isaiah, however, is a difficult question to answer. It is
important to notice that the word rendered "abhorring" is the same Hebrew word
as that rendered "contempt" in Daniel 12:2. Delitzsch describes it as the
strongest word for "abomination." This same commentator adds, "It is perfectly
obvious, that the thing itself, as here described, must appear monstrous and
inconceivable, however we may suppose it to be realized — he is speaking of the
future state, but in figures drawn from the present world. The object of his
prediction is no other than the new Jerusalem of the world to come, and the
eternal torment of the damned."14 Some commentators believe that the following
verses refer to future punishment:

"Behold, all ye that kindle a fire, that compass yourselves about with sparks;
walk in the light of your fire, and in the sparks that ye have kindled. This
shall ye have of mine hand; ye shall lie down in sorrow" (Isaiah 50:11).

"For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether
it be good or whether it be evil" (Ecclesiastes 12:14). In some of the older
literature, the following passage is used as a proof that the punishment of the
wicked shall be eternal: "If the clouds be full of rain, they empty themselves
upon the earth; and if the tree fall toward the south, or toward the north, in
the place where the tree falleth, there it shall be" (Ecclesiastes 11:3). While
this verse can hardly be considered an absolute proof of the eternal nature of
punishment in the world to come, yet it is in a context describing principles by
which God deals with men, and therefore carries that implication. Of more
importance than individual verses are the general principles which run
throughout the Old Testament. The whole Old Testament certainly pictures God as
hating sin and punishing it most severely. It is completely silent regarding any
further opportunities after death. The critical scholar A. B. Davidson says:
"There is the universalistic view according to which all shall be restored. Then
there is the view, stopping short of this, which demands a place of repentance
and sphere of development beyond the grave, and which, assuming many gradations
of salvation, finds a place for at least most of the race. And there is the view
which calls itself that of conditional immortality, according to which those
finally and persistently evil shall be annihilated. These views are in addition
to the one which has been generally accepted. Now, of course, such questions
will not be decided on Old Testament ground, but in the light of the clearer
revelations of the New Testament. I do not wish, therefore, to speak with great
decision on such a question; but my impression is, that the whole scope of the
Old Testament is in favor of the ordinary opinion. In all those Psalms which
have been alluded to, faith in the future sustains itself by planting its foot
on the present. The view of the Old Testament saints is chiefly confined to the
present — the future is to him, so far as he himself is concerned, and so far as
the wicked are concerned, but the prolongations of the present . . . . So far as
the Old Testament is concerned, a veil is drawn over the destiny of the wicked
in death; they descend into Sheol; death is their shepherd; they die in the old
sense of death, and nothing further seems added in regard to them. There is no
indication that their personality in Sheol ceases, or that they are annihilated
. . . . As Job expresses his assurance of seeing God’s face after death, this
might seem to carry also the opposite, that the wicked have no such vision."15
Chapter 2 || Table of Contents 1. C.F. Burney, Israel’s Hope of Immortality
(Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1909), p.6 2. Note: All Biblical quotations throughout
this book are from the American Standard Version unless otherwise noted.

3. G.F. Oehler, Theology of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1883),
p. 173.

4. J.P. Lange, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, The Revelation of John (New
York, Scribner, 1874), E.R. Craven, "Excursus on Hades" pgs. 364-377.

5. Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, I (New York, Scribner, 1871), 446.

6. W.O.E. Oesterley, Immortality and the Unseen World (London, Society for
Printing Christian Knowledge, 1921), p. 198.

7. Ibid.

8. S.C. Bartlett, Life and Death Eternal (New York, American Tract Society,
1866). p. 148.

9. Bartlett, Op. Cit., p. 156.

10. Oehler, Op. Cit., p. 174.

11. Burney, Op. Cit., p. 54.

12. Bartlett, Op. Cit., p. 16.

13. Burney, Op. Cit., p. 41.

14. F. Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophesies of Isaiah, II (Grand
Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1949), p. 517.

15. A.B. Davidson, The Theology of the Old Testament (Edinburgh, T. and T.
Clark, 1904), pp. 529-531.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 3: 02 THE INTER-TESTAMENTAL PERIOD
========================================================================

The Inter-Testamental Period

Two main groups of literature exist that describe Jewish thought in the
Inter-Testamental period. One is called Apocryphal literature; the other,
Apocalyptic literature.

1. Apocryphal Literature The Apocryphal literature consists of those books which
while never in the Hebrew canon of the Old Testament, were included in the Greek
Septuagint version. They are accepted as canonical by the Roman Catholic church,
but not by the Protestant. Although references to our subject are found in these
books, there is little of significance. The most important passage is in the
Second Book of Esdras, the seventh chapter. The passage contains an alleged
conversation between God and Ezra. Some confusion exists in the numbering of the
verses. The following is contained in Goodspeed’s translation of the Bible: God
says, "I will rejoice over the few who will be saved, because it is they who
have made my glory to prevail more now, and through whom my name has now been
honored. And I will not grieve over the great number of those who perish, for
they are the ones who are now like vapor, and counted as flame and smoke, they
have burned and glowed, and gone out" (vs. 6f).

"So those who live on the earth will be tortured on this account because, though
they had intelligence, they did iniquity, and though they received commandments,
they did not keep them, and though they had obtained the Law, they broke it"
(vs. 72).

Then Ezra asks a question, "If I have found favor in your sight, Sovereign, show
this also to your slave; whether after death as soon as each one of us gives up
his soul, we shall be faithfully kept at rest until these times come when you
begin to renew the creation, or shall be tortured at once" (vs. 75). To which
God answers: "I will show you that also; but you must not associate with those
who have shown scorn or count yourself among those who are tortured. For you
have a treasure of works laid up with the Most High, but it will not be shown to
you until the last times. For about death, the teaching is: When the final
sentence goes forth from the Most High that a man is to die, when the soul
departs from the body to return again to him who gave it, first of all it prays
to the glory of the Most High; if it was one of those who scorned and did not
observe the way of the Most High, and of those who have despised his law, and of
those who hate those who fear God, such spirit shall not enter dwellings but
wander about thenceforth in torment, always grieving and sad, in seven ways: The
first way is that they have scorned the Law of the Most High. The second way is
that they can no longer make a good repentance, so that they may live. The third
way is that they will see the reward destined for those who have believed the
agreements of the Most High. The fourth way is that they will consider the
torment destined for them in the last days . . . ." (vs. 76f)

Later Ezra has a further question which is of particular significance in the
study of our subject: "If I have found favor in your sight, show me, your slave,
further, whether on the Day of Judgment the upright will be able to intercede
for the ungodly, or to beseech the Most High on their behalf, fathers for sons,
or sons for parents, brothers for brothers, relatives for their kinsmen, and
friends for those who are most dear to them" (vs. 102-103). To this question,
God answers: "Since you have found favor in my sight, I will show you this also.
The Day of Judgment is final and shows to all the stamp of truth. Just as now a
father cannot send his son or a son his father or a master his slave or a friend
his dearest friend to be sick for him, or sleep or eat or be cured, so no one
can pray for another then, or lay a burden on another, for they must all bear
everyone his own iniquity or uprightness then" (vs. 104-105).

Another important passage in II Maccabees will be taken up later in connection
with the study of the views of the Rabbis. Besides the Esdras passage just
quoted and this Maccabees passage, there is scant reference to our subject in
the Apocryphal literature.

2. Apocalyptic Literature The Apocalyptic literature on the other hand, is
filled with references to the subject. This literature consists of the
descriptions of visions. Most of it is pseudepigraphical, that is, it is written
under an assumed name, usually that of some great character of the Old
Testament. It is generally believed that the Essenes were the authors of this
body of literature. Some of these books were written in the Inter-Testamental
period, others were written during and after the New Testament period. The main
development of the doctrine of eternal punishment in this period comes from the
fact that Sheol is now divided into two compartments: one for the good, called
Paradise; the other for the evil, called Gehenna. The concept of Gehenna comes
from the Valley of Hinnom just outside Jerusalem, which was a place where the
worshipers of the idol Molech had sacrificed their own children by fire, and
later became a place where the refuse of the city was burned. The valley was
considered a place of judgment. An important question is this: What caused this
division of Sheol into two compartments? Some trace it to foreign sources,
particularly to Persian Zoroastrianism with its dualism. However, most scholars,
including many not at all conservative, fail to find foreign sources, but
consider this development a result of problems finding their source in a
conflict between the previous conception of Sheol, and principles revealed in
the Old Testament. We may, therefore, consider this development as a legitimate
application of the principles revealed in the Old Testament with regard to the
question of life after death. Oesterley says, "The Apocalyptic literature
continues, and in some respects develops, the eschatological teaching of the Old
Testament.1

What were these problems of conflict between the old Sheol conception and the
revelation of the Old Testament? One was this: The teaching of the Old Testament
is that the real meaning of life is fellowship with God. This fellowship was
very real to the Old Testament saints, and obviously precious to them, and to
God himself. The usual Sheol concept, however, declared that this fellowship was
destroyed by death. It is natural that the conviction should grow that this
could not be true. Such an assurance was ultimately based on the Old Testament
revelation that the eternal God has fellowship with his people. Surely, then,
even death could not destroy the bond between God and his people. Therefore
there couldn’t be simply a common shadowy existence beyond death for both the
righteous and the ungodly. There must be a division in Sheol; there must be a
Paradise where the godly had a blessed life of fellowship with God. Abraham’s
Bosom was another term which came to be used to describe Paradise. Such a chain
of logic was the inevitable result of the experience of the Old Testament
saints. As Oesterley says, "It needs but few words to show that when a real,
intimate, and personal relationship between God and the individual is
established and experienced, the conviction must soon become overpowering in men
that this relationship cannot be severed by the death of the body."2 A second
problem was created by the difference between the Sheol concept and the Old
Testament revelation between the Sheol concept and the Old Testament revelation
which led to the concept of the division of Sheol into two distinct
compartments. The old Sheol concept did not provide for the justice that the Old
Testament revelation would lead the believer to expect. The Old Testament
certainly reveals a God of perfect justice. Yet, as is obvious in life, the
wicked often live long prosperous lives, while the righteous suffer. The justice
taught in the Old Testament, therefore, demands that there be no common
hereafter for the righteous and the wicked; but a place of blessing for the
righteous, and a place of punishment for the wicked. In the Inter-Testamental
period we trace the beginning of a clearly enunciated doctrine of punishment
after death. This doctrine, however, resulted from a legitimate extension of
important principles revealed in the Old Testament. Orr refers to this
legitimate extension of Old Testament concepts when, having mentioned the
problem of injustice in this life, he says, "From these causes the thought
almost necessarily presented itself of the extension of retribution for the
wicked into the state beyond death. Hence, as before seen, Sheol did come in the
later age to assume something of a penal character for the unrighteous."3 A
careful study of the Apocalyptic literature of the period, however, soon reveals
the fact that the concepts presented there went far beyond a legitimate
extension of Old Testament principles, and included detailed descriptions of the
punishment of the wicked.

Most important of the Apocalyptic literature is a group of writings falsely
attributed to the Old Testament character, Enoch. They were probably written
about 200 B.C. They include a description of a tour, supposedly taken by Enoch,
of the heavens and of the center of the earth. Beneath some high mountainous
rocks, Enoch saw four hollow places; two of these were for the righteous, the
one being for saintly martyrs like Abel, the other for ordinary righteous
people. There were in addition two places for sinners, one for the wicked who
were unpunished in this life, and for certain other evil people. These were to
remain in this dark realm until the time of the resurrection, and then they
would be cast into Gehenna. The other compartment was for those who suffered a
violent death which was evidently considered punishment for their sinful life.
These people were neither righteous, nor were they completely sinners, and
therefore they would remain in this intermediate state forever. Here we have an
example of how the Jewish mind was grappling with the reality of the incomplete
state of justice in this present life. In another passage, Enoch beholds the
center of the earth. There, on the one hand he sees Paradise, and on the other,
the accursed valley of Gehinnom, which is designated as the place of punishment
of the wicked. Enoch very clearly teaches the eternity of punishment in the
following passage, "And they (who will not be converted) shall be cast into the
damnation of fire, and shall perish in anger and in the mighty damnation which
last to eternity." The Fourth Book of the Sibylline Oracles, probably the work
of Alexandrian Essenes, amplifies the punishments described by Enoch by saying,
"His angels will scourge them with fiery chains, and cast them before the fierce
monsters of hell, and fiery wheels will turn them round about." "They shall be
consumed by fearful thirst and bitter woe, gnashing their teeth and longing for
death which will never come, and it will be too late for repentance."

Another Apocalyptic book which gives information on our subject is The Testament
of Abraham, which was probably written by a Jew before the birth of Christ, but
later translated by a Christian whose work in translating was affected by his
Christian viewpoint. It describes a vision which Abraham supposedly had.
Included in this vision is a wide path leading to a wide gate, and a narrow path
leading to a narrow gate. The similarity to the teaching of Jesus is obvious.
But here the exact proportion entering each gate is stated. The wide gate,
leading to perdition, has 7000 entering it for every one who enters the narrow
gate. As Abraham is watching the people entering these gates, the situation
arises in which one soul has exactly the same weight of good and evil deeds. He
is therefore consigned to remain in the middle state until the end of time.
However, Abraham, seeing this man’s unfortunate situation, prays for him, and as
a result, he is permitted to enter Paradise. Realizing the power of his prayer,
Abraham is remorseful for having allowed the others to slip into perdition so
easily. So he prays to God for them, and God grants his request by restoring the
dead to life again.

We see from these examples of Apocalyptic literature of the Inter-Testamental
period, that the division of Sheol into Paradise and Gehenna was part of the
thinking of the Jews in that time. We also note the beginnings of detailed
descriptions of future punishment, as well as the belief in intercessory prayer
for the dead.

3. Apocalyptic Literature of the Christian Era

Apocalyptic literature continued to be written after the coming of Christ.
Although the works described here were probably written by Christians, we shall
consider them at this point because they are a natural outgrowth of earlier
apocalypses. These writings continued to give a large place to the descriptions
of the punishment of the wicked. These descriptions grew more and more
grotesque. The Apocalypse of Peter is an illustration of this feature. In this
writing, we see the clear development of the idea of degrees of punishment
corresponding to the types of sin which have been committed. Those who
blasphemed the way of righteousness are seen "hanging by their tongues, while
the flaming fire torments them from beneath." Those who perverted righteousness
are seen "in a great lake of burning mire tormented by angels." "Women hang by
their hair over the bubbling mire, because they adorned themselves for
adultery." Adulterers are seen "hanging by their feet with their heads in the
mire." Murderers are thrown into "A pit full of evil reptiles by which they were
smitten and tormented while their victims stood by them and cried forth: ’O God,
righteous is thy judgment.’ " Women who destroyed children and caused abortion
are seen "in a pit filled with gore and filth that ran down from them and rose
up to their throats . . . the children who thus died . . . cried out against
them." Those who persecuted the righteous are seen in "fire up to the middle of
the body, scourged by evil spirits . . . their entrails devoured by worms that
rested not." Similar descriptions continue for fourteen classifications of
sinners. The Apocalypse of Paul is probably a compilation of the fourth century
after Christ. In it the punishment of the wicked is also conceived in grotesque
terms. Temeluchos is the name of the relentless being who is the keeper of the
place of torment. There is wailing and gnashing of teeth. There is also
darkness, moaning and groaning. There is a river of fire in which the wicked are
sunk to their knees, stomach, lips, or eyelids depending on which member of
their bodies committed sin. Seeing another river of fire filled with souls, the
apostle weeps. An angel says, "Wherefore dost thou weep? Art thou more merciful
than God?" Thereupon the apostle acknowledges his wickedness and confesses his
belief in the goodness of God. The Apostle sees a third river. There sinners are
tormented by the worm that dies not and by dragons. There is also a pit filled
with blood that holds sorcerers, adulterers and other such sinners. Worse yet,
there is a pit with seven seals, giving forth an unbearable stench, where
sinners are continually cast from coals of fire to piles of snow and back again.
The souls cry for mercy, and the angels join in this plea. As a result, the Son
of God grants the Sabbath as a day of respite from the punishment of hell. This
peculiar idea is said to have originated in the Talmud and the Midrash, where it
is written, "Every Friday, Dumah, the angel set over the dead says, ’Let the
wicked here have their Sabbath rest!’ "

4. The Pharisees

Jesus found it necessary to point out many of the fallacies in the ideas of the
Pharisees; but it is significant that at the point of punishment after death, he
was in complete agreement with them. Josephus, who was himself a Pharisee, tells
us something of their beliefs on this subject. He says that the Pharisees held
that all souls were incorruptible, that the souls of good men are only removed
into other bodies, but that the souls of bad men are subject to eternal
punishment.4 In another of his writings, Josephus says, "Souls have an immortal
vigour in them, and under the earth there will be rewards and punishments
according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life, and the
latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but the former shall have
power to revive and live again."5 5. Rabbinical Teachings 6

Immediately before the time of Christ there were two important Rabbinical
schools, that of Shammai and that of Hillel. The first of these two schools
divided all of mankind into three groups:

1. The perfectly righteous who are "immediately written and sealed to eternal
life."

2. The perfectly wicked who are "immediately written and sealed to Gehenna."

3. An intermediate class who "go down to Gehinnom and moan, and come up again."
The rabbis of the school of Shammai felt that they had Scriptural basis for this
third group in Zechariah 13:9, "And I will bring the third part through the
fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is
tried; and they shall call on my name, and I will hear them; I will say, It is
my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God," and in the Song of Hannah in
1 Samuel 2:6, "The Lord killeth, and maketh alive, he bringeth down to the grave
and bringeth up." Here we find eternal punishment for the second group, and a
type of Hillel taught that sinners were tormented in Gehenna for twelve months,
after which their bodies and souls were burnt up and scattered as dust under the
feet of righteous. However, they also believed that certain types of sinners "go
down to Gehinnom and are punished there to ages of ages." A reflection of the
Rabbinical teaching of the time before Christ is found in II Maccabees. It
teaches a belief in the efficacy of prayers for the dead. "Then Judas assembled
his army and went to the town of Adullam. And as the next day was the seventh
day, they purified themselves as they were accustomed to do, and kept the
Sabbath. On the following day, as by that time it had become necessary, Judas’
men went to gather up the bodies of the fallen, and bring them back to lie with
their relatives in the graves of their forefathers. But on every one of the
dead, under the shirt, they found amulets of the idols of Jamnia, which the Law
forbids the Jews to wear; and it became clear to all that this was why they had
fallen. So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who
reveals the things that are hidden, and fell to supplication, begging that the
sin that had been committed should be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas
exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, after having seen with
their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. He
also took a collection, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, each man
contributing, and sent it to Jerusalem, to provide a sin offering, acting very
finely and properly in taking account of the resurrection. For if he had not
expected that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been
superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead; or if it was through regard for
the splendid reward destined for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a
holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, so that they
might be set free from their sin."7 It is probable that some type of prayers for
the dead were in use during the time of the earthly ministry of Jesus and during
the time of the apostles. In the first century after Christ, the Rabbis believed
in eternal punishment. For example, Rabbi Jochanan ben Zakkai, when dying, was
filled with great fear, saying, "If He is angry with me, His Wrath is an Eternal
Wrath, if He binds me in fetters, His fetters are Eternal fetters, and if He
kills me, His death is an Eternal Death." Rabbi Elieser made the statement that
the souls of the wicked were to be bound and in unrest, one angel hurling them
to another from one end of the world to the other. He based this idea on 1
Samuel 25:29, "Yet a man is risen to pursue thee and to seek thy soul: but the
soul of my lord shall be bound in the bundle of life with the Lord thy God; and
the souls of thine enemies, them shall he sling out, as out of the middle of a
sling." In the second century after Christ, however, there was a reaction
against the doctrine of eternal punishment. Already toward the end of the first
century, Rabbi Akiba, an influential man, had begun to propagate a doctrine of
punishment of limited length. As a result, most of the Rabbis at this time
turned to the idea that in the last day, the sheath of the sun would be removed,
and the wicked would be burned up. One Rabbi taught that there was no hell at
all, but that the wicked would be annihilated. The third century witnessed a
return to former views. Rabbi Jose said that "the fire of Gehenna which was
created on the second day is not extinguished forever." Rabbi Joshua ben Levi
believed there were seven hells, because he found seven Biblical names for the
place of punishment, namely: Sheol, Abaddon, the Pit of Corruption, the Pit of
Horror, the Mire of Clay, the Shadow of Death, and the Nether Parts of the
Earth. Rabbi ben Lakish taught, however, that the fire of Gehenna would not hurt
Jewish sinners. In each of his seven compartments of hell, Joshua ben Levi had
ten heathen nations, each presided over by one of the seven Jewish apostates:
Absalom, Doeg, Korah, etc. A number of the Rabbis taught that sorrow releases a
person from the punishment of hell. The Apocalypses of Peter and Paul also
expressed this idea. They based this on Psalms 86:7, "In the day of my trouble I
will call upon thee: for thou wilt answer me." In another rabbinical
description, men are seen hanging by their hair for letting their hair grow for
adornment; by their eyelids for allowing their eyes lustful looks; and those who
ate on fast days are forced to eat bitter gall. In a vision ascribed to Moses in
a Midrash to the Song of Solomon 2:3, Moses sees these torments, pleads with God
for Israel, but is refused. As to the size of the place of punishment, some
rabbis said, "The land of Egypt is four hundred farsas square, and is
one-sixtieth of Ethiopia, and Ethiopia is one-sixtieth of the world and the
world is one-sixtieth the garden of Eden, and the garden of Eden is one-sixtieth
of Gehenna, and the whole world is as the covering of a pot to Gehenna. And some
say that Gehenna has no measure, and some say that Eden has no measure."8 The
Aristotelian School of philosophers, of which Cresas and Maimonides were
leaders, opposed the generally accepted concepts and said that heaven and hell
are symbols rather than localities.

6. Modern Liberal Judaism

Perhaps modern Jewish thought can best be summed up by quoting some of the
conclusions of Kaufmann Kohler in his book Heaven and Hell in Comparative
Religions. "Heaven and hell have at best merely symbolic significance."9 Above
all, however, does our ethical view militate against the doctrine of eternal
damnation."10 "The principle of justice . . . is violated by the assumption that
the sins committed by man during his brief stay on earth should condemn him to
endless suffering."11 "Endless joy, too, as a reward for the good is unbearable,
unless it has an ennobling effect."12 "Genuine religion fears not hell . . . and
longs not for heaven."13

We have now traced briefly the history of Jewish concepts regarding punishment
after death. Our special interest has been in that portion of the history which
leads up to the time of the New Testament. However, we have included the
development beyond that period for the sake of completeness, and because of the
interaction between Jewish and Christian doctrines in the early centuries of the
Church.

We have seen how the Israelites at first had concepts similar to the nations
around them, that they believed in a continued existence after death both for
the righteous and the unrighteous in a gloomy realm called Sheol. We have seen
that as time passed, however, there were increasingly those who were inspired by
God to hope for a more wonderful life for the godly beyond death. We noted,
furthermore, how the principles of the Old Testament inevitably led, in the
Inter-Testamental period, to a concept of blessedness for the righteous dead,
and punishment for the unrighteous. We saw also that in this period the Jewish
imagination went far beyond the Old Testament to a lurid description of these
punishments. Finally, we saw that as time passed, a reaction set in, which has
ended in complete skepticism amongst Jewish scholars.

7. Pagan Beliefs For the sake of completeness, we shall now briefly consider
some of the concepts of the life after death amongst the pagans. The Egyptians.
The Egyptian Book of the Dead is amongst the oldest literature known to
scholars. Actually the Egyptians did not have an exact equivalent to our concept
of "soul," but distinguished several parts of man which survived death, which
they designated as Ka, Ba, etc.

Concerning the future life, Egyptians held several conflicting views. One was
that the "soul" remains in the vicinity of the cemetery seeking food. This need
was first supplied by the living by bringing food to the place of burial, but
later in the history of the Egyptians, images of food were substituted for the
food itself. To those who held to this concept, the god of the dead was
Klent-amenti, the jackal-headed god. In this belief, the condition of the
departed obviously depended, not so much on the life lived on earth, as on the
provisions made by the relatives of the deceased. A second concept was that the
dead go to the kingdom of the god, Osiris. There Osiris acts as judge and the
good are admitted, but the evil are rejected and consumed by a monster (a
hippopotamus) or by fire. In this kingdom, the heavenly life was very similar to
life on earth. Here then, we have a belief in the annihilation of the wicked.
Osiris had himself been killed and had come back to life again, and it was
possible for the dead to become like Osiris, or even to lose personal identity
and to be absorbed in Osiris. A third belief was that the dead join the company
of the immortal gods, who float on the heavenly ocean in the boat of the sun. A
boat was placed in the tomb to provide transportation to this heavenly realm. In
tombs recently opened, fine specimens of these boats have been discovered.
Charms were also placed in the tomb to ensure a safe journey. There were others
who believed that this realm might be reached by a ladder supposedly existing in
the west.

Another concept of the future life was that in which the dead were believed to
be carried off by the Hathor cow or a bull in order to await a bodily
resurrection. Many amulets were buried with the body, each designated to
preserve a part of the body for this awaited resurrection. The idea that there
is a lower world, Twet, similar to this world with a river running through it
which is like the Nile, was also prevalent. There in long passages and in deep
caverns the dead dwell. The sun travels through this area during the night. The
gates separating the twelve sections of Twet are guarded by serpents and demons.
At a later period it was believed that the dead might share this nightly voyage
of the sun if they knew the proper incantations and magical formula.

We see that in most of the Egyptian conceptions, the condition of the existence
of the dead depended on the carefulness of the burial practices of their
surviving relatives, rather than the morality or religiousness of the person
himself. The Babylonians. For the Babylonians, life after death was existence on
a far lower plane than life in this world. The place of the dead was designated
as the "land of no return." It was a place of dark rooms inhabited by bats and
covered with dust. There the dead were clothed in garments of feathers, and were
under the domain of Nergal and Ereshikigal. When the soul arrived in this lower
world after death, it was judged by Annunaki, but regarding the basis of this
judgment little has been preserved. Special privileges seem to have been granted
to those who had fallen in battle, for they were provided with fresh water to
drink. Those who had no one to place offerings upon their graves suffered
serious deprivations. In a sense, to the Babylonians, everyone suffered eternal
punishment, and as with the Egyptians the degree of their condition depended not
on them as much as on their descendants. The Greeks. According to the oldest
Greek viewpoint, the surviving spirits were aided by the prescribed burial
rituals which were very elaborate, and also by the constant provision of such
things as water, wine, food and flowers. These offerings may also have been
provided partly to keep the spirits of the dead from harming the living. In the
Homeric poems, which reflect Greek beliefs around 1000 B.C., the soul goes to
Hades whence there is no return, and, according to one view, where there is no
consciousness. The rationalism of this period tended to minimize the life after
death, and the rise of the greater gods of the epics tended to reduce the power
of the spirits of the dead.

Later, in the mystery religions, there was a revival of emphasis on the life
after death. The Orphic sect even emphasized the divinity of the soul and a
blessed future life in communion with the gods.

—————————

1. W. O.E. Oesterley, The Doctrine of the Last Things (London, John Murray,
1908). p. 124.

2. Oesterley, Immortality and the Unseen World, (New York, The Macmillan
Company, 1921). p.208 3. J. Orr, The International Bible Encyclopedia, II
"Eschatology of the Old Testament," 978.

4. Josephus, Wars, II, viii, 14.

5. Josephus, Antiquities, XVIII, i, 3.

6. Detailed description of Rabbinical teachings on this subject may be found in
Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, (1884) II, p. 791f.

7. 2Ma 12:36-45, Goodspeed’s Translation 8. E.B. Pusey, What is of Faith as to
Everlasting Punishment (London, James Parker and Co., 1880), p. 94.

9. K. Kohler, Heaven and Hell in Comparative Religion (New York, MacMillan,
1923), p.150.

10. Ibid, p. 151.

11. Ibid., p. 151.

12. Ibid., p. 152.

13. Ibid., p. 153.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 4: 03 THE TEACHING OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
========================================================================

The Teaching of the New Testament

We now turn to the New Testament with the greatest interest, for here full light
is shed upon every theological subject; here the ideas that have their
beginnings in the Old Testament are fully developed; here are the teachings of
the Son of God himself, and of the apostles to whom Christ gave the promise that
they would be led into all truth.

1. The Gospels

First then, we study the teachings of Jesus, and discover that eternal
punishment is prominent in them. The fact that the loving and wise Savior has
more to say about hell than any other individual in the Bible is certainly
thought-provoking. As W.T.G. Shedd, whose chapter on "Hell" in his Dogmatic
Theology is one of the best on the subject, says, "The strongest support of the
doctrine of Endless Punishment is the teaching of Christ, the Redeemer of man.
Though the doctrine is plainly taught in the Pauline Epistles, and other parts
of Scripture, yet without the explicit and reiterated statements of God
incarnate, it is doubtful whether so awful a truth would have had such a
conspicuous place as it always has had in the creed of Christendom . . . .
Christ could not have warned men so frequently and earnestly as He did against
’the fire that never shall be quenched,’ and ’the worm that dieth not,’ had He
known that there is no future peril to fully correspond to them. That omniscient
Being who made the statements respecting the day of Judgment, and the final
sentence, that are recorded in Matthew 25:31-46, could neither have believed nor
expected that all men without exception will eventually be holy and happy . . .
. Jesus Christ is the Person who is responsible for the doctrine of Eternal
Perdition. He is the Being with whom all opponents of this theological tenet are
in conflict. Neither the Christian church, nor the Christian ministry are the
authors of it."1 The Christian doctrine of eternal punishment is Christ’s
doctrine; we believe it because he taught it. Even some of the antagonists of
this doctrine will admit this. For example, Theodore Parker in his Two Sermons
says, "I believe that Jesus Christ taught eternal punishment . . . . I do not
accept it on his authority."2

Since we believe in eternal punishment above all because of our Lord’s
teachings, nothing is more important than a careful study of what he said on the
subject. The bulk of Jesus’ teaching on the subject is found in the Gospel
according to Matthew. The first place that Jesus mentions eternal punishment is
in the Sermon on the Mount. There, speaking of the seriousness of hatred, he
says, "But I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be
in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in
danger of the hell of fire" (Matthew 5:22). Shortly afterward in the Sermon, in
connection with his comment on the adulterous nature of a lustful look, he says,
"And if thy right eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from
thee; for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and
not thy whole body be cast into hell. And if thy right hand causeth thee to
stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee; for it is profitable for thee that
one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body go into hell" (Matthew
5:29-30). In both of these passages, hell is a translation of the Greek word
"Gehenna." It is worth noticing that Jesus here speaks of the body going into
hell, and of its condition there being so terrible that the loss of an eye or a
hand for life would be far less severe. Later in the same sermon Jesus is
comparing a human life to a tree, and he says, "Every tree that bringeth not
forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire" (Matthew 7:19). A few
verses later, speaking of shallow professors of faith, he says that in the
Judgment Day he will say to them, "I never knew you; depart from me, ye that
work iniquity" (Matthew 7:23). It is important to notice that separation from
Christ is stated as being a part of the punishment of the wicked in the life to
come. In commending the faith of the centurion, Jesus says, "But the sons of the
kingdom shall be cast forth into the outer darkness; there shall be the weeping
and the gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 8:12). Hell is described in terms of
exclusion from the heavenly feast, and is said to produce sorrow on the part of
those excluded. This passage is omitted in the parallel account in Luke. In
seeking to give his disciples courage, Jesus says, "And be not afraid of them
that kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him who
is able to destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matthew 10:28). Both body and
soul are said to be destroyed in hell, the word again being a translation of
Gehenna. The punishment is obviously severe, being much worse that physical
death. In condemning the unbelief of his own nation, Jesus says, "But I say unto
you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment, than
for you. And thou, Capernaum, shalt thou be exalted unto heaven? Thou shalt go
down unto Hades: for if the mighty works had been done in Sodom which were done
in thee, it would have remained until this day" (Matthew 11:22-24). We have the
thought of difference of degrees of punishment due to greater or lesser
opportunity to know the truth. Notice that Hades is the word that is used, and
that it is described as the antithesis of heaven.

Matthew 12:1-50 also contains a reference to the eternal consequences of sin:
"Therefore I say unto you, Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men;
but the blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. And whosoever shall
speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever
shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in
this world, nor in that which is to come" (Matthew 12:31-32). Here we learn that
there is such a thing as a sin which shall never be forgiven. This passage has a
parallel in Mark 3:29 where the sin is described as an eternal sin. In the
Parable of the Tares, Jesus says, "As therefore the tares are gathered up and
burned with fire; so shall it be in the end of the world. The Son of man shall
send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that
cause stumbling, and them that do iniquity, and shall cast them into the furnace
of fire: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth" (Matthew
13:40-42). The punishment is described as taking place in a furnace of fire, and
the sorrow produced is described by the same formula as in the passage in the
eighth chapter. A few verses later, in the verses 49 and 50, in the Parable of
the Net, the punishment and the resulting anguish are described in identical
words. In speaking of the serious responsibility involved in dealing with
children, Jesus says, "And whosoever shall cause one of these little ones who
believe in me to stumble, it were better for him if a great millstone were
hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea" (Mark 9:42). These words
are found in Mark, and are a parallel to those in Matthew 18:6. Again, it is
clearly stated that there is a fate worse than physical death, even if that
physical death be of a most horrible kind. Jesus then adds, "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). This is again from Mark, and the parallel
passage is found in Matthew 18:8-9. It is similar except that it uses the phrase
eternal fire in place of unquenchable fire. Here we have another instance in
which Jesus emphasizes the fact that hell is worse than the loss of a member of
the body in this life. Again hell is a translation of the Greek "Gehenna" which
is here described as a place of unquenchable fire. Notice also that Jesus here
uses the phraseology of Isaiah 66:24 in speaking of the worm and the fire. This
is the first passage which we have come to in which Jesus uses the word
"eternal" to describe future punishment.

Jesus again refers to hell in terms of exclusion, outer darkness and remorse in
the Parable of the Wedding Feast, "Then the king said to the servants, Bind him
hand and foot, and cast him out into the outer darkness; there shall be the
weeping and the gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 22:13).

He uses the word "Gehenna" again in his criticism of the Pharisees, "Woe unto
you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye compass sea and land to make one
proselyte; and when he is become so ye make him two-fold more a son of hell than
yourselves" (Matthew 23:15). Jesus here evidently refers to a hellish nature,
and states that there are degrees of such hellishness. Later on in his
criticism, Jesus says, "Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape
the judgment of hell" (Matthew 23:31)? Again the word used is "Gehenna." This
phrase probably has the meaning, "from the verdict that consigns to hell"
(Lenski). The Parable of the Talents repeats the familiar phrases "outer
darkness" and "there shall be the weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew
25:30). The Parable of the Sheep and the Goats which follows that the Talents
describes this punishment in the following terms, "Then shall he say also unto
them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire which is
prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41). A combination of
separation from Christ and eternal fire are here mentioned. Notice that this
fire is described as not originally intended for man. Describing the punishment
of the same group, Jesus adds, "And these shall go away into eternal punishment;
but the righteous into eternal life" (Matthew 25:46). In his pronouncement
against Judas, Jesus describes the punishment of the wicked by means of another
comparison. "The Son of man goeth, even as it is written of him; but woe unto
the man through whom the Son of man is betrayed: it were better for that man if
had never been born" (Matthew 26:24). According to this passage the fate of
Judas will be far worse than annihilation.

All the passages in Matthew that deal with the subject have been considered,
along with parallel passages in Mark. There are passages in Mark which have no
exact parallel in Matthew. Mark 12:40 states, "They that devour widows’ houses,
and for a pretence make long prayers; these shall receive greater condemnation."
This is an illustration of the principle that there are degrees of punishment.
This same passage is found in Luke 20:47. In Mark 16:16, Jesus says, "He that
believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that disbelieveth shall be
condemned."

Luke also has a few relevant passages which have no parallels in the other
Gospels. In the Parable of the Waiting Servants, we read "And that servant who
knew his lord’s will, and made not ready, nor did according to his will, shall
be beaten with many stripes; but he that knew not, and did things worthy of
stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. And to whosoever much is given, of
him shall much be required: and to whom they commit much, of him will they ask
the more" (Luke 12:47-48). This illustrates the principle that there are various
degrees of punishment depending on the degree of knowledge of God’s will.

Luke records the important parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31).
This parable so clearly teaches the orthodox doctrine of eternal punishment that
the opponents of the doctrine are hard pressed to know what to do with it.
Hudson, one of the leading advocates of annihilationism, admits that the parable
"assumes and implies a judgment, or some kind of retribution after death."3 He
goes on to admit that "It teaches, further, that the retribution consists in
conscious suffering . . . . The Passage teaches, thirdly, that this suffering
follows death at once . . . ’there is a great gulf fixed’ implies that the case
of the rich man is hopeless."4 Another annihilationist, Whately, admits that "It
seems to imply, indeed, very plainly that there is a future state of rewards and
punishments."5 Still another, H.H. Dobney, admits that "It teaches a terrible
and hopeless state for the wicked after death,"6 but he goes on to insist that
it doesn’t prove that this state is eternal. The absurd interpretations of some
other scholars who try to avoid the obvious teaching of the parable are quite
fantastic, and prove to what extent one must go in order to escape the true
doctrine as it is so clearly set forth in this parable. For example, the
annihilationists Ellis and Reed say, "In this parable, the Jewish priesthood,
personated by the rich man, died, the priesthood being abolished."7 Blain has a
similar interpretation, although he believes that it is probably the political
rather than the ecclesiastical condition for the Jews which is being described.8
The evangelical recognizes the metaphorical nature of the language of the
parable, but this in no way detracts from its clear teaching. As Bartlett, a
defender of the orthodox position, says "We fail to receive literally the
circumstances of dipping the tip of one’s finger in water and cooling the
tongue, the flame, the lying in Abraham’s bosom, the gulf, and even the oral
communications between Abraham and the rich man . . . This mode of
representation is employed from necessity. We have no language, nor modes of
conception, with which to speak of God and heaven and spiritual beings, except
the language and conceptions drawn from earth and sense."9 Keeping this in mind,
what do we learn from this parable? One important teaching is certainly the
impassability of the gulf between the lost and the saved. This is not just
scenery, this is one of the fundamental points of the parable. Those who wish to
believe in progressive salvation beyond death point out that the rich man now
has a concern for his brothers which they believe indicates an improvement of
his character. There is no evidence however that he had no concern for his
brothers while he was yet in this life. More significant is the teaching of
Jesus at this point that those who will not believe the testimony of Scripture
would not be converted by one who returned from the dead. In other words Jesus
doesn’t share the optimism of those who think that men will be saved if they are
only given a second chance.

There are additional relevant passages in the Gospel according to John. In John
3:16 we have the familiar words, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his
only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have
eternal life." Here is mentioned an awful alternative to possessing everlasting
life, which alternative is described as perishing. Perishing is evidently the
fate of those who do not believe in Christ. In the passage that follows, those
who fail to believe are described as "judged." The idea of judgment certainly
carries with it appropriate punishment. John 5:28-29 is a very clear passage,
"Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in which all that are in the tombs
shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the
resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of
judgment." To the unbelieving Jews, Jesus said, "Whither I go, ye cannot come"
(John 8:21). This is another illustration of the principle that the punishment
of unbelief includes exclusion and separation from Christ. Jesus adds, "I said
therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for except ye believe that I
am he, ye shall die in your sins" (John 8:24). In John 15:6 we read, "If a man
abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and they gather
them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned." This is certainly an
abiding form of punishment. In John 17:12 Jesus describes Judas as perishing and
as being the son of perdition.

What conclusion shall be drawn from all of these passages in the Gospels? Our
conclusion will depend on who we believe Jesus is. Believing that Jesus is God
incarnate, that he spoke nothing but the Truth of God, that he had a perfect
knowledge of what the world to come is like, we can come to only one conclusion:
there is eternal punishment for the wicked. It is an inescapable fact that
Jesus, without going to the grotesque extremes to which some of the apocalyptic
writers went, places the stamp of his approval upon the general Gehenna concept
which had developed during the Inter-Testamental period. He does not oppose this
idea of punishment beyond death, he is not silent on the subject; rather, again
and again he uses the popular language describing Gehenna to warn men concerning
the terrible consequences of sin! Jesus certainly did not teach the doctrine
because his Jewish contemporaries taught it, but the fact that Jesus did teach
this doctrine proves that although his contemporaries were wrong in so many of
their ideas, they were correct in believing in the existence of Gehenna. Jesus’
teaching further proves that the Inter-Testamental development of the doctrine
was in reality a sound extension of the beginnings of that doctrine which are
found in the Old Testament. When Jesus speaks of such things as the worm and the
fire, we believe he was using figurative language. This idea will be developed
at greater length later, but at this point note the following observations:
Figurative language is used in many places in the Bible; a number of passages
can be understood only under such an assumption. Furthermore, Jesus used
figurative language on a number of occasions. For example, he said, "I am the
door," and "I am the vine." Another reason for considering these descriptions as
figurative is that otherwise they would be contradictory. Jesus speaks of hell
in terms of fire and also in terms of darkness. These cannot both be literally
true. Furthermore, by the very nature of the process involved, literal fire
cannot consume a literal body for eternity. The language is evidently
figurative, but it stands for a terrible reality! Like the figurative language
describing heaven, symbols are used because the realities are indescribably
terrible on the one hand, and indescribably wonderful on the other. The
teachings of our Savior may be summarized as follows: There are only two
ultimate destinies, heaven and hell. The existence of the wicked in the future
state is a very terrible reality and endless. Part of the punishment lies in
exclusion from the presence of Jesus himself. There are degrees of punishment
depending upon the kind of life lived on this earth, and upon the greatness of
the opportunities which were neglected.

2. The Apostolic Teaching In the writings of the Apostle Paul we find that much
less is stated about punishment in the future state than was revealed by Jesus.
However, his very earnestness in pressing forward to preach the gospel can only
be understood as resulting from a strong conviction regarding the serious
alternatives which are involved. In Romans 2:1-29, Paul speaks of the judgment
of God in these words, "So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet
do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? Or do you show
contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing
that God’s kindness leads you toward repentance? But because of your
stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against
yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be
revealed. God will give to each person according to what he has done. To those
who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give
eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and
follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress
for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; .
. . All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all
who sin under the law will be judged by the law" (Romans 2:3-9; Romans 2:12).

Having spoken of the Christian as a temple, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 3:17, "If
any man destroys the temple of God, God shall destroy him; for the temple of God
is holy, and that temple you are." He speaks again of the judgment in 2
Corinthians 5:10, "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ,
that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body,
whether good or bad." According to 1 Thessalonians 5:3, there will be a judgment
day which will bring destruction to some, "When they are saying, Peace and
safety, then sudden destruction comes upon them as travail upon a woman with
child; and they shall in no wise escape." 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9 is one of the
clearest passages in which Paul speaks of future punishment, "God is just: He
will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are
troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed
from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who
do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be
punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord
and from the majesty of his power." Notice again in this passage, as in the
teachings of Christ, the element of the eternity of the punishment and of
separation from Christ. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews is also deeply
concerned about a judgment which shall result in severe punishment to the
unsaved. "For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every
transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward; how shall
we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation? which having at the first been
spoken through the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard" (Hebrews
2:2-3). He considers "eternal judgment" as a fundamental of the faith,
"Wherefore leaving the doctrine of the first principles of Christ, let us press
on unto perfection; not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works,
and of faith toward God, of the teaching of baptisms, and of the laying on of
hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgments" (Hebrews
6:1-2). Of this judgment he says, "And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once
to die, and after this cometh judgment" (Hebrews 9:27). Even as Christ taught,
so also the punishment to those who reject Christ, is, to the writer to the
Hebrews, something worse than death. "Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died
without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely
do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under
foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that
sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who
said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," and again, "The Lord will judge his
people."It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."
(Hebrews 10:28-31). He concludes, "But we are not of them that shrink back unto
perdition; but of them that have faith unto the saving of the soul" (Hebrews
10:39).

Peter, in his second Epistle, writes on the subject in very forceful language.
"For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,
putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment; if he did not spare
the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected
Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others; if he condemned the cities
of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what
is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who
was distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men (for that righteous man,
living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the
lawless deeds he saw and heard)— if this is so, then the Lord knows how to
rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of
judgment, while continuing their punishment (2 Peter 2:4-9). The word "hell"
here is a translation of Tartarus, the Roman and Greek equivalent of the Hebrew
conception of Gehenna. A few verses later, Peter adds, "But these men blaspheme
in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of
instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will
perish. They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done (2 Peter
2:12-13a). "These men are springs without water and mists driven by a storm.
Blackest darkness is reserved for them" (2 Peter 2:17). "It would have been
better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known
it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to
them" (2 Peter 2:21). In this last passage an inference is made as to the
degrees of punishment based on the amount of knowledge of the way of salvation.

Jude writes, "And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but
abandoned their own home—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting
chains for judgment on the great Day. In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and
the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion.
They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire"
(Jude 1:6-7). "They are wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shame; wandering
stars, for whom blackest darkness has been reserved forever. Enoch, the seventh
from Adam, prophesied about these men: "See, the Lord is coming with thousands
upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all the
ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all
the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him" (Jude 1:13-15). Notice
especially in these passages the everlasting nature of the fire and the
darkness. In the Revelation given to John by Jesus Christ, a great deal is said
about eternal punishment. In Revelation 14:9-11, "A third angel followed them
and said in a loud voice: If anyone worships the beast and his image and
receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, he, too, will drink of the
wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his
wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy
angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever.
There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or
for anyone who receives the mark of his name" (Revelation 14:9-11). In
Revelation 20:12-15 we read, "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing
before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the
book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded
in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave
up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he
had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of
fire is the second death. If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of
life, he was thrown into the lake of fire." In Revelation 21:8 we read, "But the
cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those
who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the
fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." In Revelation 22:11 we
read, "Let him who does wrong continue to do wrong; let him who is vile continue
to be vile; let him who does right continue to do right; and let him who is holy
continue to be holy." This last passage indicates a permanence of condition. Of
these passages in Revelation, Dearmer, a bitter opponent of the doctrine of
eternal punishment, says, "In the splendid imagery of this great book the sharp
contrast between heaven and hell is unmistakably set forth, and we can hardly
wonder that the doctrine of eternal punishment was established from it in ages
that imagined it to be the work of that Beloved Disciple who would reflect in a
special way the most intimate thought of Christ."10

These passages from the Epistles and Revelation give evidence that the apostles
follow their Master in teaching the serious alternatives of life. They teach
clearly the fact of judgment, resulting in eternal life or eternal death, which
is not a cessation of existence, but rather an existence in which the lost
experience the terrible results of their sins. They teach that this existence is
endless. The New Testament is very reserved in its descriptions of this state of
punishment, especially in comparison to some other literature on the subject
such as the non-canonical apocalyptic literature and also some later
commentators. Nevertheless, the New Testament leaves the inescapable impression
that this state is very real and highly undesirable.

Because there are so many who deny that the word "eternal" means endless, it
will be profitable to make a careful study of the meaning of that word. In the
Greek, it is the word aionios which in the Bible is rendered eternal or, less
frequently, everlasting. This word in turn comes from the word aion meaning
primarily "the age." The classical Greek writers such as Homer used it in
reference to the period of a man’s life. However, by Plato aion was used of the
Eternal Being as compared with Time. Aristotle used the word to describe the
ultimate principle of existence. The Hellenistic Jewish translators of the
Septuagint used the word in both the older classical sense and in the later
Platonic sense. Examples of the older usage are Deuteronomy 15:17, "Then take an
awl and push it through his ear lobe into the door, and he will become your
servant for ever," and 1 Samuel 27:12, "Achish trusted David and said to
himself, "He has become so odious to his people, the Israelites, that he will be
my servant forever." The later Platonic sense is found in such passages as Micah
4:5, "For all the peoples walk every one in the name of his god; and we will
walk in the name of Jehovah our God for ever and ever." And Daniel 12:3, "And
many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to
everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." The New Testament
divides all of history into the present aion and the aion which is to come. The
Greek language contains no other word which better describes the concept of
endlessness. Aionios is used in the New Testament sixty-six times: fifty-one
times of the happiness of the righteous, two times of the duration of God and
his glory, six other times where there is no doubt as to its meaning being
endless, and seven times of the punishment of the wicked. Aion is used
ninety-five times: fifty-five times of unlimited duration, thirty-one times of
duration that has limits and nine times to denote the duration of future
punishment. A clear example of the usage of the word to express endless duration
is found in 2 Corinthians 4:18, "While we look not at the things which are seen,
but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are
temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal." It is true,
(especially in the writing of the Apostle John), that the word is often used to
describe the quality of existence, rather than as having a quantitative aspect.
However, the very nature of this quality presupposes endlessness. The strongest
evidence that the word aionios is meant to teach the endlessness of the
punishment of the wicked is in the fact that the same word is used to describe
the blessed life of the godly. In a number of passages the two uses of the word
lie side by side. Only a violent twisting of meaning can lead to any other
conclusion than this: if aionion describes life which is endless, so must
aionion describe punishment which is endless. Here the doctrine of heaven and
the doctrine of hell stand or fall together. W.R. Inge says, "No sound Greek
scholar can pretend that aionios means anything less than eternal."11 It should
also be mentioned that the endless duration of the punishment doesn’t depend
entirely on the translation of aionios since there are such statements in the
Bible as "the fire is never quenched" and the "worm never dies." Baron von Hugel
states that in the New Testament "There is everywhere an assumption or an
implication of man’s life here below as a choice between immense alternatives
with corresponding abiding consequences."12 He also says, "If we follow the New
Testament the essence of hell lies assuredly above all in its endlessness."13

It must be recognized that the King James Version translated some words
describing punishment in too strong a sense. For example, some places where the
King James Version has "damn," the American Standard translators felt that a
more accurate translation is "judged." Also "Hades," even where it has a neutral
connotation, is in the King James Version, rendered "hell."

Plumptre, who would like to disprove the endlessness of hell, if possible, says
of universalism, "It fails to prove that the element of duration is, as has been
maintained, altogether absent from the word which defines the divine law of
retribution as eternal in its issues."14 An even more significant admission is
made by Dearmer, who is an opponent of the doctrine of eternal punishment. After
trying to detract as much as possible from the meaning of the Greek words
involved, he states, "There are however in the Synoptics, and especially in
Matthew, passages which, however accurately they are translated, are
inconsistent with the teachings of Christ."15 He then goes on to argue that
these passages are not the words of Jesus, basing his arguments on the
conjectural solutions of the synoptic problem advocated by liberal scholars. He
insists that the Gospels are not to be considered inerrant. The crux of the
problem here comes to view. The orthodox doctrine of inspiration and the
doctrine of eternal punishment stand or fall together. The only way to escape
the doctrine of eternal punishment is to deny the infallibility of Scripture,
and to deny that it is the one rule of faith and practice, which is historically
a cardinal doctrine of Protestant churches. A man like Savage in his book "Life
and Death is at least honest when he writes "If the doctrine of eternal
punishment was clearly and unmistakably taught in every leaf of the Bible, and
on every leaf of all the Bibles of the all the world, I could not believe a word
of it. I should appeal from these misconceptions of even the seers and the great
men to the infinite and eternal God, who only is God, and who only on such terms
could be worshipped."16 Other opponents of the orthodox doctrine give evidence
of the fact that their positions are not squarely based on Scripture. For
example, C.F. Hudson describes the purpose of one of his books to be "To meet
the convenience of those who rely, for their views of future life, upon their
reading and interpretation of the Scripture."17 A little later, however, he
admits that he doubts if an exclusively Scriptural argument will prove
satisfactory to very many, however clearly it may appear to be made out.18

Let us return for a moment to Dearmer’s statement that the doctrine of eternal
punishment is inconsistent with the teachings of Christ. The question must be
asked, "But what are the teachings of Christ?" Are they the teachings which have
been recorded by the evangelists, or are they whatever parts of the record we
happen to like? The second alternative is hopelessly subjective, yet it is the
premise upon which Dearmer bases his statement. This is not the place to enter
into the complex subject of higher criticism. Suffice it to say that the denial
of the authenticity of parts of Scripture is not based on scientific facts, but
on theories, theories often influenced by the desire to deny certain teachings
of the Scriptures.

Chapter 4 || Table of Contents 1. W.G.T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology (New York,
Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1888), pp. 675, 676, 680.

2. Bartlett, Op.Cit., p. 15.

3. As quoted in Bartlett, Op.Cit., p.219.

4. Ibid., p. 222.

5. Ibid., p. 227.

6. Ibid., p. 227 7. Ibid. (In Bible vs. Tradition, p.214), p.225.

8. As quoted in Bartlett, p. 225.

9. Ibid., pp. 223, 224.

10. Percy Dearmer, The Legend of Hell (Cassell and Co., London, 1929).

11. Inge and others, What is Hell? (Harper and Bros., New York, 1930), p.6 12.
Ibid., p. 11.

13. Ibid., p. 7.

14. E.H. Plumptre, The Spirits in Prison (London, Isbister and Co., 1898), p.
14.

15. P. Dearmer, Op. Cit.

16. A.H. Strong, Systematic Theology (Philadelphia, The Judson Press, 1907), p.
1035.

17. Bartlett, Op. Cit., p. 20.

18. Ibid., p. 21.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 5: 04 THE PRE-REFORMATION PERIOD
========================================================================

The Pre-Reformation Period 1. The Early Church The masses of Christians in the
early Church certainly believed in the doctrine of eternal punishment. Gibbon
considered this to be one of the five most important reasons why the Gospel
spread in such amazing fashion. The testimony of the martyrs of the first
centuries of the Church contained many references to the doctrine. Pusey’s What
is of Faith as to Everlasting Punishment contains a whole series of these
references. One example is the answer of Sylvanus the son of Felicitas, to his
judge when he was on trial for his life, "If we fear a passing destruction, we
shall incur eternal punishment. Knowing then, what rewards are prepared for the
righteous, and what punishments appointed for sinners, we fearlessly despise
human law, to keep the Divine commands. For they who adore daemons will be with
them in destruction and in everlasting burnings."1

One of the most outstanding martyrs was Polycarp. He said, "You threaten me with
fire that burns for one hour and then cools, not knowing the judgment to come,
nor the perpetual torment of eternal fire to the ungodly." These words are
typical of the martyrs. It is obvious that their assured faith in the reality of
eternal punishment gave them the courage to face martyrdom, as being by far the
lesser of two evils. The general consensus of opinion of the Church Fathers was
also in favor of the doctrine of eternal punishment. Clement of Rome (c.40-97)
said nothing about hell itself in those of his writings which have been
preserved, but he did state, "After we leave this world we are no longer able to
confess sin, and to turn from it." In the second century, the phrase "eternal
fire" is found in the writings of many of the Church Fathers, among them
Ignatius (d. 117). Commenting on a verse from Ephesians, he says, "One so
defiled will go into unquenchable fire, and in like manner he who heareth him."
The Shepherd of Hermas (c. 115) said, "Those which fell into the fire and were
burned, are those who have departed for ever from the living God; nor does the
thought of repentance ever come into their hearts, on account of their devotion
to their lusts and to the crimes which they committed." The Epistle of Barnabas
(c. 120) includes this statement, "The way of the black one is crooked and full
of curses. It is the way of eternal death with punishment." It is not certain
who wrote An Ancient Homily, but it is generally assigned to this same period.
One passage from it is as follows, "For if we do the will of Christ, we shall
find rest: but if otherwise, then nothing shall deliver us from eternal
punishment, if we should disobey His commandments."

Justin Martyr (c. 110-165) in his Apology has a clear and lengthy statement on
the subject: "Plato said to the same effect: that Rhudamanthus and Minos would
punish the wicked men when they came to them; we say that the same thing will
take place; but that the Judge will be Christ, and that their souls will undergo
an eternal punishment; and not as he said, a period of a thousand years. We
believe — I would rather say — we are fully convinced — that each will suffer
punishment by eternal fire, according to the demerit of his actions; and that an
account will be required of everyone, in proportion to the powers which he
received from God, as Christ has declared in these words, ’For unto whomsoever
God has given much, of him shall the more be required.’

"We Christians (in contrast to the vices attributed by the heathen to their
gods) have been taught that they only will attain to immortality, who lead holy
and virtuous lives, like God; and we believe, that all who live wickedly, and do
not repent, will be punished in eternal fire."

Iranaeus (135-200) mentions eternal fire many times. For example he says, "That
eternal fire is prepared for those who should transgress, both the Lord openly
affirmed, and the other Scriptures prove." He also said, "Good things are
eternal, and without end in God, and therefore the loss of them is also eternal
and never ending" and "Those who fly from the light of God . . . are themselves
the cause of their inhabiting eternal darkness, destitute of all good things."
Notice here the idea that the punishment includes what the sinner misses as well
as a positive penalty. We also have here the idea that the punishment is the
natural consequence which the sinner brings upon himself. Farrar claimed that
Iranaeus was inconsistent in that he taught both eternal punishment and
universal restoration, but Pusey explains these alleged universalistic passages
very satisfactorily.2

Theophilus, the Sixth Bishop of Antioch (c. 168), said, "Give reverential
attention to the prophetic Scriptures, and they will make your way plainer for
escaping the eternal punishments, and obtaining the eternal prizes of God." At
the beginning of the third century, one of the outstanding Church Fathers was
Tertullian, (c. 160-230). He taught the doctrine of eternal punishment; the type
of language which he used however depended on whom he was addressing. As Pusey
says, "Tertullian, when not bent on producing an effect on the heathen, writes
calmly of the fear of eternal punishment as keeping Christians from evil."3
Tertullian speaks of "the greatness of the punishment which continueth, not for
a long time, but forever." He was the first of the Church Fathers to emphasize
the idea which reappears from time to time in the history of the subject that
hell would be a joyful spectacle to those who are saved. He says in his De
Spectaculis "How shall I admire, how laugh, how rejoice, how exult when I behold
so many proud monarchs, and fancied gods, groaning in the lowest abyss of
darkness; so many magistrates, who persecuted the name of the Lord, liquefying
in fiercer fires than they ever kindled against the Christians."

Cyprian (c. 200-258) also was rather graphic in his descriptions of eternal
torments. He said, "Let him fear to die, on whom, at his going away from life an
eternal flame will lay pains that never cease." In his Second Epistle, he said,
"Gains which sever men from the feast of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and bring
them down, ill and to their ill, fattened in this world, to the punishment of
hunger and thirst eternal." The famous Alexandrian school of theologians,
however, denied the doctrine of eternal punishment. As Shedd says, "The
principle deviation from the catholic doctrine of endless retribution was in the
Alexandrian school, founded by Clement and Origen. The position taken by them
was that ’the punishments of the condemned are not eternal but only remedial;
the devil himself being capable of amelioration.’ "4 Shedd goes on to say,
"Origen’s Restorationism grew naturally out of his view of human liberty. He
held that the liberty of indifference and the power of contrary choice, instead
of simple self-determination, are the substance of freedom. These belong
inalienably and forever to the nature of the finite will. They cannot be
destroyed, even by apostasy and sin. Consequently there is forever a possibility
of a self-conversion of the will in either direction. Free will may fall into
sin at any time; and free will may turn to God any time. This led to Origen’s
theory of an endless alternation of falls and recoveries, of hells and heavens;
so that practically he taught nothing but hell. For, as Augustine (City of God,
XXL. xvii) remarks in his refutation of Origen, ’heaven with the prospect of
losing it is misery.’ "5 We see then that Origen’s view was the result of his
anthropology. Origen himself recognized the dangerous moral consequences of
universalism, and sometimes spoke of eternal condemnation and the impossibility
of conversion in the world to come. He also said that in the matter of "the end
or consummation" what is said "is said with great fear and caution, discussing
and treating, rather than laying down anything as certain and defined." In his
discussions of the subject he constantly began statements with the term
"perhaps." Jerome said, "Origen himself, in an epistle which he wrote to Fabian,
Bishop of Rome, expressed regret for having written such things, and threw the
blame upon Ambrose, who made public what he had written privately." Origen
called the doctrine of eternal damnation a "beneficial deception" by God. In
other words, he himself believed in universalism, but he believed in teaching
eternal damnation to the masses of men as a deterrent to sin. This in itself is
an admission of the fact that the denial of eternal punishment undermines
morals, and therefore places a serious question over against the claim that such
denial could correspond to reality. The Eastern Church formally condemned the
heresies of Origen in a synod at Alexandria convened by Theophilus, and one at
Cyprus convened by Epiphanius. These teachings of Origen were also condemned by
Anastasius, Bishop of Rome. After some Origenist monks had stirred up some
trouble in Palestine, the Emperor Justinian (who liked to delve into theology)
had the matter brought up to the Fifth General Council, where Origenism was
condemned.

Among the words of Basil (c. 330-379) are these, "For they who have done evil
shall arise to reproach and shame, seeing in themselves the foulness and the
marks of their evil deeds. And perhaps more fearful than darkness and the
eternal fire in that shame, which sinners will have as their companion in
eternity, having ever before their eyes the traces of that sin in the flesh, as
a dye which cannot be washed out, abiding forever in the memory of their souls.

"Let no one deceive thee with vain words; for sudden destruction will come upon
thee, and the overthrow shall overtake thee, like a whirlwind. The dark angel
will come, carry away by force, and dragging thy soul bound with sins, often
turning back to the things here and mourning voicelessly, the organ of
lamentation being now closed . . . . For there is no liberation from those
things after death, nor any device or means of escaping those bitter poisons."
We note in Basil an emphasis on the psychological result of sin rather than on
the literal aspects of the punishment.

Gregory of Nyssa (c. 331-396) at times followed the teachings of Origen, but at
other times made statements such as the following: "And this will be the
complete effacement of wickedness, when all are called up to life by the
resurrection; the just being removed to the portion above, those held fast by
sins being delivered over to the fire of Gehenna." Commenting on this statement
by Gregory, Pusey says, "The above clear and explicit preaching to his people,
shows what was the faith of Saint Gregory. Whatever be the explanation of the
mist of Origenism, which at times, floated over his own imaginative mind, or
that of his saintly sister, Saint Macrina, to whom he owed so much, nothing but
a want of conviction of the truth of the speculations could have made him preach
the exact contrary."

Gregory Nazianzen (c. 329-389) said, "There is not to those who depart to Hades,
confession or amendment. For God hath concluded here life and action, but there
the sifting of what has been done. That sentence, after which is no appeal, no
higher judge, no defence through subsequent works, no oil, from the wise virgins
or from those who sell, for the failing lamps; no repentance of a rich man
wasting in the flame and seeking amendment for his relations; no appointed time
of transformations; but one last fearful judgment, even more just than
formidable, yea rather the more formidable, because it is also just." Note here
the Biblical basis for Gregory’s statements.

It was during this period, the fourth century, that the article of the Apostle’s
Creed, "He descended into hell," received acceptance. This article is important
in the study of our subject because the advocates of the "larger hope" claim
that this article refers to the fact that Jesus preached to the dead, thus
bringing salvation to some who had before this time been lost. This article was
slow in being accepted into creedal statements. It was absent from the
statements of the first four Ecumenical Councils, Nicaea, Constantinople,
Ephesus, and Chalcedon. The first formal creed in which it had a place was that
of the Arian party at the council of Ariminum (359). Even after that, there were
many creeds from which it was omitted. Furthermore, once it was admitted, it was
interpreted in a great variety of ways. The article of the Creed in itself
certainly does not give any detailed description of Christ’s activities while in
"hell."

Athanasius (293-373) is best known for his defense of the orthodox doctrine of
the person of Christ in the controversy with the Arians. His writings contain
several references to the doctrine of eternal punishment, but his position on
the subject is not clear. He quoted passages on punishment from Matthew, but he
also made the statement: "While the devil thought to bind one he is deprived of
all. Cast out of Hades, and sitting by the gates he sees all the fettered
beings, led forth by the courage of the Saviour." This would seem to imply a
belief in universalism.

Hilary (d. 367), sometimes called "the Athanasius of the West", stated that the
heathen will have material bodies suitable for living in flames. He said, "An
eternity of the body is destined for the heathen too, so that there shall be in
them eternal matter for the eternal fire, and in all being everlasting,
everlasting punishment shall be put in force."

Ambrose (c. 340-379) was another of the Church Fathers who is best known for his
part in the conflict with the Arians. He taught that the sufferings of the
damned were not material. He said, "There is no gnashing of corporeal teeth, nor
any perpetual fire of corporeal flames, nor is the worm corporeal — the fire is
that which the sadness over transgressions generates, because the sins pierce
with compunction the mind sense of the irrational soul of the guilty, and eat
out, as it were, the bowels of conscience; which sins are generated like worms
out of each other, as it were from the body of the sinner . . . the gnashing of
teeth also indicates the feeling of one indignant because each repents too late,
is too late wroth with himself, groans over himself too late, that he offended
with such obstinate wickedness."

Jerome, (340-420) said, "Therein shall the sinner be cursed, that, his body
being uncorrupt he shall suffer eternal punishment." He also said, "The worm
which will never die and the fire which never will be quenched is by very many
(plerisque) understood of the conscience of sinners, which tortures them when
under punishment, why through their own fault and sin, they missed the good of
the elect." He then adds, "Yet not as to deny the eternal punishment of those
who deny the Lord."

Jerome rejected the extreme emphasis on punishment which was advocated by the
Pelagians, yet he said, "But if Origen says, that no rational creature will be
lost, and ascribes repentance to the devil, what is that to us, who say that the
devil and his hosts and all ungodly and transgressors perish for ever, and that
Christians, if overtaken (by death) in sin, will be saved after punishment?" The
latter part of the statement is, of course, a reference to a purgatorial
experience, to which many of the other Church Fathers also made a great deal of
reference. Jerome also said, "All God’s enemies shall perish, not that they
shall cease to exist but cease to be enemies." This is a rather ambiguous
statement, but in the light of other passages from his works it cannot mean that
he believed in universalism.

Jerome clearly held to the doctrine of eternal punishment, yet at the same time
he had a tolerant view toward those who denied it. In commenting on Isaiah
24:1-23, "post multos dies visitabuntur" he says, "This seems to favour those
friends of mine who grant the grace of repentance to the devil and to demons
after many ages, that they too shall be visited after a time." He goes on to
explain that the text mentioned doesn’t necessarily mean this, but then he adds,
"human frailty cannot know the judgment of God, nor venture to form an opinion
of the greatness of His punishment."6

Augustine (354-430) stood uncompromisingly for the doctrine of eternal
punishment. As with many other doctrines, his advocacy of this position tended
to cause it to become the accepted doctrine of the church for the centuries that
followed. In dealing with the subject he avoided the coarseness of the
descriptions of some of the scholars who lived in his era. He took his position
not only because it was Biblical but also because the fear of hell had had a
salutary effect in his own experience. He says, "Thy right hand was continually
ready to pluck me out of the mire, and to wash me thoroughly, and I knew it not;
nor did anything call me back from a yet deeper gulf of carnal pleasures, but
the fear of death and of thy judgment to come; which, amid all my changes, never
departed my breast."7 We shall never know how many others have been kept from
plunging more deeply into sin by the fear of hell. This is certainly not the
highest motive for morality, but it has helped to restrain evil. That the
doctrine of eternal punishment was not the only position held with regard to
what happens to the ungodly after death is shown by Augustine’s statement
concerning the very many in his day who "though not denying the Holy Scriptures,
do not believe in endless torments." On the same subject he says, "For in vain
certain, or rather very many, with human feelings compassionate the eternal
punishment of the doomed, and their eternal torments without intermission, and
so believe not that it will take place, not indeed in the way of opposing
themselves to the divine Scriptures, but by softening, according to their own
feelings, all the hard sayings, and by turning unto a more gentle meaning such
things, as they think to be said rather to execute terror than as though true."

Augustine pointed out that aionios must have the same meaning when it refers to
punishment as when it refers to reward. He considered separation from God to be
the worst part of the punishment of the lost. He said that beyond the degrees of
suffering involved in eternal punishment "Alienation from the life of God, which
would be common to all, would be greater than any suffering whatever." He allows
each individual the freedom to choose whether he believes in the more sensuous
or the more spiritual forms of punishment, but he himself thought it best to
believe that there will be a combination of the two. In his City of God,
Augustine devotes the entire Twenty First Book with its 27 brief chapters to the
subject of hell. He begins the first chapter of the book by writing: "We are now
to proceed (by the help of God) in this book, with the declaration of the
punishment due unto the devil and all his confederacy. And this I choose to do
before I handle the glories of the blessed, because both these and the wicked
are to undergo their sentences in body and soul, and it may seem more incredible
for an earthly body to endure undissolved in eternal pains, than without all
pain, in everlasting happiness. So that when I have shown the possibility of the
first, it may be a great motive unto the confirmation of the latter."8 In brief
chapters in this Book, he then goes on to discuss "Whether an earthly body may
possibly be incorruptible by fire," and "Whether a fleshly body may possibly
endure eternal pain." He then goes on to give what he considered some of
Nature’s testimonies that bodies may remain undiminished in fire. In Chapter IX,
entitled "Of hell, and the qualities of the eternal pains therein," he quotes
several of Jesus’ sayings on the subject, and then he says, "O whom would not
this thunder from the mouth of God strike a chill terror into, sounding so
often? Now, as for this worm and this fire, they that make them only mental
pains do say that the fire implies the burning of the soul in grief and anguish,
that now repents too late for being severed from the sight of God: after the
manner that the apostle says: ’Who is offended and I burn not?’ And this
language may be meant also by the worm say they, as it is written ’As the moth
is to the garment, and the worm to the wood, so does sorrow eat the heart of a
man.’ Now such as hold them both mental and real, say that the fire is a bodily
plague to the body, and the worm a plague of conscience to the soul. This seems
more likely."9 He then goes on in brief chapters to discuss "Whether the fire of
hell if it be corporeal, can take effect upon the incorporeal devils," and
"Whether it be not justice that the time of the pains should be proportioned to
the time of the sins and crimes."

Chapter XVII is entitled "Of some Christians that held that hell’s pains should
not be eternal." We quote this chapter in full because of its direct bearing
upon our subject: "Now must I have a gentle disputation with certain tender
hearts of our own religion, who think that God, who has justly doomed the
condemned unto hell fire, will after a certain space, which His goodness shall
think fit for the merit of each man’s guilt, deliver them from that torment. And
of this opinion was Origen, in far more pitiful manner, for he held that the
devils themselves after a set time expired, should be loosed from their
torments, and become bright angels in heaven, as they were before. But this, and
other of his opinions, chiefly that rotation and circumvolution of misery and
bliss which he held that all mankind should run in, gave the Church cause to
pronounce his anathema: seeing he had lost this seeming pity, by assigning a
true misery, after a while, and a false bliss, unto the saints in heaven, where
they (if they were true) could never be sure of remaining. But far otherwise is
their tenderness of heart, which hold that this freedom out of hell shall only
be extended unto the souls of the damned after a certain appointed time for
everyone so that all at length shall come to be saints in heaven. But if this
opinion be good and true, because it is merciful, why then the farther it
extends the better it is; so that it may as well include the freedom of the
devils also, after a longer continuance of time. Why then ends it with mankind
only, and excludes them? nay, but it dares go no farther. they dare not extend
their pity unto the devil. But if any one does so, he goes beyond them, and yet
sins in erring more deformedly, and more perversely against the express word of
God, though he thinks to show the more pity herein."10

Augustine based his belief in eternal punishment on the Scriptures. For example
he says, "Wherefore there is no reason either stronger or plainer to assure our
belief that the devil and his angels shall never more return to the glory and
righteousness of the saints, than because the Scriptures, that deceive no man,
tell us directly and plainly, ’that God hath not spared them, but cast them down
into hell, and delivered them unto chains of darkness, there to be kept unto the
condemnation in the just judgment, then to be cast into eternal fire, and there
to burn for evermore’ . . . Shall the word of God, spoken alike both to men and
devils, be proved true upon the devils, and not upon the men? So indeed would
man’s surmises be of more certainty than God’s promises."11

Augustine obviously gave a great deal of thought to the subject, and his
conclusions had a great influence upon the thinking of the Church.

Chrysostom (c. 345-407) had a great influence on the Church both because of his
outstanding ability as a preacher, and because he did a great deal of writing.
He seems to have been in favor of much in Origen’s thinking, but in spite of
that, to have believed in eternal punishment himself. Farrar makes the charge
that "the doctrine of accommodation" which was prevalent amongst the Church
Fathers was practiced by Chrysostom at this point. In other words, Farrar says
that Chrysostom did not believe in the doctrine of eternal punishment, but
taught it to accommodate himself to the convictions of his hearers. However as
we turn to the clear language that Chrysostom used, we find this hard to
believe. Besides, what other evidence do we have concerning what he believed
than the record of what he said and wrote?

Commenting on a passage in Matthew, Chrysostom said, "And some even say that it
(the saying ’But whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell
fire.’) was spoken rather hyperbolically. But I fear lest, when we have deceived
ourselves with words here, we may in deeds there suffer that extreme
punishment."12 Commenting on a passage in Romans, he says, "Where then are they
who, with all this great exactness in view, yet will not allow that there is a
hell?"13 In another sermon, he said, "All these things let us speak as in pity
for the deceased, and as depreciating things present; in order that by fear and
by pity we may soften the cruel word. And when we see men shrinking into
themselves at these narrations, then, and not till then, let us introduce to
their notice also the doctrine of hell, not as terrifying these, but in
compassion for others. And let us say, But why speak of these things present?
For far indeed will our concern be from ending with these: a yet more grievous
punishment will confront all such persons; even a river of fire, and a poisonous
worm, and darkness interminable, and undying tortures."14 Commenting on a verse
in 1 Thessalonians he says, "For it is no small advantage to be persuaded
concerning hell. For the recollection of such discourses, like bitter medicine,
will be able to clear every vice, if it be constantly settled in our mind."15 In
another passage he says, "For indeed my heart is troubled and throbs, and the
more I see the account of hell confirmed, the more do I tremble and shrink
through fear, but it is necessary to say these things, lest we fall into
hell."16 He also said, "I could wish also myself , that there were no punishment
. . . But it cannot be, that there is not punishment and hell. What can I do?"17
In yet another passage he calls the denial of hell "Satanic reasoning."18 He had
hopes that the preaching of the doctrine might have a powerful influence, for he
said, "For this cause did God threaten hell, that none may fall into hell, that
all may obtain the Kingdom, for this cause, we too make mention continually of
hell."19

Just a few of the most prominent of the Church Fathers have been quoted to
illustrate the conceptions held in the early Church. Except for a few, notably
Origen, the most influential of the Fathers held to the doctrine of eternal
punishment, and in fact proclaimed it more or less vigorously.

2. The Middle Ages In the Middle Ages a great deal of attention was focused on
the doctrine of eternal punishment. There is also a noticeable increase in the
crudeness of the description of hell. This is especially true of the many
visions on the subject which are recorded as having been seen in this age. The
most famous of such visions in the early part of the Middle Ages was that of the
Venerable Bede (673-735) in which he described a man in torments, "the flames of
fire gushed out from his ears and eyes and nostrils and at every pore." There
were also, however, in this period saner discussions on the subject. For
example, John Damascene (c. 700-754), considered by many the most authoritative
theologian of the Eastern Church, says "After death there is no longer turning,
no longer repentance, not that God wouldn’t accept repentance, for He cannot
deny Himself, nor doth He cast away His compassion; but the soul is no longer
converted."20

John Scotus Erigena (c. 815-877) was both a controversial and an original
thinker. Although his position is not entirely clear, he seems to have denied
the endlessness of punishment and the material aspects of hell. In one passage
he spoke of hell as the conscience, but in another place he spoke of hell fire.
He spoke of evil being abolished as a kingdom, but not abolished in individuals.
Of Erigena’s position, J.M. Deutsche says, "Evil is nothing substantial, it had
no place in primordial cause, it is only instability of will which is an
accident attendant upon God-created natures. Since the changes outlined above
produce a will fully sanctified and united with God, the will is in full accord
with the divine will; there is then no cause of evil. The consequences of evil
likewise vanish, since that which is only an accident cannot assume the form of
substance; at the end of world-history evil in every form is to be annihilated.
This is the necessary consequence of the system of Scotus, to which he gave
extended discussion. According to his system, it was impossible that a nature,
something created by God, could suffer eternally, and he attempted to show how a
vice could attach to a pure nature without corrupting it, also how it might be
punished, though in itself nothing, otherwise than in the nature possessed by
it; his demonstration, however, is unsatisfactory. How the bad will can continue
to exist while the nature is completely pure is not made clear, and this
difficulty is the greater because Scotus regarded the will not as an accident
but as an essential. Yet Scotus has (x. 38) a sentence which should be noticed.
He says that practically all authors agree that as many men attain to the
heavenly kingdom as there are angels who have fallen, and remarks that, if that
is correct, then must the number of men who eventually are born equal that of
angels, or else not all men attain to the purpose of their creation, which last
is contrary to the reasons already given for the salvation of all men in Christ.
In that case only demons and the devil are doomed to eternal condemnation."21 In
this reference there is obviously a great deal of speculation, rather than
thought based on Biblical revelation.

One of the lesser theologians of this era, Theophylact (c. 1077) said, "The worm
and the fire, which punish sinners, is the conscience of each, and the memory of
the foul deeds committed in this life, which prey upon him like a worm, and
scorch him like fire."

Peter Lombard (c. 1105-1160), famous for his Sentences, followed Tertullian in
considering hell to be a beautiful sight to the redeemed. He said, "The elect
shall go forth . . . to see the torments of the impious, and seeing this they
will not be affected with grief, but will be satiated with joy."

Thomas Aquinas (c. 1225-1274) who set the pattern for all later Roman Catholic
thought, agreed with Tertullian and Lombard when he said, "that the saints may
enjoy their beatitude more thoroughly and give more abundant thanks to God, a
perfect view of the punishment of the damned is granted to them." He considered
that the torments included useless repining and mourning. In his system "guilt
and punishment correspond to each other; and since the ’apostasy from the
invariable good which is infinite’ fulfilled by man, is unending, it merits
everlasting punishment."22 He made an important contribution to Roman Catholic
thought by developing the idea of a separate place for unbaptized children, the
Limbus Infantum. The most famous of the many visions of heaven and hell are
those of Dante Alighieri (1265-1321). He describes hell in his poem Inferno.
According to the poem, in April of 1300, Dante finds himself wandering in a
gloomy forest. Leaving the forest, he attempts to climb a hill, but is driven
back by three ravenous beasts. He is met by Virgil who promises to conduct him
through hell and purgatory. On the evening of Good Friday, April 8, they enter
the gate of hell and pass through its successive circles. What Dante sees there
is then described in great vividness. Hell is supposedly shaped like an inverted
cone with its apex at the center of the earth. The upper circle is that of the
Elysian Fields where the noble pagans dwell. Venial sins are punished in the
next few circles; and deadly sins are punished in those circles nearest the
center where there is a frozen lake in which Lucifer himself punishes traitors.
The following are a few illustrative passages from the Inferno:

First we see the description of the entrance to Hell:

"Through me the way is to the city of woe;

Through me the way unto eternal pain;;

Through me the way unto the lost below.

Justice commoved my high Creator, when Made me Divine Omnipotence, combined With
Primal Love and Wisdom Sovereign.

Before me nothing was of any kind Except Eterne, and I eterne abide:

Leave, ye that enter in, all hope behind!"23 One of his descriptions of the lost
is as follows:

"But all those spirits, so forworn and stark, Change color, and their teeth are
chattering, As soon as they the cruel accents mark.

God they blaspheme, and their own sires, and fling Curses on race and place and
time and taw Both of their birth and their engendering."24 At sight of the noble
pagans in hell Virgil speaks:

"Askest thou not," resumed the Master good, "What spirits these may be thou dost
behold?

Now ere thou go, I wish it understood, Though these sinned not, their merit
manifold Doth not, for want of Baptism, signify — The portal of the faith which
thou dost hold —

They worship God but through idolatry, Seeing they were to Christian ages prior;
And among such as these myself am I."25 Another vivid description of the
condition of the lost is found in Canto V:

"And now the notes of woe begin to smite The hollow of mine ear; now am I come
Where I am pierced by wailings infinite.

I came into a place of all light dumb, Which bellows like a sea where thunders
roll And counter winds contend for masterdom. The infernal hurricane beyond
control Sweeps on and on with ravishment malign Whirling and buffering each
hapless soul. When by the headlong tempest hurled supine, Here are the shrieks,
the moaning, the laments;

Here they blaspheme the puissance divine.26

It is difficult to know whether or not Dante considered hell to be literally as
he described it or whether he was deliberately using metaphorical language, but
it is easy to see how less poetic souls who read his words would picture hell.

Richard Rolle de Hampole (c. 1290-1349), an English mystic, stated that the
torments of hell are unimaginable, but spent one thousand lines of his Stimulus
Conscientiae trying to describe them. The subject of hell was very popular in
this period. Heinrich Suso (c. 1300-1366), the German ascetic, devoted a whole
chapter to it in one of his books. The Speculum Humanae Salvationis, a poem of
uncertain authorship, written at the beginning of the fourteenth century, had
much to say about hell. It spoke of the body being deformed in proportion to the
sin committed, of punishment for sin being unending because the sinner will
never repent, and it also spoke of the worm of conscience. Some of the writings
of this period were accompanied by the most grotesque pictures which no doubt
made a deep impression on the illiterate masses. The Kalendrier des Bergiers
gave a terrifying description of hell supposedly related by Lazarus.

Chapter 5 || Table of Contents

1. Note: The quotations from the martyrs and Church Fathers are all taken from
Pusey, What is of Faith as to Everlasting Punishment, unless other references
are given.

2. Pusey, Op. Cit., p. 182.

3. Ibid., p. 182.

4. Shedd, Op. Cit., p. 669.

5. Ibid. p. 669.

6. Hieron, in Esai, xxiv.

7. Augustine, Confessions, vi. 16, p. 105 Oxf. Tr.

8. Augustine, The City of God, II Trans. by J.H. (London, Griffith Farran Okeken
and Welsh, first published in 1610), p. 292.

9. Ibid., pp. 303, 304.

10. Ibid., pp. 310, 311.

11. Augustine, The City of God, Book XXI, Chapter XXIII.

12. Chrysostom, Hom. XVI on Matthew 5:22, p. 241, Oxf. Tr.

13. Ibid., Hom. XXXI on Romans 16:16, p. 495.

14. Ibid., Hom. XI on 1 Corinthians 4:5, p. 146.

15. Ibid., Hom. VIII on 1 Thessalonians 4:18, p. 425.

16. Ibid., Hom. IX on 1 Corinthians 3:1-2, p. 115.

17. Ibid., Hom. VIII on 1 Thessalonians 4:18, pp. 424-425.

18. Ibid., Hom. VIII on 1 Thessalonians 4:18, p. 418.

19. Ibid., Hom. VI on Php 2:5-8, p. 73.

20. John Damascene, Dialogue Against the Manicheans.

21. S.M. Deutsch, in The New Schaff Herzon Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge,
X, "Scotus Erigena, Johannes" (Grand Rapids, Baker Book-house, 1950), 306, 307.

22. R. Seeburg, in the New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge,
XI, "Thomas Aquinas," 425.

23. Dante Alighieri, "Inferno" in H.W. Robbins and W.H. Coleman, Western World
Literature (The Macmillan Co., New York, 1938), Translation by Melville Best
Anderson, p. 339.

24. Ibid., p. 340.

25. Ibid., pp. 340, 341.

26. Ibid., p. 342.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 6: 05 REFORMATION AND POST-REFORMATION THOUGHT
========================================================================

Reformation and Post-Reformation Thought (To The Nineteenth Century) The
Reformers were not especially interested in the doctrine of eternal punishment.
In fact, they were not interested in eschatology in general, except for the
doctrine of purgatory. As Quistorp, an authority on the subject says, "The
theology of the reformers is not primarily concerned with questions of
eschatology."1 The Reformers accepted the Medieval conceptions of hell,
although, as with all doctrine, they returned to an emphasis on the Biblical
teaching rather than human speculation. In the period following the Reformation,
however, a great interest in the subject continued both in the Roman Catholic
and in the Protestant Churches.

Luther’s position is not entirely clear. He believed in hell; in fact it was an
overwhelming fear of hell which caused his entrance into the monastery, which
was one of the most important turning points of his life. However, Luther also
made a statement in which he left room for salvation after death. He said, "God
forbid that I should limit the time of acquiring faith to the present life. In
the depth of the Divine mercy there may be opportunity to win it in the
future."2 Those who believe in an opportunity for salvation beyond death make a
great deal of this statement. However, it is commonly recognized that Luther was
not as clearly a consistent thinker as Calvin, and this statement is evidently a
passing hope rather than an integral part of Luther’s creed. That this is the
case is revealed in such passages of Luther’s writing as, "By the doctrine of
purgatory they are brought to trust in a false security so that they think they
can put in store their salvation and delay things until the day of their death;
they try to assume repentance and sorrows and escape purgatory by means of
covenants, masses for the soul, and testaments, but doubtless, they will then
discover the truth."3 Now to be logical, this same reasoning would hold for a
doctrine of salvation beyond death, in fact, the argument would be even stronger
than that against the doctrine of purgatory. Quistorp says, speaking of Luther’s
denial of purgatory, "The special reason which he gives for rejecting it is the
character of decision which marks the whole of our present life in time: each
hour may be the hour of our death and therefore we must decide for faith here
and now and constantly live in the hope of the hereafter."4 Quistorp comes to
this conclusion: "Both reformers hold fast to a two-fold issue — either
acceptance to an eternity of bliss or rejection to eternal damnation, and are
opposed to any neutralizing tendency which would dissolve the decisive
significance of the gospel and of the faith."5 In regard to the intermediate
state Luther seems to have held to a position nearly akin to soul sleep. The
Jehovah’s Witnesses take great delight in quoting him as proof that he held
their position at that point. Luther did make statements such as this, "We must
accustom and discipline ourselves to despise death in faith and to regard it as
a deep, strong, and sweet sleep."6 The writings of Calvin contain a number of
references to the subject. His view is expressed in the following section from
the Institutes:

Moreover, as language cannot describe the severity of the divine vengeance on
the reprobate, their pains and torments are figured to us by corporeal things,
such as darkness, wailing and gnashing of teeth, inextinguishable fire, the
ever-gnawing worm (Matthew 8:12; Matthew 22:13; Mark 9:43; Isaiah 66:24). It is
certain that by such modes of expression the Holy Spirit designed to impress all
our senses with dread, as when it is said, “Tophet is ordained of old; yea, for
the king it is prepared: he has made it deep and large; the pile thereof is fire
and much wood; the breath of the Lord, like a stream of brimstone, does kindle
it,” (Isaiah 30:33). As we thus require to be assisted to conceive the miserable
doom of the reprobate, so the consideration on which we ought chiefly to dwell
is the fearful consequence of being estranged from all fellowship with God, and
not only so, but of feeling that his majesty is adverse to us, while we cannot
possibly escape from it. For, first, his indignation is like a raging fire, by
whose touch all things are devoured and annihilated. Next, all the creatures are
the instruments of his judgment, so that those to whom the Lord will thus
publicly manifest his anger will find that heaven, and earth, and sea, all
beings, animate and inanimate, are, as it were, inflamed with dire indignation
against them, and armed for their destruction. Wherefore, the Apostle made no
trivial declaration, when he said that unbelievers shall be “punished with
everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his
power,” (2 Thessalonians 1:9). And whenever the prophets strike terror by means
of corporeal figures, although in respect of our dull understanding there is no
extravagance in their language, yet they give preludes of the future judgment in
the sun and the moon, and the whole fabric of the world. Hence unhappy
consciences find no rest, but are vexed and driven about by a dire whirlwind,
feeling as if torn by an angry God, pierced through with deadly darts, terrified
by his thunderbolts and crushed by the weight of his hand; so that it were
easier to plunge into abysses and whirlpools than endure these terrors for a
moment. How fearful, then, must it be to be thus beset throughout eternity! On
this subject there is a memorable passage in the ninetieth Psalm: Although God
by a mere look scatters all mortals, and brings them to nought, yet as his
worshippers are more timid in this world, he urges them the more, that he may
stimulate then, while burdened with the cross to press onward until he himself
shall be all in all."8

Calvin’s view can also be gleaned from his comments on those portions of
Scripture which deal with eternal punishment. In a lengthy comment on Matthew
3:12, he makes his position clear: "Many persons, I am aware, have entered into
ingenious debates about the eternal fire, by which the wicked will be tormented
after the judgment. But we may conclude from many passages of Scripture, that it
is a metaphorical expression. For, if we must believe that it is real, or what
they call material fire, we must also believe that the brimstone and the fan are
material, both of them being mentioned in Isaiah, ’For Tophet is ordained of
old; the pile thereof is fire and much wood; the breath of the Lord like a
stream of brimstone doth kindle it’ (Isaiah 30:33). We must explain the fire in
the same manner as the worm, (Mark 8:44, 46, 48) and if it is universally agreed
that the worm is a metaphorical term, we must form the same opinion as to the
fire. Let us lay aside the speculations, by which foolish men weary themselves
to no purpose, and satisfy ourselves with believing, that these forms of speech
denote, in a manner suited to our feeble capacity, a dreadful torment, which no
man can now comprehend, and no language can express."9

Commenting on Matthew 8:12 Calvin says, "By darkness Scripture points out that
dreadful anguish, which can neither be expressed nor conceived in this life."10
On Matthew 13:42 "And shall cast them into a furnace of fire," he says, "This
shall cast them into a furnace of fire," he says, "This is a metaphorical
expression; for, as the infinite glory which is laid up for the sons of God so
far exceeds all our senses, that we cannot find words to express it, so the
punishment which awaits the reprobate is incomprehensible, and is therefore
shadowed out according to the measure of our capacity. From ignorance of this,
the Sophists have tortured themselves, to no purpose by fruitless disputes, as
we have already hinted on a former occasion."11

Commenting on the phrase "into everlasting fire" in Matthew 25:41, he says,
"Under these words, therefore, we ought to represent to our minds the future
vengeance of God against the wicked, which, being more grievous than all earthly
torments, ought rather to excite horror than a desire to know it. But we must
observe the eternity of this fire, as well as of the glory which, a little
before, was promised to believers."12

Especially enlightening are Calvin’s comments on the Parable of the Rich Man and
Lazarus found in Luke 16:1-31. He believes this to be the narration of an actual
incident, rather than a parable, yet he says, when commenting on the words "And,
lifting up his eyes in hell": "Though Christ is relating a history, yet he
describes spiritual things under figures, which he knew to be adapted to our
senses. Souls have neither fingers nor eyes, and are not liable to thirst, nor
do they hold such conversations among themselves as are here described to have
taken place between Abraham and the rich man; but our Lord has here drawn a
picture, which represents the condition of the life to come according to the
measure of our capacity. The general truth conveyed is, that believing souls,
when they have left their bodies, lead a joyful and blessed life out of this
world, and that for the reprobate there are prepared dreadful torments, which
can no more be conceived by our minds than the boundless glory of the heavens.
As it is only in a small measure — only so far as we are enlightened by the
Spirit of God — that we taste by hope the glory promised to us, which far
exceeds all our senses, let it be reckoned enough that the inconceivable
vengeance of God, which awaits the ungodly, is communicated to us in an obscure
manner, so far as is necessary to strike terror into our minds.

"On these subjects the words of Christ give us slender information, and in a
manner which is fitted to restrain curiosity. The wicked are described as
fearfully tormented by the misery which they feel; as desiring some relief, but
cut off from hope, and thus experiencing a double torment; and as having their
anguish increased by being compelled to remember their crimes, and to compare
the present blessedness of believers with their own miserable and lost
condition. In connection with this a conversation is related, as if persons who
have no intercourse with each other were supposed to talk together. When the
rich man says, Father Abraham, this expresses an additional torment, that he
perceives, when it is too late, that he is cut off from the number of the
children of Abraham."13

Commenting on "a vast gulf lieth" in verse 26, Calvin says, "These words
describe the permanency of the future state, and denote, that the boundaries
which separate the reprobate from the elect can never be broken through. And
thus we are reminded to return early to the path, while there is yet time, lest
we rush headlong into that abyss, from which it will be impossible to rise."14
On Romans 11:32, "that he may have mercy on all," Calvin says, "Nothing can
equal the gross conception of those madmen, who infer from this passage the
salvation of the whole human race: Paul simply means, that Jews and Gentiles
obtain salvation from no other cause than the mercy of God, that he may leave no
ground for any one to complain."15

1 Corinthians 15:28 says, "That God may be all in all." On this Calvin says,
"Others infer from this that the Devil and all the wicked will be saved — as if
God would not altogether be better known in the Devil’s destruction, than if he
were to associate the Devil with himself, and make him one with himself. We see
then, how impudently madmen of this sort wrest this statement of Paul for
maintaining their blasphemies."16

We take as a final example from Calvin’s Commentaries that on 2 Thessalonians
1:9, "Everlasting destruction from the face . . ." where he says, "He shews, by
apposition, what is the nature of the punishment of which he had made mention —
destruction without end, and an unending death. The perpetuity of the death is
proved from the circumstance, that it has the glory of Christ as its opposite.
Now, this is eternal, and has no end. Accordingly, the influence of that death
will never cease. From this also the dreadful severity of the punishment may be
inferred, inasmuch as it will be great in proportion to the glory and majesty of
Christ."17

It would have been well if those who followed Calvin in his orthodoxy had
followed him in his sanity of interpretation, particularly in recognizing the
metaphorical nature of the language used in the Bible in describing eternal
punishment. If they had all done so, there would have been a much less
reactionary denial of the doctrine.

Quistorp’s conclusion as to Calvin’s position on the fate of the ungodly is:
"This defeat, however, does not mean annihilation but eternal death. The eternal
glorification of God is the whole meaning and purpose of eternal damnation.
Calvin’s descriptions of the ultimate fate of the godless are only brief in
comparison with his account of the eternal salvation of the elect."18 On the
Roman Catholic side, the outstanding figure in this period was Ignatius Loyola
(1491-1556) who founded the Jesuits. Of his famous Spiritual Exercises, the
Fifth Exercise is a meditation on hell: "The first part will be to see with the
eye of the imagination those great fires, and those souls as it were in bodies
of fire. The second to hear with the ears lamentations, howlings, cries,
blasphemies against Christ our Lord and against all his Saints. The third, with
the sense of smell, to smell smoke, brimstone, refuse, and rottenness. The
fourth, to taste with the taste bitter things, as tears, sadness and the worm of
conscience. The fifth, to feel with the sense of touch how those fires do touch
and burn souls." In this same century, the Confession of Augsburg in 1530, in
its Seventeenth Article stated very clearly, "Ungodly men and the devils shall
he condemn into endless torments." This confession was prepared by Melanchthon,
approved by Luther, and signed by the evangelical princes of Germany. In the
Church of England, in 1553 Cramner and his fellow Reformers formulated the
Forty-Two Articles. The Forty-Second Article stated: "They are also worthy of
condemnation (damnatione digni) who endeavor at this time to restore the
dangerous (periculosam) opinion that all men, be they never so ungodly, shall at
length be saved, when they have suffered pains for their sins a certain time
appointed by God’s justice." However, in 1563, this article, along with several
others, was abolished, thus leaving the question outside the scope of the
official doctrine of the Church of England. But, according to Pusey, the reason
for this was not that there was a strong opposition to the doctrine of eternal
punishment, but, quite the contrary, that it was considered that this heresy was
a dead issue. This conclusion comes from the fact that the other articles
dropped at this time were those which had been primarily aimed at the Anabaptist
heresy, which by 1563 had ceased to be of importance. Whatever the reason, the
dropping of this article had profound effect on English theology because it left
the door wide open to all sorts of speculations on the subject. During this
period, however, the generally accepted doctrine was that of eternal punishment.
The non-conformist groups as well as the Church of England preached the
doctrine. For example, Henry Smith (c. 1550-1591), a Puritan who was known as
the "silver-tongued preacher" whose sermons passed through at least seventeen
editions, said in one of them, "All the fires of hell leap upon his heart like a
stage, Thought calleth to Fear; Fear whistleth to Horror, Horror beckoneth to
Despair and saith, ’Come and help me torment this sinner.’ " The creedal
statements of the Reformed Churches were also written during this period and
contain several references to the subject. The Belgic Confession written in 1559
by Guido de Bres, in Article XXXVII "Of the Last Judgment" says, "And therefore
the consideration of this judgment, is justly terrible and dreadful to the
wicked and ungodly, but most desirable and comfortable to the righteous and the
elect: because then their full deliverance shall be perfected, and there they
shall receive the fruits of their labour and trouble which they have borne.
Their innocence shall be known to all, and they shall see the terrible vengeance
which God shall execute on the wicked, who most cruelly persecuted, oppressed
and tormented them in this world; and who shall be convicted by the testimony of
their own consciences, and being immortal, shall be tormented in that
everlasting fire, which is prepared for the devil and his angels." In the
Heidelberg Catechism, written by Olevianus and Ursinus in 1563 we read, "Q. 10.
Will God suffer such disobedience and rebellion to go unpunished? By no means:
but is terribly displeased with our original as well as actual sins; and will
punish them in his just judgment, temporally and eternally, as he hath declared,
’Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things, which are written in the
book of the law, to do them.’ "

"Q. 11. Is not God then also merciful? God is indeed merciful, but also just;
therefore his justice requires that sin, which is committed against the most
high majesty of God, be also punished with extreme, that is, with everlasting
punishment both of body and soul." The Seventeenth Century An indication of
prevalent thought in the seventeenth century is revealed to us by the following
examples of the works of otherwise unknown writers. A little known preacher
named Greenwood published a sermon in 1614 entitled Tormenting Tophet giving a
description of hell. This sermon was so popular that it reached fourteen
editions. In 1620 a book called Decker’s Dream gave a vivid description of hell.
Antonius Rusca made the statement that hell waxes at the center of the earth,
that the fire and serpents were material and that the fire produced coldness as
well as heat. John Drexel in his book on hell sought to bring to the imagination
the idea of eternity. He asked his readers to think of a million to the tenth
power number of years, and then he went on to say that this period is a second
of time in hell. Among his many other descriptions of eternity was this one:
Suppose one flea or ant drinks its fill from the ocean, in time the world would
become dry, but eternity would still not be ended. The English bishop, Jeremy
Taylor (1613-1667), in his Contemplations on the State of Man, which some think
was a translation of a Jesuit book, gives fifty pages to the description of the
sufferings in hell. He himself, however, seemed to waver in his thinking on the
subject. He writes, "The pains of the damned are infinitely too fiery to pass
lightly upon persons who cannot help themselves, and who, if they were helped
with clearer revelations, would have avoided it."19 "Concerning this doctrine of
theirs, so severe and yet so moderate, there is less to be objected than against
the supposed fancy of Origen; for it is strange consideration to suppose an
eternal torment to those to whom it was never threatened, to those who never
heard of Christ . . . " "It is certain that God’s mercies are infinite, and it
is also certain that the matter of eternal torments cannot be understood; and
when the schoolmen go about to reconcile the Divine justice to that severity,
and consider why God punishes eternally a temporal sin or a state of evil, they
speak variously and uncertainly, and unsatisfyingly."20 It is well to point out
that Jeremy Taylor is not here denying the fact of eternal punishment but rather
expressing his concern with the problem of special cases such as that of the
heathen who have never heard the gospel.21 Taylor goes on to speak of the
punishments of the wicked in the old traditional tone, recalling his
interpretation of the "second death," and explains it as meaning "a dying to all
felicity," a being "miserable for ever." The main English groups of
non-conformists were believers in eternal punishment. Christopher Love
(1608-1651), a Presbyterian martyr, wrote a treatise in 1651 called Heaven’s
Glory, Hell’s Terror (350 pp. 1653), in which he mentioned among other things
the idea that the elect will enjoy the spectacle of the torment of the lost.
John Bunyan (1628-1688) the famous Baptist allegorist also wrote about hell. In
his Last Remains, almost thirty-five pages are devoted to the subject. His Sighs
from Hell, or Groans of a Damned Soul went into twenty editions. Bunyan, in this
book, says that the following will go to hell: hunters, dancers, those who paint
their faces, those that follow plays and sports, singing drunkards, and such as
for fear of rain, or wind are loath to leave their chimney-corner and go to
church. An exception among the non-conformists seems to have been Peter Sterry
(d. 1672) who had tendencies toward universalism. However, other of his writings
seem to contradict this position. He probably had an influence on Maurice who
played an important part in the controversies on this subject later in English
history. The poetry of John Milton (1608-1674) contains vivid descriptions of
hell. For example:

"At once as far as angels ken he views The dismal situation waste and wild: A
dungeon horrible, on all sides round As one great furnace flamed, yet from those
flames No light, but rather darkness visible Serveal only to discover sight of
woe, Regions of sorrow, doleful shades, Where peace and rest can never dwell,
hope never comes That comes to all; but torture without end Still rages, and a
fiery deluge, fed With ever-burning sulphur unconsumed."22

Whether Milton thought of hell as being literally what he described it to be is
an unanswered question, but it is certain that the concept of hell which
emphasized its physical aspects was reinforced by Milton’s poetry.

Richard Baxter (1615-1691), one of the greatest English theologians and pastors,
in The Saints’ Everlasting Rest, has two chapters devoted entirely to the misery
of those who lose the blessing of everlasting rest. He lists as included in
their punishment the following: the loss of a personal perfection of the saints,
the loss of God himself, the loss of all delightful affections toward God, and
the loss of the blessed society of angels and glorified spirits. He states that
this loss will be aggravated by the fact that those who are lost will have their
understanding cleared and enlarged, their consciences brought to a true and
close application, their affections more lively and their memories strengthened.
He mentions as further cause for sorrow the fact that they will lose all those
things which they enjoyed in this world.

Baxter then speaks at length of the torments of hell itself. He shares the
extreme statements of his age on the subject, saying "The everlasting flames of
hell will not be thought too hot for the rebellious; and when they have there
burned through millions of ages, he will not repent him of the evil which is
befallen them. Woe to the soul that is thus set up as a butt, for the wrath of
the Almighty to shoot at; and as a bush that must burn in the flames of his
jealousy, and never be consumed."23 He also shared the strange idea, which is
prevalent in the history of thought on the subject, that Satan will be the
executioner of the divine wrath. He makes the very interesting statement, "They
were wont to think sermons and prayers long; how long then will they think these
endless torments."24 He also makes the following thought-provoking statements:
"Let me ask once more, if the wrath of God be so light, why did the Son of God
himself make so great a matter of it?"25 "This kind of preaching or writing is
the ready way to be hated; and the desire of applause is so natural, that few
delight in such a displeasing way. But consider, are these things true, or are
they not? If they were not true I would heartily join with thee against any that
fright people without a cause. But if these threatenings be the word of God,
what a wretch art thou, that wilt not hear it, and consider it."26 "Preaching
heaven and mercy to thee, is entreating thee to seek them and not reject them;
and preaching hell, is but to persuade thee to avoid it. If thou wert quite past
hope of escaping it, then were it in vain to tell thee of hell; but as long as
thou art alive, there is hope of the recovery, and therefore all means must be
used to awake thee from thy lethargy."27

Francois Fenelon (1651-1715) was an outstanding French mystic. In his Telemaque,
a book read throughout Europe, he states his conviction that the punishment of
hypocrites will be more severe than of those who murder their own mothers. Lewis
du Moulin, a professor of history at Oxford, wrote a treatise in 1680 in which
he sought to prove that not one in one hundred thousand people is saved.

There were also creedal statements made in the seventeenth century which
included articles on the subject. The Westminster Confession, still the official
creed of the Presbyterian churches, was written in 1646, and spoke of "others
foreordained unto everlasting death." The Larger Catechism, written at the same
time, stated that "The punishments of sin in the world to come are everlasting
separation from the comfortable presence of God, and most grievous torments in
soul and body, without intermission, in hell-fire forever." The Baptist
Confession of 1677, adopted by the General Assembly in London in 1689 said that
the lost "shall be cast into everlasting torments, and punished with everlasting
destruction." The closing years of the seventeenth century, also produced new
ideas which were very different from the orthodox positions that had been
prevalent in the past. For example, in England Coward taught that man utterly
perishes in the grave, but at the last day Christ will raise up the believers
again. This position was similar to that of the Psychopannychians against whom
Calvin had written a long time before. Many men were engaged on both sides of
the resulting controversy. The so-called Cambridge Platonists brought about a
revival of Universalism at this time. Benjamin Whichcote (1609-1683), one of
their leaders, was well acquainted with Peter Sterry, by whom he was probably
influenced. Some extracts from Whichcote’s Sermons (1698) will give some idea of
his thinking: "Hell arises out of a man’s self. Hell’s fuel is the guilt of a
man’s conscience." "Where there is wisdom and goodness in the assent all
punishment is for instruction, reformation, and bettering of the offender, for
example to by-standers, not for the revenge upon the party." The Eighteenth
Century The eighteenth century witnessed an increasing revolt against the
orthodox position. The peculiar doctrines of Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772)
contained lengthy descriptions of hell which are a combination of the most weird
ideas with some very penetrating thoughts on the subject. According to
Swedenborg, "Hell, the same as heaven, is divided into societies."28 "There are
three hells."29 Swedenborg believed that the Biblical words Devil, Satan, and
Lucifer are actually names for each of the three hells. As to those who inhabit
hell, "All who are in hells . . . are from the human race . . . . Those who have
gone there from the beginning of creation to this time amount to myriads of
myriads, and every one of them is a devil in accord with his opposition to the
Divine while he lived in the world."30 As to how men get to hell, "He (God)
casts no one into hell and is angry with no one."31 "Evil in man is hell in him,
for it is the same thing whether you say evil or hell . . . He is led into hell,
not by the Lord but by himself."32 The faces and bodies of spirits in the life
to come will be an exact expression of the inward being. "In general their faces
are hideous and void of life like those of corpses, the faces of some are black,
others fiery like torches, others disfigured with pimples, warts, and ulcers;
some seem to have no face, but in its stead something hairy or bony, etc."33

According to Swedenborg, it is misdirected love which is the cause of hell.
"These two loves, the love of self and the love of the world rule in the hells
and constitute the hells; as love to the Lord and love towards the neighbor rule
in the heavens and constitute the heavens."34 Picture to yourself a society of
such persons, all of whom love themselves alone."35 Infernal fire is the lust
and delight that springs from these two loves as their organs."36 He speaks of
the fact that there are restraints on evil in this life, such as that of law and
hope of gain, honor and reputation. But in the life to come these are all
removed and a man becomes what he really is internally. As to the position of
hell in the universe, according to Swedenborg the hells are in the lowest parts
of the spiritual world. "The hells are every where, both under the mountains,
hills and rocks and under the plains and valleys."37 "In the milder hells there
is an appearance of rude huts . . . In some of the hells there are nothing but
brothels . . . There are also deserts where all is barren and sandy."38 "In the
most remote hells in that quarter are those that had belonged to the Catholic
religion, so called, and that had wished to be worshipped as gods."39 "There are
likewise hells beneath hells. Some communicate with others by passages and more
by exhalations, and this is in exact accordance with the affinities of one kind
of one species of evil with others."40

Later in the eighteenth century, no less a person than William Law (1686-1761),
best known for his Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life, made the statement
that "As for the perfection of all human nature . . . I fully believe it."
Joseph Butler (1692-1752), Bishop of Durham, in his famous Analogy also
expressed some unorthodox ideas. He was not a universalist, but left room for
some to obtain salvation in the world to come. The pertinent statement is:
"Virtue, to borrow the Christian allusion, is militant here, and various
untoward accidents contribute to its being often overborne; but it may combat
with greater advantage here after, and prevail completely, and enjoy its
consequent rewards in some future states. Neglected as it is, perhaps unknown,
perhaps despised and oppressed here, there may be scenes in eternity lasting
enough, and in every way adapted to afford it a sufficient sphere of action; and
a sufficient sphere for the natural consequences of it to follow in fact . . .
And, one might add, that suppose all this advantageous tendency of virtue to
become effective amongst one or more orders of vicious creatures in any distant
scene or period throughout the universal kingdom of God; this happy effect of
virtue would have a tendency, by way of example, and possibly in other ways, to
amend those of them who are capable of amendment and being recovered to a just
sense of virtue. If our notions of the plan of Providence were enlarged in any
sense proportionable to what late discoveries have enlarged our views with
respect to the material world, representations of this kind would not appear
absurd or extravagant."41 But the century also had its able advocates of the
traditional belief. In 1744, Matthew Horbury wrote his Inquiry into the
Scripture Doctrine Concerning the Duration of Future Punishment. He wrote this
as the orthodox answer to the peculiar views of Whiston. Certainly one of the
most fervent preachers of the doctrine of hell was the very influential Jonathan
Edwards (1703-1758). He shared the belief that hell would be a source of
happiness to the saints. In fact, he said that the doctrine of election of
sinners to eternal damnation was "exceedingly pleasant, bright and sweet." In
his famous sermon Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God (published in Boston in
1741 and frequently republished) — he tries to get his listeners to imagine
being in a great furnace, where the pain is much greater than that experienced
when accidentally touching a coal, to imagine what that would be like for a
quarter of an hour, how after one minute how awful it must be to think of
fourteen more, to imagine an hour of such suffering, twenty-four hours, one
year, 1000 years and after millions and millions of ages to be no nearer to the
end. Of Edwards’ statements, James Orr says, "There is hardly anything in
literature more appalling, for example, than the sermon of Jonathan Edwards on
this subject, nor is it easy to explain how so spiritual and gracious a man —
one so penetrated by the thought of the love of God — could allow himself to
write as he did of the dealings of the Almighty even with the condemned."41

There are those however who feel Edwards is misunderstood. For example, F. H.
Foster says that those who severely criticize Edwards "fail to regard the
character and condition of the persons to whom it was preached."42 Strong says,
"It is sometimes fancied that Jonathan Edwards, when, in his sermon ’Sinners in
the Hands of an Angry God,’ he represented the sinner as a worm shriveling in
the eternal fire, supposed that hell consists mainly of such physical torments.
But this is a misinterpretation of Edwards. As he did not fancy heaven
essentially to consist in streets of gold or pearly gates, but rather in
holiness and communion with Christ, of which these are the symbols, so he did
not regard hell as consisting in fire and brimstone, but rather in the
unholiness and separation from God of a guilty and accusing conscience, of which
the fire and brimstone are symbols. He used the material imagery because he
thought that this best answered to the methods of Scripture. He probably went
beyond the simplicity of the Scripture statements, and did not sufficiently
explain the spiritual meaning of symbols he used; but we are persuaded that he
neither understood them literally himself, nor meant them to be so understood by
others."43

Edwards’ disciple, Samuel Hopkins (1721-1803), stated that for every degree of
misery the damned feel, the happiness of saints shall be increased millions of
millions of degrees. The Roman Catholic Church also produced some very
descriptive literature in this era. The book of the Jesuit F. Pinamonti was
translated from the Italian. It was a meditation for each day of the week
entitled Hell Opened to Christians. It was illustrated with seven vivid
woodcuts. It was one of the many books illustrating the demons enjoying their
work as torturers. In his written description, Pinamonti goes so far as to
analyze the awful odor of hell as a combination of the stench of all the filth
on earth plus that of burning brimstone and that of decaying carcasses. Then he
refers the reader to Saint Bonaventura for further details.

Chapter 6 || Table of Contents 1. Heinrich Quistorp, Calvin’s Doctrine of the
Last Things (Lutterworth Press, London, 1955), p. 11.

2. In a letter to Hansen von Rechenberg in 1522.

3. Luther, Luther’s Works (Weimar Edition), 10, I, 111, 22.

4. Quistorp, Op. Cit., p. 107.

5. Ibid., p. 12.

6. Luther, Op. Cit., pp. 35, 478, 12.

7. Quistorp, Op. Cit., p. 98.

8. Calvin, The Institutes, Book III, Chapter XXV, Section XII.

9. Calvin, Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists (Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1949, Grand Rapids), Trans. by W. Pringle, I. 200.

10. Ibid., p. 384.

11. Ibid., II, 124.

12. Ibid., III, 182.

13. Ibid., II, 188, 189.

14. Ibid., pp. 190, 191.

15. Calvin, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (J. Whetham, Philadelphia,
1836), Trans. F. Gibson, p. 292.

16. Calvin, Commentary on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians
(Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, 1948), Trans. J. Pringle, II, 33,
34.

17. Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians and
Thessalonians (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, 1948), Trans. J.
Pringle, p. 318.

18. Quistorp, Op. Cit., p. 191.

19. Works (ed. Heber), vi, pp. 198, 199.

20. Ibid., pp. 47, 48.

21. See Appendix II.

22. J. Milton, The Portable Milton, edit. D. Bush, "Paradise Lost" Book I, Line
59-69 (Viking Press, New York, 1949), p. 234.

23. Richard Baxter, The Saints’ Everlasting Rest (Philadelphia, W.A. Leary and
Co.), p. 98.

24. Ibid., p. 102.

25. Ibid., p. 103.

26. Ibid., p. 104.

27. Ibid., p. 105.

28. E. Swedenborg, Heaven and its Wonders and Hell (New York, The American
Swedenborg Printing and Publishing Society, 1922), (First published in Latin,
London, 1785), p. 505.

29. Ibid., p. 506.

30. Ibid., p. 507.

31. Ibid., p. 509.

32. Ibid., p. 511.

33. Ibid., p. 518.

34. Ibid., p. 520.

35. Ibid., p. 526.

36. Ibid., p. 534.

37. Ibid., p. 551.

38. Ibid., p. 553, 554.

39. Ibid., p. 555.

40. Ibid., p. 557.

41. Joseph Butler, Analogy, Part i. c. 3.

42. James Orr, The Progress of Dogma 43. Strong, Op. Cit., p. 1035.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 7: 06 POST-REFORMATION THOUGHT
========================================================================

Post-Reformation Thought (The Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries) The Nineteenth
Century The nineteenth century witnessed an increasing rebellion against the
doctrine of eternal punishment. As Orr says, in his Progress of Dogma, "All this
of necessity provoked a reaction. We see already a decided weakening of the
doctrine in Arminians like Limborch. Deism and the easy-going theology of the
illuminist period, with their lighter views of sin, protested against the
orthodox view. Then the stronger intellect and conscience of the nineteenth
century took up the opposition. The general enlargement of knowledge, the better
acquaintance with other civilizations and religions, reflection on the
unnumbered millions of the heathen world who had never heard of Christ, the
stronger feeling of the complexity of the problem of responsibility awakened by
discussions on heredity, operated in the same direction of fostering doubt and
provoking inquiry."1 The influential German theologian, Friedrich Schleiermacher
(1768-1834), was a universalist. In one of his books, he says, "Through the
power of Redemption there will result in the future a general restoration of all
human souls."2 In another book he gives the following reasons for his position:
"(a) Christ’s words in Matthew 25:46, Mark 9:44, John 5:29, are figurative. (b)
The passage in 1 Corinthians 15:25-26 teaches that all evil shall be overcome.
(c) Misery cannot increase, but must decrease. If it is bodily misery, custom
habituates to endurance, and there is less and less suffering instead of more
and more. If, on the other hand, it is mental suffering, this is remorse. The
damned suffer more remorse in hell than they do upon earth. This proves that
they are better men in hell than upon earth. They cannot therefore grow more
wretched in hell, but grow less so as they grow more remorseful. (d) The
sympathy which the saved have with their former companions, who are in hell,
will prevent the happiness of the saved. The world of mankind, and also the
whole universe, is so connected that the endless misery of a part will destroy
the happiness of the remainder."3 Schleiermacher also objected to the
disproportion between the finite offense and the infinite punishment. He felt
that if the whole family of God were not restored, it would be a defeat of the
divine purpose. The German Mediating School in general questioned eternal
punishment and considered a further chance of salvation after death as possible.

Horace Bushnell (1802-1876) believed that the capacity of wicked men diminished
by a natural law until they might possibly waste away completely at some remote
time. Lyman Abbott (1835-1922) a Massachusetts pastor, taught annihilation. The
Andover School taught continued probation, at least for those who have not
rejected the gospel.

Tennyson’s In Memoriam (1849) probably did more than the writings of any
theologian of his time to break down belief in the historic doctrine of eternal
punishment and to popularize universalism. Some of his lines which apply to the
subject are:

"That nothing walks with aimless feet; That no one life shall be destroyed, Or
cast as rubbish to the void, When God hath made the pile complete;

Behold, we know not anything;

I can but trust that good shall fall At last — far off — at last, to all, And
every winter change to spring. The wish, that of the living whole No life may
fail beyond the grave, Derives it not from what we have The likest God within
the soul.

I stretch lame hands of faith, and grope, And gather dust and chaff, and call To
what I feel is Lord of all, And faintly trust the larger hope." At this time
there was a great deal of controversy in England revolving around the so-called
"Damnatory Clause" in the Athanasian Creed. The clause is Article 43 and reads
as follows: "And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and
they that have done evil into everlasting fire." This is followed by the
concluding article, Number 44, "This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man
believe faithfully, he cannot be saved." The leaders of the Broad Church
movement in the Church of England rejected the traditional doctrine. Richard
Whately (1787-1863), Archbishop of Dublin, who was heterodox with regard to
other doctrines as well, held to a position of annihilationism or conditional
immortality. F. D. Maurice (1805-1872) emphasized the idea that the New
Testament word for "eternal" referred to quality rather than duration. As a
result of his casting "an atmosphere of doubt about the word ’eternal’ " he was
expelled from his position in King’s College. He himself, however, denied that
he had intended to cast such doubt, and denied being a universalist. H.B. Wilson
(1803-1888) expressed the hope that infants would grow up after death and that
the perverted would be restored. He was brought to court for his larger hope. In
considering the case, the Judicial Committee referred to the withdrawal of the
Forty-second Article to which we have already referred. The controversy
continued sporadically, and when the Episcopal Church in the United States
separated from that in England it ratified the Prayer Book in 1789, but in so
doing deliberately omitted the Athanasius Creed as a standard of faith. In
England, Dr. Hey and Dr. Thomas Arnold fought vigorously against the Damnatory
Clause, and the orthodox side was represented by Dr. Lidden and Dr. E.B. Pusey
(1800-1882). The latter’s book What is of Faith as to Everlasting Punishment
(1880), is one of the classics in defense of the orthodox position. In reality,
however, Pusey practically depopulated hell by stressing the fact that many are
saved whom we do not recognize as saved, and that many turn to God in their
dying moments without our knowing it. In a sermon Everlasting Punishment,
preached in Oxford University in 1864, Pusey said, "Gather in one in your mind
an assembly of all those men or women from whom whether in history or in fiction
your memory most shrinks . . . Conceive the fierce fiery eyes of hate, spite,
phrenzied rage, ever fixed on thee, glaring on thee, looking thee through and
through with hate . . . "

Frederick William Farrar (1831-1903) replied to Pusey in the book Eternal Hope,
the most important of his many volumes of sermons, published in 1877, and in the
book Mercy and Judgment in 1881. Farrar was not a Universalist, but contended
that there was room for repentance beyond the grave, and that eventually the
majority of men will be saved. He admitted the possibility of some being lost.
"I cannot tell whether some souls may not resist God for ever, and therefore may
not forever be shut out from His presence, and I believe that to be without God
is ’hell’; and that in this sense there is a hell beyond the grave; and that for
any soul to fall even for a time into this condition, though it be through its
own hardened impenitence and resistance of God’s grace, is a very awful and
terrible prospect; and that in this sense there may be for some souls an endless
hell."4 One interesting statement that Farrar made on the subject was, "I would
here, and now, and kneeling on my knees, ask that I might die as the beasts that
perish, and for ever cease to be, rather than that my worst enemy should endure
the Hell described by Tertullian, or Minutius Felix, or Jonathan Edwards, or Dr.
Pusey, or Mr. Furniss or Mr. Moody, or Mr. Spurgeon, for one single year."
Actually, this extremely grotesque concept of hell was not held by those on
either side of this controversy.

There were also other German theologians besides the disciples of Schleiermacher
who denied eternal punishment in this period. Carl Nitzsch taught
restorationism. He said, "The thought of an eternal condemnation (Mark 9:44;
Matthew 25:41; Matthew 25:46) is so far a necessary one that there can be in
eternity no constrained holiness, no happy unholiness. But there is no ground
for saying that the truth of God’s word of God’s kingdom necessitates the
existence of beings eternally condemned, or that God perpetuates any personal
existence only to deprive it of the possibility of becoming holy and therefore
happy."5 On the basis of 1 Peter 3:19, which mentions "preaching to the spirits
in prison," and Hebrews 11:39-40, "These received not the promises," he says.
"There are traces of a capacity in another state of existence for comprehending
salvation, and for a change and purification of minds": to which he later adds,
"It is the Apostolical view, that for those who were unable in this world to
know Christ in his truth and grace, there is a knowledge of the Redeemer in the
other state of existence which is never inoperative, but is either judicial or
quickening."

Hans Lassen Martensen (1808-1884), a Danish bishop, took a similar view. He
states, "The kingdom of the dead is a kingdom of subjectivity, a kingdom of calm
thought and self-fathoming, a kingdom of remembrance in the full sense of the
word, in such a sense, I mean, that the soul now enters into its own inmost
recesses, resorts to that which is the very foundation of life, the true
substratum and source of all existence. Hence arises the purgatorial nature of
this state . . . they continue spiritually to mould and govern themselves in
relation to the new manifestation of the Divine will now first presented to
their view."6

Richard Rothe (1799-1867) taught that the impenitent wicked would be
annihilated, that is, that there was for them an extinction of self
consciousness.7

Julius Muller (1801-1878) seems somewhat contradictory in his statements. His
general position, however, seems to be that he believed in hope beyond the
grave, but not in Universalism. He says, "The way of return to God is closed
against no one who does not close it against himself; therefore those who have
not yet closed it against themselves, in that the means of salvation, the
redemption in Christ, has not yet been offered to them, will indisputably
hereafter, when beyond the bounds of this earthly life, be placed in a condition
to enter upon this way of return to God if they choose. And this of course also
refers to those to whom, although belonging to the outer sphere of the Christian
Church, the real nature of the Gospel has nevertheless not been presented;
indeed we may venture to hope that between death and the judgment of the world
many deep misunderstandings, by which numbers were withheld from the
appropriation of the truth, will be cleared away."8 He also states, however,
"The doctrine of an universal restoration is decisively excluded by the
declaration of Christ under our consideration respecting the blasphemy of the
Holy Ghost."9

Isaak August Dorner (1809-1884) in his Christian Doctrine, comes to these
conclusions, "We must be content with saying that the ultimate fate of
individuals, namely, whether all will attain the blessed goal or not remains
veiled in mystery." "There may be those eternally damned, so far as the abuse of
freedom continues eternally, but in this case man has passed into another class
of beings."

Frank Delitzsch (1850-1922) did not believe that immortality is inherent in
human nature but that it is a future gift of God, yet he considered annihilation
as an extreme improbability. He believed in opportunity for salvation for the
dead up until the judgment day, but not thereafter.

Samuel Cox (1826-1893), an English Baptist, was one of the leading universalists
of the time. His Salvator Mundi, or Is Christ the Saviour of all Men? a defense
of restorationism, was his best known book. He also wrote The Larger Hope, a
Sequel to Salvator Mundi (1883). He stated very dogmatically, "While our
brethren hold the Redemption of Christ to extend only to the life that now is,
and to take effect only on some men, we maintain to the contrary, that it
extends to the life to come, and must take effect on all men at the last." In
1877, Cox made this statement: "Few of the more thoughtful and cultivated
preachers of the Gospel now hold the doctrine of everlasting torment."

Whether or not this last statement was true we hold to be questionable. John
Henry Newman (1801-1896) certainly held that belief. He said in a sermon in
1871, "The poor soul struggles and wrestles in the grasp of the mighty demon
which has hold of it and whose every touch is torment. ’Oh, atrocious!’ it
shrieks in agony."

John Charles Ryle (1816-1900), Bishop of Liverpool, certainly believed in it. He
said, "Let others hold their peace about hell if they will — I dare not do so. I
see it plainly in Scripture, and I must speak of it. I fear that thousands are
on that broad road that leads to it, and I would fain arouse them to a sense of
the peril before them. What would you say of the man who saw his neighbor’s
house in danger of being burned down, and never raise the cry ’Fire’? Call it
bad taste, if you like, to speak of hell. Call it charity to make things
pleasant and speak smoothly, and soothe men with a constant lullaby of peace.
From such notions of taste and charity may I ever be delivered. My notion of
charity is to warn men plainly of their danger. My notion of taste is to declare
all the counsel of God. If I never spoke of hell, I should think I had kept back
something that was profitable, and should look on myself as an accomplice of the
devil."

Charles Haddon Spurgeon assuredly believed the doctrine. In a sermon, The
Bridgeless Gulph, he stated: It is labor in the fire, but no ease, no peace, no
sleep, no calm, no quiet; everlasting storm; eternal hurricane; unceasing
tempest. In the worst diseases there are some respites . . . there is no peace
in hell’s torment." He once delivered a sermon entitled Heaven and Hell to an
audience of twelve thousand persons at Hackney. Some impression of how Spurgeon
preached on the subject may be gathered from the following quotations from that
sermon: "The second part of my text is heart breaking . . . Here is a dreary
task to my soul, because there are gloomy words here."10 "There are some
ministers who never mention anything about hell. I heard of a minister who once
said to his congregation, ’If you do not love the Lord Jesus Christ, you will be
sent to that place which it is not polite to mention.’ He ought not to have been
allowed to preach again, I am sure, if he could not use plain words."11 "The
angel, binding you hand and foot, holds you one single moment over the mouth of
the chasm. He bids you look down — down — down. There is no bottom; and you hear
coming up from the abyss, sullen moans, and hollow groans, and screams of
tortured ghosts."12 "Ye are to be cast ’into outer darkness;’ ye are to be put
in the place where there will be no hope. For, by ’light’, in Scripture, we
understand ’hope’; and you are to be put ’into outer darkness’, where there is
no light — no hope."13 "They are forever — forever — forever — lost! On every
chain in hell, there is written ’forever.’ In the fires, there blaze out the
words, ’forever.’ "14 In a sermon, God the All-Seeing One, Spurgeon says, "Where
hell is, and what its miseries, we know not; except ’through a glass darkly,’ we
have never seen the invisible things of horror. That land of terror is a land
unknown, God has put somewhere, far on the edge of his dominions, a fearful lake
that burneth with fire and brimstone."15 "Into that place we dare not look.
Perhaps it would not be possible for any man to get a fair idea of the torments
of the lost, without at once becoming mad."16 "Whilst they lie in their chains,
they look upward, and they see ever that fearful vision of the Most High; the
dreadful hands that grasp the thunderbolts, the dreadful lips that speak the
thunders, and the fearful eyes that flash the flames that burn their souls, with
horrors deeper than despair."17 In another sermon, Woes to Come, Spurgeon says,
"You cannot compare the pains of this life with the agonies to be endured
hereafter. Could all the misery that ever startled the keepers of our hospitals
be conceived, it could not convey the least idea of the pains of the spirits
that are doomed to dwell in eternal fire and everlasting burning. The woe,
however, will act its terrible part on the soul. The memory aghast — hope and
fear, thoughts and imaginations, conscience and judgment, all will be racked,
every one be stretched on a bed of fire, every nerve strained to its utmost,
every vein made a road for the hot feet of pain to travel on."18 "Many of you
are hanging over the mouth of hell by a solitary plank, and that plank is
rotten! O think, when you come into the place of torment, what will you say then
as you lie in the mighty heat?"19 One can well imagine what an impression such
preaching left on the people as well as what a reaction it produced in the minds
of others.

Even liberal thinkers at this time believed in a form of hell. Schilder gives as
examples James Martineau (1805-1900), in Types of Ethical Theory, Theodore
Kaftan, R. Seeburg, and Girgensohn. Shilder also quotes Bahels as saying,
"Believe me, people, that eternity isn’t going to be as easy as you think it is,
that eternity is going to be difficult."

New confessional statements were less plentiful in the nineteenth century, but
an important one, the Wesleyan Methodist Catechism, states:

"What sort of place is hell? A dark and bottomless pit, full of fire and
brimstone.

How will the wicked be punished there? Their bodies will be tormented with fire,
and their souls by a sense of the wrath of God.

How long will their torments last? The torments of hell will last for ever and
ever." This passage, however, was toned down somewhat in 1925. In the nineteenth
century there were those who could not subscribe to any of the major theses
regarding the subject of the fate of the wicked after death. For example, E.H.
Plumptre (1821-1891), after setting forth what he believed to be the teachings
of the New Testament supporting universalism, and also those supporting eternal
punishment, says, "I do not attempt to formulate a reconciliation of the two
contrasted views which I have endeavored to set forth faithfully, as each of
them finding an adequate, or at least an apparent, support in the teaching of
the New Testament. We seem landed, as in other questions, God’s fore-knowledge
and man’s free-will, God’s predestination and man’s responsibility, in the
paradox of seemingly contradictory conclusions. I do not say that any such
reconciliation is for our faculties and under our conditions of thought
possible. We must, it may be, be content to rest in the belief that each
presents a partial aspect of the truth which may one day be revealed in its
completeness. We may at least tolerate, as the Church of the third and fourth
centuries tolerated, those who hold either to the exclusion of the other. We may
endeavor to appropriate to ourselves whatever is profitable in the way of
encouragement or warning, of hope or fear, in each."20 One wonders, however, how
there can be any real encouragement or any real warning in such a sea of
uncertainty as that suggested by such a position. In general, the Roman Catholic
Church continued to propagate an extremely physical version of hell. Bishop
Challoner in 1843 said, "The very fire that burns there contrary to the natural
property of that element is black and darksome and affords no light." "The
dismal music with which the poor wretches shall be forever entertained in this
melancholy abode which shall be no other than dreadful curses and blasphemies,
etc." Father Furniss, whose Books for Children are said to have sold four
million copies, gives this description of a child in hell in Book X, "The Sight
of Hell": "The little child is in this red-hot oven. Hear how it screams to come
out. See how it turns and twists itself about in the fire. It hurts its head
against the roof of the oven. It stamps its little feet on the floor of the
oven." He also says, "Little child, if you go to hell there will be a devil at
your side to strike you. He will go on striking you every minute for ever and
ever without stopping." The Twentieth Century

We now turn to our own century. Within the Protestant Church, there are three
main groups: those who believe in eternal punishment, those who believe in
universalism, and those who hold to annihilationism. These positions will be
discussed in subsequent chapters. We conclude our historical study with a
summary of the present day Roman Catholic teaching, and that of neo-orthodoxy.
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the location of hell is unimportant. Her
theologians say that the nature of the punishment is twofold. There is the pain
of loss (poena damni) and the pain of sense (poena sensus). The first is the
worst part of the suffering of hell; it consists in the fact that the damned are
deprived of the highest good, the vision of God. The second part of the
punishment comes from wicked passions, remorse, despair, and external
circumstances. The Roman Catholic Church has never defined officially whether or
not the fires of hell are literal flames or not, and therefore there is a
difference of opinion at that point. The Neo-orthodox are here, as in all other
doctrines, paradoxical in their position. In a recent book, "Eternal Hope," Emil
Brunner (1889-1966) discusses the subject.21 He points out the necessity for a
final judgment, else God’s relationship to the world would become irrelevant.
But Brunner goes on to say: "Yet in the repugnance to the traditional
interpretation of judgment, with its antithesis of the blessed and accursed — so
familiar to us in medieval art — there comes to expression a highly significant
insight even though it be perhaps only by way of dim surmise. This static
symmetry picturing the two opposites, apparently in complete conformity with the
words of Jesus about a last universal judgment, is somehow essentially false.
While the picture-symbol shows inevitably this symmetry, the intention of the
words of Jesus is quite different. The picture suggests: there are these two
alternatives, the one and the other, the salvation of the blessed, the damnation
of the accursed; but the Word of Jesus is a summons calling for a decision, a
Word exhorting to penitence and promising grace. In contrast to the plastic
representation, the living Word just does not know this symmetry — notice the
linguistically unsymmetical treatment of those on the left hand and those on the
right. The fundamental intention of the Word of Jesus is utterly asymmetrical
and anti-static. It is a dynamic Word, a Word implying God’s movement towards
Him. The meaning is not: these are the two realities. Rather it is: come forth
from perdition unto salvation."

Brunner goes on to point out that in his opinion the purpose of the Biblical
teaching of the final judgment is not to produce a sense of security in the
hearts of the impious.

He then says: "It is therefore not surprising that the doctrine of forgiving
Grace — the doctrine of justification — finds its crown in a proclamation of
universal redemption. God wills that all men should be saved and come to the
knowledge of the truth. ’For it pleased the Father that He, Christ, should
reconcile all to Himself through the blood of His Cross, whether it be things on
earth or things in heaven.’ ’To Him, Christ, has He given a name that is above
every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, and tongue confess
that Jesus Christ is Lord to the honor of God the Father.’ That is the revealed
Will of God and the plan for the world which He discloses, a plan of universal
salvation, of gathering all things into Christ. We hear not one word in the
Bible of a dual plan, a plan of salvation and its polar opposite. The Will of
God has but one point, it is unambiguous and positive. It has one aim, not two."

Brunner then continues by stating that because of the sovereignty of God no one
can ultimately resist Him. He considers that the fact of hell would mean an
incomplete victory for an omnipotent God, which is to him unthinkable.

Brunner goes on to say: "Thus it is understandable that the aim not to obscure
this unmistakable ground-tone of Biblical revelation by any subordinate
harmonies leads to the attempt to qualify all affirmations about the last
judgment by making the latter an interim affair after which alone that which is
truly the ultimate will come. Hence the expressions by which the New Testament
emphasizes apparently the finality of the last judgment and of the damnation of
the reprobate are so interpreted as to impart to judgment the character of a
transitional stage, of a pedagogic cleansing process. Aionios does not mean
eternal, but only eschatological; the inextinguishable fire, the worm, that
dieth not, the apoleia, the destruction, the second death, etc., all these quite
unequivocal expressions in themselves are subjected to such a protracted process
of exegetical chemistry that they lose the definiteness of their ultimate
character . . .

"What then is our conclusion to be — the word concerning judgment and
separation, heaven and hell, or the message of universal redemption? Both
aspects remain juxtaposed in their harsh incompatibility. We cannot even assign
them to their respective witnesses. They stand in the same epistle, in fact in
the very same chapter. And the one, by its very absoluteness, logically excludes
the other. Which of them is the ultimately valid point of view?

"Our answer is: both voices are the Word of God. But God’s Word — and this we
must repeat over and over again to the point of satiety — is a Word of
challenge, not of doctrine."

After considering such words we are forced to conclude that here we have what
appears to be double talk which, however, lands us in as complete a universalism
as any position which ignores judgment completely. Brunner’s concept of God’s
sovereignty evidently destroys the meaning of human decision. Here we have also
a clear proof that in spite of his lip service to the Bible, the neo-orthodox
theologian is basically subjective in his interpretation. While Brunner appears
to be basically a universalist, he severely criticizes Barth for his apparent
universalism. He disagrees with Barth’s position because he says it would mean
that "we cannot speak at all about being lost. There is then no possibility of
damnation, and therefore no divine final judgment."22 Brunner considers Barth’s
position at this point to be absolutely opposed to the teaching of the New
Testament.

Reinhold Niebuhr’s (1892-1971) position is at least expressed more simply and is
apparently a little closer to the historic position of the Christian faith. A
few quotations from his writings will give us some idea of his attitude:23 "It
is unwise for Christians to claim any knowledge of either the furniture of
heaven or the temperature of hell." "Literalistic conceptions of the allegedly
everlasting fires of hell have frequently discredited the idea of a final
judgment." "It is prudent to accept the testimony of the heart, which affirms
the fear of judgment."

Karl Barth (1886-1968) is almost impossible to understand at this point. He
holds to the universal election of all men in Christ. He believes in the
absolute sovereignty of God and seeks to avoid the slightest trace of synergism.
He believed that the covenant embraces all, the only difference among men being
that all do not yet know of this saving fact. At the same time he refuses to go
on to the doctrine of apokatastasis (the reconciliation of all men). How he can
hold to the one without the other is impossible to understand. On the one hand
he speaks of the answer of unbelief to the gospel message as "fatally
dangerous," and on the other hand he speaks of the reality of unbelief as
ontologically impossible. According to Barth, we are not to concern ourselves
with this paradox, for he says, "To reflect today with unseemly seriousness
about the possibility of the eternal damnation of this one and that one, and
tomorrow with an equally unseemly cheerfulness about the ultimate reconciliation
of one and all is one thing: another (and that is the charge that has been given
to the Christian Church) is to regard oneself obliged to witness with Christian
word and deed to Jesus Christ as Lord not only but as the Redeemer of the world
and, as such, its future."24 This is still not a satisfactory explanation, and
once again we are left with the feeling that we are confronted with double-talk,
and basically with universalism.25

Paul Tillich (1886-1965) also comes close to universalism. In fact, D.E. Roberts
says, speaking of Tillich, "By means of his doctrine of participation, he
arrives at a form of universalism."26 Tillich’s position will be clarified when
the final volume of his Systematic Theology is published.

Another influential thinker of our own day, Nicholas Berdyaev (1874-1948), an
existentialist within Russian Orthodoxy, has much to say on the subject of
hell.27 He states that the modern rejection of hell makes life too easy and
superficial. On the other hand he feels that belief in hell makes moral life
meaningless because all that man does out of fear of hell and not out of the
love of God has no religious significance. He says that if hell exists,
disinterested love of God is impossible. Therefore belief in hell turns men into
hedonists and utilitarians. However, it is easy to deny hell only if men deny
freedom and personality. According to Berdayaev, hell is necessary not for the
triumph of justice but to prevent forcing men into heaven. On the other hand,
for him it is impossible to reconcile the idea that God created the world if he
foresaw hell. To admit hell would be to deny God. Hell is subjective, not
objective, it means complete self-centeredness, it is a denial of eternity, it
seems endless in subjective experience. If the light of God ceases, torment of
hell ceases, and there will be return to non-being. Divine light is the source
of torments because it is a reminder of man’s true calling. Hell is not
inflicted by God, but by man himself. The wholeness of personality disappears in
hell in consequence of self absorption. The "wicked" create hell for themselves,
the "good" for others. Berdyaev believes that the doctrine of eternal punishment
is based on gospel texts without consideration for the metaphorical. He thinks
that the new Christian consciousness is worried about the gospel words about
hell. However, if out of pity we admit the universal nature of salvation, we
must deny human freedom. Freedom demands hell, but rebels against it, this
antimony is indissoluble. There is no justice in punishing by eternal torments,
since sins are committed in time. "True believers" send "heretics" to hell in
accordance with human, not divine justice. Hell is nothing other than complete
separation from God. "The horror is to have my fate left in my own hands." "If
there is no Christ and no change of heart connected with Christ, hell in one
form or another is inevitable." "There was a time when the intimidating idea of
hell retained the herd-man within the church; but now this idea can only hinder
people from entering the church." Berdyaev’s final conclusion: "A higher and
maturer consciousness cannot accept the old-fashioned idea of hell; but a
light-hearted sentimental optimistic rejection of it is equally untenable. Hell
unquestionably exists . . . but it . . . is temporal." Berdyaev’s position is
therefore: although the way of the sinner is exceedingly hard, the final result
is annihilation.

Very recently, the first book on the subject in many years written by a well
known author was published. John Sutherland Bonnell is the author, and his book
is entitled Heaven and Hell. However, only one chapter deals with hell. In this
chapter Bonnell summarizes the three main positions. He describes the doctrine
of everlasting punishment in a less favorable light than the other two
positions, but his final conclusion is: "Which, then, of these three concepts of
the fate of the impenitent shall we accept? Happily, we are not compelled to
choose any one of them, for none has the right to demand our exclusive
allegiance. In this matter, as in many another, the Christian is entitled to
maintain an open mind. There are points of merit and demerit in all three of
them. Our wisest course, as we contemplate this awful mystery, is to leave the
issue in the hands of a just and merciful God."28 In concluding the historical
portion of our study, here is a brief summary of the trends which have
manifested themselves down through the centuries with regard to the doctrine
under consideration. The Church Fathers held various opinions regarding future
punishment, but most of them favored the idea of eternal punishment. The
theologians of the Middle Ages were unanimous regarding eternal punishment, and
in general presented it in very extreme forms. The Reformers believe in the
doctrine, as did both Protestants and Roman Catholics for some time after the
Reformation. In the eighteenth century a rebellion against the doctrine started.
Caused in part by the extreme forms in which the doctrine was sometimes
propagated by its adherents, this rebellion swelled into a mighty revolt in the
nineteenth century, a revolt which continues to the present day. At the same
time, many continued and still continue to hold the traditional doctrine,
although rarely in the grotesque forms in which it was held during the Middle
Ages.

Chapter 7 || Table of Contents 1. Orr, Progress of Dogma, p. 347.

2. F. Schleiermacher, Der Christl. Glaube, ii, p. 506.

3. F. Schleiermacher, Glaubenslehre, 163, Anhang.

4. F.W. Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, p. 485.

5. Carl Nitzsch, Christliche Lehre, p. 376.

6. H. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, p. 460.

7. R. Rothe, Dogmatics, II, ii 46-49, 124-131.

8. Julius Muller, On the Christian Doctrine of Sin, p. 483.

9. Ibid., p. 481.

10. C. H. Spurgeon, Spurgeon’s Sermons, I. (Zondervan Publishing House, Grand
Rapids, Michigan), 309.

11. Ibid., p. 309.

12. Ibid., p. 313.

13. Ibid., p. 314.

14. Ibid., p. 314.

15. Ibid., IV, p. 166.

16. Ibid., p. 166.

17. Ibid., p. 167.

18. Ibid., XIII, 96.

19. Ibid., p. 97.

20. E.H. Plumptre, The Spirits in Prison (London, Isbister and Co., 1898).

21. Emil Brunner, Eternal Hope (Translated by Harold Knight, Philadelphia, The
Westminster Press, 1954).

22. E. Brunner, Dogmatik, I, 376.

23. Reinhold Niebuhr, The Nature and Destiny of Man, Vol. II Human Destiny (New
York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1943), p. 294.

24. K. Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik, IV 1, p. 129.

25. Note: For a thorough discussion of Barth’s position see G.C. Berkouwer, The
Triumph of Grace in the Theology of Karl Barth, and especially Chapter X, "The
Universality of the Triumph" (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1956).

26. G. W. Kegley, and R.W. Bretall, edit., The Theology of Paul Tillich
(Macmillan Co., New York, 1952), David E. Roberts "Tillich’s Doctrine of Man,"
p. 129.

27. N. Berdyaev, The Destiny of Man (Charles Scribners’ Sons, New York, 1937),
p. 338f.

28. J.S. Bonnell, Heaven and Hell (Abingdon Press, New York, 1956), p. 40.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 8: 07 DENIALS AND THEIR ANSWERS
========================================================================

Denials and Their Answers In the preceding chapter we have noted several
positions which stand in opposition to the doctrine of eternal punishment.
Basically they can be summed up under two headings: universalism and
annihilation. At this point we shall consider each of these positions and point
out the fallacies in the arguments used to support them.

Universalism A simple statement of this doctrine is that those who hold it
believe that sooner or later all will be saved. They believe in an opportunity
for salvation beyond this life which will eventually be completely successful.
It must be acknowledged that there are also those who believe that many or all
men will have a chance to be saved in the life to come, but that not all will be
saved.

There are several arguments used by the universalists: a. Scripture proof. They
hold that certain passages teach universalism. For example, they refer to Acts
3:21, "Whom the heaven must receive until the time of restitution of all things,
which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world
began"; John 12:32, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men
unto me"; and Romans 11:32, "For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that
he might have mercy upon all." But Mackintosh,1 who obviously desires to avoid
the doctrine of eternal punishment if possible, says, "In the logical discussion
just noted — Fairbairn is an exception — the question is generally argued as one
of NT interpretation. The present writer does not think that hopeful. He sees no
ground for challenging the old doctrine on exegetical lines. Words often applied
to the universalist hope — apokatastasis, ’restitution of all things,’ Acts 3:21
(cf. Matthew 17:11, Acts 1:6) — do not really bear the supposed meaning. One
passage teaches probation after death (1 Peter 3:19), but it hardly falls within
the limits of this article. Eternal punishment had come to be the doctrine of
the synagogue, and it passed into the NT with perhaps even sharper definition,
as a witness to the unspeakable evil of sin. True, the doctrine was not
rigorously formulated, and it is a question among interpreters whether St.
Paul’s teaching is eternal punishment or rather a certain type of conditional
immortality doctrine. But generally the NT is clear, even the language used by
Christ; although we note that what is freshest and most personal is our Lord’s
words (Luke 12:47-48) goes to modify the dreadful wholesale dogma, and
foreshadows, at however remote a time, the ultimate challenging of the letter of
this article of the theological creed. Again, as a matter of exegesis, we cannot
claim either the Johannine teaching of our Lord (John 12:32), or the culminating
point in St. Paul’s argument (Romans 11:32) as asserting universal salvation." A
telling argument against the use of Acts 3:21 to support the universalists’
argument is that just two verses later we read, "And it shall be, that every
soul that shall not hearken to that prophet, shall be utterly destroyed from the
among the people." With regard to John 12:32, as Orr points out, it is not
stated what Christ will do with men when he draws them to himself: he may
condemn them!

Other passages which are quoted to support universalism are: Ephesians 1:10,
"Unto a dispensation of the fulness of the times, to sum up all things in
Christ, the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth, in him, I
say," and Colossians 1:20, "And through him to reconcile all things unto
himself, having made peace through the blood of his cross; through him, I say,
whether things upon the earth, or things in the heavens." Hodge answers this:
"The question is, who or what are the all, who are to be reconciled unto God?
The answer to this question depends upon the nature of the thing spoken of, and
to the analogy of Scripture. ’All’ cannot mean absolutely ’all things,’ the
whole universe, including sun, moon, and stars, for how can such inanimate
objects be reconciled to God. For the same reason it cannot mean all sensitive
creatures, including irrational animals. Nor can it mean all rational creatures,
including the holy angels; for they do not need reconciliation. Nor can it mean
all fallen rational creatures, for it is specifically taught in Hebrews 2:16
that Christ did not come to redeem fallen angels. Nor can it mean all men, for
the Bible teaches in other passages that all men are not reconciled to God; and
Scripture cannot contradict Scripture; for that would be for God to contradict
Himself. The ’all’ intended is the ’all’ spoken of in the context; the whole
body of the people of God; all the objects of redemption." The passages which
are argued in favor of universalism can all be explained fairly in other ways.
It is obvious in many passages of Scripture that the word "all" is used in a
relative sense; for example, when the wise men came, we read of Herod, "He was
troubled, and all Jerusalem with him." Certainly there must have been some
people who were indifferent to the situation. The word "all" is surely not used
here in the absolute sense. Or again, concerning John the Baptist we read, "Then
went out unto him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about the
Jordan." Surely we are not to believe that every single individual in this whole
territory visited John at the Jordan.

Furthermore, the fact that God will reign over all doesn’t necessarily mean that
all will be saved. God will have sovereign control over all in hell, both evil
spirits and lost men. All active opposition to him will be ended. Furthermore,
while there are a few passages which might possibly be interpreted in favor of
universalism, there are a great many clear passages which teach eternal
damnation.2

Lastly, the universalists have no right to lay strong weight upon proof texts
because, almost to a man, they do not believe in the infallibility of Scripture.
If they are honest they will admit that their position is based on human
reasoning, not on divine revelation. As Shedd says, "Universalism has a slender
exegetical basis. The Biblical data are found to be unmanageable, and resort is
had to human sentiment and self interest. Its advocates quote sparingly from
Scripture. In particular, the words of Christ relating to eschatology are left
with little citation or interpretation." "The chief objections to the doctrine
of Endless Punishment are not Biblical, but speculative. The great majority of
students and exegetes find the tenet in the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures.
Davidson,3 the most learned of English rationalistic critics, explicitly
acknowledges that ’if a specific sense be attached to words, never-ending misery
is enunciated in the Bible. On the presumption that one doctrine is taught, it
is the eternity of hell torments. Bad exegesis may attempt to banish it from the
New Testament Scriptures, but it is still there, and expositors who wish to get
rid of it, as Canon Farrar does, injure the cause they have in view by
misrepresentation. It must be allowed that the New Testament record not only
makes Christ assert everlasting punishment, but Paul and John. But the question
should be looked at from a larger platform than single texts; in the light of
God’s attributes, and the nature of the soul. The destination of man, and the
Creator’s infinite goodness, conflicting as they do with everlasting punishment,
remove it from the sphere of rational belief. If provision be not made in
revelation for a change of moral character after death, it is made in reason.
Philosophical considerations must not be set aside even by Scripture’ (Last
Things, 133, 136, 151)."4 Here we have the clearest admission that the basis of
the doctrine is not Scriptural. b. A Just God Would Not Give Infinite Punishment
for Finite Sin. This is a very popular argument of the universalist. To this it
may be replied: Sin against God is a very serious matter. As Shedd so well
explains: "Those who deny the position that sin is an infinite evil forget that
the principle, upon which it rests is one of the commonplaces of jurisprudence:
the principle, namely, that crime depends upon the object against whom it is
committed as well as upon the subject who commits it. The merely subjective
reference of an act is not sufficient to determine whether it is a crime. The
act may have been the voluntary act of a person, but unless it is also an
offence against another person, it is no crime. To strike is a voluntary act;
but to strike a post or a stone is not a culpable act. Furthermore, not only
crime, but degrees of crime depend upon the objective reference of a personal
act. Estimated only by the subjective reference, there can be not only no
culpability, but no difference in culpability. Killing a dog is no worse than
killing a man, if merely the subject who kills, and not the object killed, is
considered. Both alike are voluntary acts, and of one and the same person. If
therefore the gravity of the act is to be measured solely by the nature of the
person committing it, and not by that of the thing against whom it is committed,
killing a dog is as heinous as killing a man.

"Now this principle of jurisprudence is carried into theology by the theologian.
The violation of the moral law is sin and guilt, only when viewed objectively in
reference to God primarily, and to man secondarily."5 In other words, sin is
committed against an infinite God, and therefore it is not unreasonable or
unjust that its punishment should be infinite. Shedd also says, "The objection
that an offense committed in a finite time cannot be an infinite evil, and
deserve an infinite suffering implies that crime must be measured by the time
that was consumed in its perpetration. But even in human punishment, no
reference is had to the length of time occupied in the commission of the
offence. Murder is committed in an instant, and theft sometimes requires hours.
But the former is the greater crime, and receives the greater punishment."6 The
fact is that sin can and does have lasting effects. It may permanently harm
others, it may permanently affect one’s own character, and it may be the seed of
further sin which in turn produces still more sin ad infinitum. Individual acts
of sin produce habits, habits produce character, and character tends to
permanence. As W.E. Orchard points out, "Modern psychology doesn’t encourage the
optimism of universalist theology. It shows a tendency toward fixity of
character. It also reveals the irrepressibility of conscience, and the
infallibility of memory thus showing what hell may really be."7 As William James
says in his famous chapter on Habit, "The hell to be endured hereafter, of which
theology tells, is no worse than the hell we make for ourselves in this world by
habitually fashioning our characters in the wrong way. Could the young but
realize how soon they will become mere walking bundles of habits, they would
give more heed to their conduct while in the plastic state. We are spinning our
own fates, for good or evil, and never to be undone. Every smallest stroke of
virtue or of vice leaves its never so little scar. The drunken Rip Van Winkle,
in Jefferson’s play, excuses himself for every fresh dereliction by saying, ’I
won’t count this time.’ Well, he may not count it, and a kind Heaven may not
count it; but it is being counted none the less. Down among his nerve-cells and
fibers the molecules are counting it, registering and storing it up to be used
against him when the next temptation comes. Nothing we ever do is, in strict
literalness, wiped out. Of course, this has its good side as well as its bad
one. As we become permanent drunkards by so many separate drinks, so we become
saints in the moral, and authorities and experts in the practical and scientific
spheres, by so many separate acts and hours of work."8 Viewed from the
psychological viewpoint, endlessness of punishment is consistent with what has
been discovered about the human mind. This fact is further confirmed by Dr.
Heman Lincoln who speaks of two great laws of nature which confirm the doctrine
of eternal punishment. He says: "The tendency of habit is toward a permanent
state. The occasional drinker becomes a confirmed drunkard. One who indulges in
oaths passes into a reckless blasphemer. The gambler who has wasted a fortune,
and ruined his family, is a slave to the card-table. The Scripture doctrine of
retribution is only an extension of this well-known law to the future life." The
second law he mentions, is "Organism and environment must be in harmony. Through
the vast domain of nature, every plant and tree and reptile and bird and mammal
has organs and functions fitted to the climate and atmosphere of its habitat. If
a sudden change occurs in climate, from torrid to temperate, or from temperate
to arctic; if the atmosphere changes from dry to humid, or from carbonic vapors
to pure oxygen, sudden death is certain to overtake the entire fauna and flora
of the region affected, unless plastic nature changes the organism to conform to
the new environment. The interpreters of the Bible find the same law ordained
for the world to come. Surroundings must correspond to character. A soul in love
with sin can find no place in a holy heaven. If the environment be holy, the
character of the beings assigned to it must be holy also. Nature and Revelation
are in perfect accord."9

Universalism must also face the problem of free will at this point. This is a
very difficult problem in many respects. But even the strongest Calvinist does
not believe that God forces men to be saved. There is an area in which man is
free to choose, and if a man persists in his rejection of the gospel in spite of
many opportunities, what assurance do we have that he would accept it if he had
further opportunity in the world to come? Even such men as Plumptre, as advocate
as we have seen of the larger hope, recognize this. He says, "The hindrances to
the reception of the theory as true are, to say the least, very serious. It
dwells with a passionate eagerness exclusively on the loving purpose of God, and
turns its eyes from the terrible, inalienable prerogative of man’s freedom, by
which that purpose may be, and daily is, frustrated."10

There are those who will argue that there will be punishment in the life to
come, but that this punishment will in turn lead men to repentance. But what
certainty is there that punishment will have such an effect, especially that it
will have such an effect on every single individual? As Plumptre further admits,
"All experience shows that if punishment, accepted as the chastisement of a
righteous Father, may lead men to repentance, it may also harden them into the
sullen resistance of the rebellious slave."11 Thus it is in this life; what
assurance is there that it will be any different in the life to come?

Hodge presents a striking argument against the objection that hell is contrary
to justice when he says, "If it be inconsistent with the justice of God that men
should perish for their sins, then redemption is not a matter of grace, or
undeserved mercy. Deliverance from an unjust penalty, is a matter of justice.
Nothing, however, is plainer from the teaching of Scripture and nothing is more
universally and joyfully acknowledged by all Christians than that the whole plan
of redemption, the mission, the incarnation, and the sufferings and death of the
Son of God for the salvation of sinners is a wonderful exhibition of the love of
God which passes knowledge. But if justice demands that all men should be saved,
then salvation is a matter of justice, and then all the songs of gratitude and
praise from the redeemed, whether in heaven or on earth, must at once cease."12
c. A Good God Wouldn’t Send Men to Hell. We must confess that this argument is
touching. It is usually stated in terms such as this: "A good man surely
wouldn’t punish anyone forever, how can a good God do such a thing?" It was
James Stuart Mill who especially popularized this line of reasoning. To this
argument it must be replied: But God is not a man! His task is to judge the
whole earth. He has the right and the duty to inflict punishments which the
individual has no right to inflict, even as all will admit that the state has a
right and a duty to punish in ways which the individual has no right to punish.
If that is true of the state administered by frail human beings, how much more
true it is of God. A human judge who fails to punish the wrong-doer is not a
good judge. Furthermore, the argument proves too much. If God’s goodness demands
that no one suffer for eternity, then that same goodness demands that he do
something to prevent all suffering here and now. He obviously permits great
suffering in this life; in a way beyond our understanding, this is consistent
with his goodness. Future suffering then also can be consistent with his
goodness.

One of the most serious arguments against universalism is that it is morally
dangerous. As Macintosh points out: "Measured and limited ill-consequence is in
no sort of proportion to the infinite evil of wilful wickedness; and the
rhetoric of universalism in the minds of those who ’eddy round and round’ is the
lazy and lying assurance, ’It will come to the same thing in the end.’ God
cannot brook this. He must needs threaten sin with its wages; and we have no
right to affirm that the most awful of all threats is but an empty or ideal
possibility."13

John Baillie does not accept the position of eternal punishment, yet he says,
"But if we decide for universalism, it must be for a form of it which does
nothing to decrease the urgency of immediate repentance and which makes no
promises to the procrastinating sinner. It is doubtful whether such a form of
the doctrine has yet been found."14

Shedd says, "The French people, at the close of the last century, were a very
demoralized and vicious generation, and there was a very general disbelief and
denial of the doctrines of the Divine existence, the immortality of the soul,
the freedom of the will, and future retribution. And upon a smaller scale, the
same fact is continually repeating itself. Any little circle of business men who
are known to deny future rewards and punishments are shunned by those who desire
safe investments. The recent uncommon energy of opposition to endless
punishment, which started about ten years ago in this country, synchronized with
great defalcations and breaches of trust, uncommon corruption in mercantile and
political life, and great distrust between man and man. Luxury deadens the moral
sense, and luxurious populations do not have the fear of God before their eyes.
Hence luxurious ages, and luxurious men, racalcitrate at hell, and ’kick against
the goads.’ No theological tenet is more important than eternal retribution to
those modern nations which, like England, Germany, and the United States, are
growing rapidly in riches, luxury, and earthly power. Without it they will
infallibly go down in that vortex of sensuality and wickedness that swallowed up
Babylon and Rome. The bestial and shameless vice of the dissolute rich, that has
recently been uncovered in the commercial metropolis of the world, is a powerful
argument for the necessity and reality of ’the lake which burneth with fire and
brimstone.’ "15 As Emory Storr once said, "When hell drops out of religion,
justice drops out of politics."16 In our own generation even in our own nation
we have witnessed moral corruption and the denial of eternal punishment go hand
in hand. We have had another example in the awful atrocities committed by the
Communists in other lands which have followed from their denial of the existence
of God and of the punishment of the sinner.

Another strong argument against universalism is that its denial of eternal
punishment is inevitably connected with the denial of other important Christian
doctrines. As Shedd says, "None of the evangelical churches have introduced the
doctrine of Universalism, in any form of it, into their symbolical books. The
denial of endless punishment is usually associated with the denial of those
tenets which are logically and closely connected with it: such as original sin,
vicarious atonement, and regeneration. Of these, vicarious atonement is the most
incompatible of any with universal salvation; because the latter doctrine, as
has been observed, implies that suffering for sin is remedial only, while the
former implies that it is retributive."17 The way in which one doctrine is
inevitably dependent on another, and how the denial of one easily leads to the
denial of another is pointed out by Strong. "But, if there be no eternal
punishment, then man’s danger was not great enough to require an infinite
sacrifice; and we are compelled to give up the doctrine of atonement. If there
were no atonement, there was no need that man’s Saviour should himself be more
than man; and we are compelled to give up the doctrine of the deity of Christ,
and with this that of the Trinity. If punishment be not eternal, then God’s
holiness is but another name for benevolence; all proper foundation for morality
is gone, and God’s law ceases to inspire reverence and awe. If punishment be not
eternal, then the Scripture writers who believed and taught this were fallible
men who were not above the prejudices and errors of their times; and we lose all
evidence of the divine inspiration of the Bible. With this goes the doctrine of
miracles; God is identified with nature, and becomes the impersonal God of
pantheism."18 Annihilation (Conditional Immortality) This idea takes various
forms, but in general it claims that after a period of punishment those who
remain in rebellion cease to exist. The proponents of this theory quote various
passages of Scripture which speak of the destruction of the wicked, and the fact
that they perish. Among others, this is the official position of the Seventh Day
Adventists. As Spicer, one of their writers, says: "The positive teaching of
Holy Scripture is that sin and sinners will be blotted out of existence. There
will be a clean universe again when the great controversy between Christ and
Satan is ended." This is also the position of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Their
denial of hell is obviously a strong point in winning converts since many people
are happy to find an explanation by which they can avoid the doctrine of eternal
punishment.19 As Dr. J.M. Gray says, "its theory of the future life" is "that
which chiefly gives ’Millenial Dawnism’ its popularity with the natural heart,
and constitutes its greatest harm." The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ position is based
on the belief that man is so constituted that he would be unable to suffer
eternal punishment, and that Scripture does not teach the existence of such a
place of torment. They teach that death means total destruction, that Sheol or
Hades should in every instance be translated the grave, and that the fire of
Gehenna is an emblem of annihilation. All of their arguments are supposedly
based on passages of Scripture, but in reality they are based on their own
arbitrary interpretation of these passages, and the exclusion of other passages.

There are several strong arguments against the claim that Bible passages which
speak of destruction mean total annihilation. a. The very same words which the
annihilationists claim can only mean complete cessation of existence are in fact
used in the Scriptures themselves to mean something very different than
annihilation. For example, the Hebrew word for perish is "abadh." This is the
word which is used in many passages to speak of the fact that the wicked perish,
but it is also used in Isaiah 57:1 which states, "The righteous perisheth, and
no man layeth it to heart." The same word in other instances obviously means
lost, and is so translated. For example, "And the asses of Kish, Saul’s father,
were lost. . . . And as for thine asses that were lost three days ago, set not
thy mind on them: for they are found" (1 Samuel 9:3; 1 Samuel 9:20). It is
obvious that Kish’s donkeys were not annihilated.

Another phrase supposedly teaching annihilation is the phrase "cut off." It is a
translation of the Hebrew "karath." We read "For evil doers shall be cut off"
(Psalms 37:9). And we also read, "And after three score and two weeks shall
Messiah be cut off, and will have no one" (Daniel 9:26). Surely the Messiah was
not annihilated.

Another example is the word translated "destroy." We read, "All the wicked will
he destroy" (Psalms 145:20). But we also read that Job said, "He hath destroyed
me on every side" (Job 19:10), and that God said through the prophet Hosea, "O
Israel thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thine help" (Hosea 13:9).
Another example of the fact that the word "destroy" doesn’t necessarily mean
annihilate is this: "And Pharoah’s servants said unto him . . . Knoweth thou not
yet that Egypt is destroyed" (Exodus 10:7)? The proponents of annihilationism
also point to the use of the word "consume." "Let the sinners be consumed out of
the earth" (Psalms 104:35), but the same word is used in Ezekiel 13:1-23 to tell
of a wall being consumed by hailstones, and in Ezekiel 35:12 to tell of
mountains being consumed by the enemies of Israel. Certainly the material of
which this wall and these mountains consisted did not cease to exist. There is
also the phrase "was not." Of the wicked, the Psalmist says, "Yet he passed
away, and lo, he was not; yea I sought him, but he could not be found" (Psalms
37:36). But the same Hebrew word is used in Genesis 5:24, "And Enoch walked with
God: and he was not; for God took him."

These examples clearly show that the primary argument of the annihilationists,
that the Biblical words used must mean annihilation, is completely undermined by
the usage of these very words in the Bible itself. Many more instances can be
found in J.W. Haley’s Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. b. The annihilationist
places a great emphasis on the fact that the figure of "fire" is used in the
Bible to describe future punishment; and fire, they point out, always destroys.
In fact, dramatic preachers of this doctrine have sometimes burned pieces of
paper in their pulpits to prove that fire causes that which it attacks to vanish
to nothingness. But the fact is that when you burn something it is not
annihilated, it simply changes form. It becomes ashes and gaseous matter, but it
certainly does not cease to exist. c. The passages cited from the Bible teach
that destruction is a serious punishment. But if annihilation follows a period
of torment, then that annihilation is not punishment, but a happy relief from
punishment. d. With regard to the use of the word "death," a careful study of
the Bible clearly shows that "life" as it is often used in the Scriptures means
something more than mere existence, and conversely that death means an existence
without the possession of this "life." "Life" is existence in a right
relationship with God, and death is existence out of that right relationship
with God. e. Annihilationism undermines morality just as universalism does.
Hastings, himself an annihilationist, protests the doctrine that there will be
no resurrection with these words, "The results of that opinion (in France) are a
matter of history . . . A mother after her youthful daughter had been
associating with a preacher who taught this doctrine, told me how they drew
inferences of impunity in sin and security in impenitence which they could
mention and act upon, though he might not be affected by them." In other words,
often the highly ethical scholars who propound such doctrines are not led into
immorality by them, but their less moral listeners find it easier to sin because
of them.

We conclude this chapter on the theories opposed to the doctrine of eternal
punishment and our answers to them with this significant statement by a Roman
Catholic theologian, who, pointing to the fact that many of these theories make
room for further opportunity for salvation in the life to come, says
"Protestants, who began by rejecting Purgatory . . . (are now) . . . giving up
their belief in Hell, and taking refuge in some sort of Purgatory."

Chapter 8 || Table of Contents 1. Mackintosh, Op. Cit., p. 785 2. See previous
chapter on "The Teachings of the New Testament."

3. He refers to Samuel Davidson.

4. Shedd, Op. Cit., p. 714.

5. Ibid., p. 740 6. Ibid., p. 741.

7. Inge and others, Op. Cit., "Hell: A Theological Exposition."

8. W. James, Principles of Psychology (New York, Henry Hold, 1890).

9. In an article on Future Retribution, Examiner, April 2, 1885.

10. Plumptre, Spirits in Prison.

11. Ibid.

12. Hodge, Op. Cit., p. 878.

13. Mackintosh, Op. Cit., p. 786.

14. John Baillie, And the Life Everlasting (Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1933, New
York), p. 294.

15. Shedd, Op. Cit., p. 745.

16. Shedd, Op. Cit., p. 1055.

17. Shedd, Op. Cit., p. 670.

18. Strong, Op. Cit., p. 1055.

19. See Appendix III.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 9: 08 PRESENT-DAY CONSERVATIVE POSITION
========================================================================

Present-Day Conservative Position As has been pointed out repeatedly, the denial
of hell has gone hand in hand with the denial of the infallibility of the
Scriptures. It is the desire of the conservative Bible student to accept the
whole Bible as the Word of God, and to make it, rather than human reason, the
final authority for faith. We have seen in our study that the Bible clearly
teaches the fact of eternal punishment. This is our reason for believing in the
doctrine. To this solid ground of Scripture may be added the fact, already
mentioned, that a theological system without hell is morally dangerous. For
these reasons, we ought to stand as defenders of this doctrine without apology.

It is no coincidence that our present age which laughs at the idea of hell is an
age of gross immorality. As Sheila Kaye-Smith says, "Every significant religious
revival has been accompanied by a quickening sense of the danger and terror of
hell."1 A further argument for the doctrine is set forth by W.R. Inge. "The
greatest saints, who knew what the loss would be if God turned his face away
from them"2 have been the ones who have believed in the fact of hell.

Furthermore some of the greatest sinners have been conscious of the reality of
hell. To deny hell is to fail to be realistic, it is to be ignorant of the
depths of sin into which many in the human race have fallen. A famed preacher of
Wolverhampton, England was called late one night to the bedside of a dying
disreputable woman. He had departed from many of the orthodox doctrines, and
sought to console the woman with statements of the goodness and kindness of God.
The woman seemed dissatisfied and kept saying, "But, Pastor, I want to get in."
The minister assured her "God will take you in." "But my sin" replied the poor
unfortunate, "I’m a bad woman and I’m afraid I’ll go to hell unless I’m
forgiven!" The liberal preacher answered, "Don’t be foolish woman. There is no
hell. God is kind. He’ll look after you." The woman asked, "Are you the
minister?" "Yes," he answered. "And you say there is no hell." Then she almost
shouted, "Aye there is a hell, and my feet are slipping into it now! Can’t you
help me, Pastor!" In desperation the preacher returned to his old theology of
One who died on the cross to save sinners. To the consciousness of many a sinner
hell has been very real.

We believe in this doctrine because it is Biblical, it is morally sound, and it
is realistic in an obviously sinful and suffering world. At the same time the
present day conservative position repudiates the extremes of past ages. The
grotesque literalism of the Middle Ages has been one of the greatest factors in
driving thinking men away from this doctrine. As Sheila Kay-Smith says, "We
cannot put down the loss of Hell’s prestige to mere indifference. I should feel
inclined to attribute it in the first place to its own exaggerations. Calvin and
Wesley made of hell a nightmare . . . Early Christian doctrine of hell was
comparatively mild."3 Although our own study of Calvin doesn’t bear out this
statement, the general idea is sound; extremists have not helped the cause of
truth. As James Moffatt says, "The current dislike for the church’s doctrine of
Hell has a certain justification in crude and one-sided expressions which have
excited proper reprobation. They are due largely to a medieval inheritance from
the Latin Church."4 Herein lies the value of the historical study of this
subject. It shows us one of the reasons for its denial, the reason being that
this denial is a reaction against the extreme forms in which the doctrine has
often been propagated. We must clearly and boldly proclaim the doctrine of hell,
at the same time avoiding this pitfall which will only produce further reaction.

Many of the opponents of the doctrine in the present day are really tilting
against windmills. They often fight a form of the doctrine which very few
conservatives hold today. Much of their distaste for this truth stems from the
fact that the word "hell" brings to their minds physical bodies writhing in
literal flames, but this is not the position of most conservatives. As Hodge
says, "There seems no more reason for supposing that the fire spoken of in
Scripture is to be literal fire, than that the worm that never dies is literally
a worm. The devil and his angels who are to suffer the vengeance of eternal
fire, and whose doom the finally impenitent are to share, have no material
bodies to be acted upon by elemental fire."5

Dr. Pieters holds a similar position; he says, "Much ingenuity has been expended
upon these words of Christ to make them mean something less than they seem to
say, but in vain. That the form is that of parables is clear, but the essence of
the teaching is also clear. ’The outer darkness,’ ’The fire that is not
quenched,’ ’The worm that does not die,’ etc., are symbols, not literal
realities, but they are symbols of spiritual realities that are more terrible
than their symbols, not less so."6

Strong speaks in a similar vein when he says, "In preaching this doctrine, while
we grant that the material images used in Scripture to set forth the sufferings
of the lost are to be spiritually and not literally interpreted, we should still
insist that the misery of the soul which eternally hates God is greater than the
physical pains which are used to symbolize it. Although a hard and mechanical
statement of the truth may only awaken opposition, a solemn and feeling
presentation of it upon proper occasions, and in its due relation to the work of
Christ and the offers of the gospel, cannot fail to accomplish God’s purpose in
preaching, and to be the means of saving some who hear."7

Schilder enters into a lengthy discussion of the ways in which the opponents of
the orthodox position misunderstand that position at this very point. He says,
"Do we still have to tell you that no man who has any reverence for the
Scripture understands this literally? Did you think that we Reformed folk did
not know that all this gruesomeness, is to be understood not simply symbolically
but essentially symbolically? Let’s quit denying these words of Scripture a true
reality, in the face of those tirades which over-simplify the Reformed views.
Really, the truly Reformed man laughs at the caricature presentations of our
understanding of this doctrine, as for instance if an ordinary man describes
nature and says of a place, ’It’s pitch dark here, it’s worse than the darkness
of hell.’ Who takes him literally? For surely truly Reformed have long since
broken with the ridiculous and therefore deeply profane and in essence godless
declaration of real flames, of real worms, or ’pitchdarkness’ and the like."

"Thus, the worm, according to this our conception, becomes the symbol of inner
selfconsumption." "And thus the ’fire’ becomes the prophecy of anxiety which
makes existence unbearable. The worm is the symbol of the dissolving power
working from within, and the fire is the illustration of a deadly power coming
from without. You have death in you, and you have death on you, that is indeed
the awful reality. Naturally we must never forget that being dead in the Bible
is something entirely different from not existing."

"Then as we hear of gnashing of teeth we naturally think of self-condemnation
and self-loathing, which is therein plastically preconfigured, or when there is
mention made of darkness also this word is a figure of standing outside of
cosmic life, giving the tormenting certainty that he who sacrificed heaven for
the earth has lost both and has seen both drop away from him forever."8

Here then is an important point in the present day conservative position; Hell
is a reality, but the concepts such as fire mentioned in the Scriptures must be
taken symbolically, as symbols of a very real and very serious spiritual fact.
The liberal must recognize that he fails to understand our position when he
thinks we take these symbols literally. On the other hand, the ultra
conservative literalist must be made to understand that we have in no way
abandoned the belief in eternal punishment when we advocate such a symbolical
interpretation.

Another point at which it ought to be recognized that our position differs from
many in the past is that we do not look on the suffering of hell as a cause for
joy on the part of the believer. The conservative can sympathize with those who
rebelled against the doctrine when it was presented in those terms. It is with
great sadness that we realize that many people will spend eternity in hell. The
conservative does not exult over the enemies of the Church who will have this as
their destiny. He realizes that but for the Grace of God he too would be
destined for hell. He agrees with Robert Murray McCheyne who said that a
preacher ought never to preach on the subject except with the greatest sadness.

Christians in heaven are not omniscient. They do not necessarily see men in
hell. The fact that there is a hell will surely make Christians appreciate God’s
grace and mercy, but the saved will not rejoice over those in torment. Neither
will the inhabitants of heaven be sad; but they will be satisfied with the
perfect justice of God. This is one of the points which we now see through a
glass darkly, but that is no reason for thinking that it cannot be so.

Another part of our position which helps to make hell understandable to the
modern mind is the fact that there will be degrees of punishment there, as well
as degrees of blessedness in heaven. The Scriptural basis for this idea is the
justice of God, as well as those texts which speak of the final judgment
according to works, and specifically the passage where Jesus says, "And that
servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did
according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not,
and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For
unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required; and to whom men
have committed much, of him they will ask the more" (Luke 12:47-48). One of the
reasons people rebel against the doctrine is that when the word "hell" is
mentioned, they conceive of all the lost boiling together in a common fire. But
there will be nothing arbitrary about God’s judgment, all will be according to
his perfect justice. The Bible teaches that there is every reason to believe
that the fate of a Hitler on the one hand, and that of a typical American who
had sincere humanitarian spirit but who neglected the gospel, will be
considerably different, although both will go to hell. The fate of each one will
be exactly what he deserves, each man will be for eternity exactly what his
conduct on earth has merited. But since all men are sinners, to receive perfect
justice will mean to be punished. The only reason the fate of those in heaven
will be different is by the intervention of divine grace. When viewed from this
perspective, it should be further recognized that God would have been perfectly
just with men if he had let all go their own way to their own condemnation. Men
ought not to criticize God for sending some to hell, but rather praise God for
lifting some above that fate which they absolutely deserved, and giving them the
gift of eternal life. The fact is that the unredeemed man would not enjoy heaven
if he got there. We may even say that for the unredeemed to go to heaven would
be a more terrible fate than to go to hell. This is illustrated by the dislike
even amounting to loathing and hate which many have for the worship and the
praise of God and fellowship with his people here in this world. As Shedd says,
"That endless punishment is reasonable is proved by the preference of the wicked
themselves. The unsubmissive, rebellious, defiant, and impenitent spirit prefers
hell to heaven. Milton correctly represents Satan as saying: ’All good to me
becomes bane, and in heaven much worse would be my state’; and, also, as
declaring that ’it is better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven.’ This
agrees with the Scripture representation, that Judas went ’to his own place’
(Acts 1:25).

"The lost spirits are not forced into a sphere that is unsuited to them. There
is no other abode in the universe which they would prefer to that to which they
are assigned, because the only other abode is heaven. The meekness, lowliness,
sweet submission to God, and love to him, that characterize heaven, are more
hateful to Lucifer and his angels, than even the sufferings of hell. The wicked
would be no happier in heaven than in hell. The burden and anguish of a guilty
conscience, says South, is so insupportable, that some ’have done violence to
their own lives, and so have fled to hell as a sanctuary, and chose damnation as
a release.’ This is illustrated by facts in human life. The thoroughly vicious
and ungodly man prefers the license and freedom to sin which he finds in the
haunts of vice, to the restraints and purity of Christian society. There is
hunger, disease and wretchedness, in one circle; and there is plenty, health,
and happiness in the other. But he prefers the former. He would rather be in the
gambling-house and brothel than in the Christian home."9

One further difference between our modern position and that which the Church
held centuries ago is with regard to the locality of hell, and heaven too, for
that matter. Those who based their doctrine on an overly literalistic
interpretation of Scripture were shaken when astronomers discovered the facts
concerning the shape of the earth, its motion, and its place in the universe.
The fact that the directions up and down are not as simple as men once thought
need not in the least disturb our conception of heaven and hell. There is still
a moral and spiritual "up" and a moral and spiritual "down." There is still a
heaven and a hell although we do not know their precise physical location in
God’s great universe. The doctrine of eternal punishment is Biblical, therefore
we proclaim it unashamed. Our only apology is for the misconceptions which the
Church has sometimes helped to create in the past. Remove the grotesque figures,
and the spirit of exultation that some have had concerning the doctrine,
recognize that there will be degrees of punishment and that men will be in hell
exactly what they have made of themselves, then only those who deliberately
reject truth can rebel against the doctrine.

One final word with regard to the preaching of this doctrine. It must be
preached, for it is our duty to proclaim the whole counsel of God. But it need
not surprise us that its preaching is not as effective as in the days of
Jonathan Edwards. We cannot turn back the clock, we live in a different world
than that of Jonathan Edwards. In general, the attitudes of men being what they
are today, most ungodly men remain unshaken by threats of hell. We temper this
statement by reminding ourselves of the power of the Holy Spirit to use God’s
Word. We should also recognize that the effectiveness of preaching this doctrine
will depend partly on the background of our audience. At this point it is
interesting to note what Billy Graham says, "I am conscious of the fact that the
subject of hell is not a very pleasant one. It is very unpopular, controversial,
and misunderstood. In my campaigns across the country, however, I usually devote
one evening to the discussion of this subject."10 This doctrine must be preached
with prayer that it will awaken the unconverted, but perhaps its preaching will
be more effective in another way; that is, as a means to awaken God’s people to
the urgency of evangelistic and missionary endeavors. In general, the modern
evangelical church has been all too silent on the subject. We ought more often
to hold before our people the terrible fact that many all around us are slipping
into eternal condemnation, and impress upon them their duty as Christians to do
all in their power to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ, "For there is none
other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).
Those who are not saved now in the few years we have to work with them will be
lost forever, they will spend eternity in hell, separated from God, as His Word
so plainly teaches. Therefore, Ye Christian Heralds, go proclaim Salvation
through Emmanuel’s Name; To distant climes the tidings bear, And plant the Rose
of Sharon there.

Appendix 1 || Table of Contents 1. Inge and others, Op. Cit., Eternal Hell, p.
104.

2. Ibid., What We Mean By Hell, p. 14.

3. Ibid., "Eternal Hell," p. 105.

4. Ibid.

5. Hodge, Op. Cit., III, 868.

6. A. Pieters, The Facts and Mysteries of the Christian Faith (Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, 1946), pp. 55, 56.

7. Strong, Op. Cit., p. 1056.

8. Schilder, Op. Cit.

9. Shedd, Op. Cit., pp. 741, 742.

10. Graham, Peace With God (Doubleday and Co., Inc. Garden City, New York,
1953), p. 73.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 10: 09 INFANT SALVATION OR DAMNATION
========================================================================

Infant Salvation or Damnation The special case of those who die in infancy is
worthy of our careful consideration. There are no passages of Scripture which
deal specifically with the subject. In the earliest days of the church, there is
no evidence that the question was discussed. Augustine, however, clearly taught
the damnation of infants. He spoke of their sufferings though eternal, as being
of the mildest character. Later a special annex to hell, the Limbus Infantum,
was assigned to them by the theologians. The Council of Trent refused to commit
itself on the subject. Since then, some Catholic theologians follow Peter
Lombard in saying that those dying in infancy are punished for original sin,
while others, like Cardinal Celestino Sfondrati, say they enjoy as much
happiness as their limited capacity permits. Perrone held that they suffer only
the lack of the beatific vision.

Turning to the Protestant Church, we find that Zwingli denied the necessity of
baptism for infant salvation, and taught that all who die in infancy are elect,
and therefore saved.

Calvin said, "As to infants, they seem to perish, not by their own fault, but by
the fault of another. But there is a double solution. Though sin does not yet
appear in them, yet it is latent; for they bear corruption shut up in the soul,
so that before God they are damnable." "That infants who are to be saved (as,
certainly, out of that age some are saved) must be previously regenerated by the
Lord is clear."1 He seems to be teaching here by implication that some but not
all infants are saved. The Canons of the Synod of Dort (1619) state, "Since we
are to judge of the will of God from his word (which testifies that the children
of believers are holy, not by nature, but in virtue of the covenant of grace, in
which they, together with their parents, are comprehended), godly parents have
no reason to doubt of the election and salvation of their children whom it
pleaseth God to call out of this life in their infancy."2 Here we note that no
assurance is given to ungodly parents. The Westminster Confession (1648)
contains the following pertinent statements: "The grace promised (in baptism) is
not only offered, but really exhibited and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such
(whether of age or infant) as that grace belongeth unto, according to the
counsel of God’s own will, in his appointed time."3 "Elect infants dying in
infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when
and where and how he pleaseth."4 In 1903, however, this last phrase was
supplemented by the Presbyterians in America with the following statement: "It
is not to be regarded as teaching that any who die in infancy are lost. We
believe that all dying in infancy are included in the election of grace, and are
regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who works when and where and
how he pleases."

Lorraine Boettner (1901-1990) says, "Most Calvinistic theologians have held that
those who die in infancy are saved. The Scriptures seem to teach plainly enough
that the children of believers are saved; but they are silent or practically so
in regard to those of the heathens. The Westminster Confession does not pass
judgment on the children of heathens who die before coming to years of
accountability. Where the Scriptures are silent, the Confession, too, preserves
silence. Our outstanding theologians, however, mindful of the fact that God’s
tender mercies are over all his works, and depending on his mercy widened as
broadly as possible, have entertained a charitable hope that since these infants
have never committed any actual sin themselves, their inherited sin would be
pardoned and they would be saved on wholly evangelical principles.

"Such, for instance, was the position held by Charles Hodge, W.G.T. Shedd, and
B.B. Warfield."5

Arminians hold to salvation of all infants, while Lutherans and others who teach
baptismal regeneration, when logical, teach that the unbaptized are lost. The
position of at least some within the Church of England is expressed by John
Henry Blunt, a High-churchman, "It can hardly, I think, be doubted, that they do
sustain a loss, of whatever kind. In the Institutions of a Christian Man, the
Church of England declares, ’Insomuch as infants and children dying in their
infancy shall undoubtedly be saved thereby (i.e., by baptism), else not.’ In the
last revision of the Prayer-book is read, ’It is certain by God’s word that
children which are baptized, dying before they commit actual sin, are
undoubtedly saved’: in other words we are certain of the future happiness of the
baptized, but have no assurance of the salvation of the unbaptized infant. The
question must thus be left in obscurity, as we have no sufficient warrant to go
beyond the cautious statement of our Church."6 The popular attitude toward the
subject is expressed by Daniel Poling in a recent magazine article. To the
question: "Is there anything in the Bible that directly states that babies, with
or without baptism, will be saved?" he answers, "Of course they will be saved.
If they are not saved, I don’t want to be! And of course I want to be. In 2
Samuel 12:23, David said that he would go to his infant child who had died. Also
it was evident that he expected to know his child. Read Matthew 18:10 for the
words of Jesus and also what He said about the Kingdom of Heaven and a little
child in Matthew 19:14."7 The subject is certainly a perplexing one. Where
Scripture is silent we hope for the best. We can be sure that the children of
God’s people certainly will be saved, whether or not there has has been
opportunity for baptism. As to the children of unbelievers, we cannot be
certain. Of this we can be sure, God will not punish them unjustly, but whether
or not they will experience the joy of heaven, we cannot say with certainty.
There is something unrealistic about universal infant salvation. It means that
Herod, who killed the infants of Bethlehem was their great benefactor; on the
other hand, it would seem to indicate that medical missionaries who save the
lives of the children of the heathen are thus increasing their chances of going
to hell. We stand confronted by a mystery which we must leave in the hands of
our loving heavenly Father, who is far wiser than we are.

Appendix 2 || Table of Contents 1. Calvin, Institutes, iv, xvi, 17.

2. First Head of Doctrine, art. xvii.

3. xxxviii. 6

4. x. 3.

5. L. Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (Wm B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, 1941), p. 143.

6. Dictionary of Doctrinal and Historical Theology (London, 1870), p. 346, note
1.

7. The Christian Herald, May 1955, p. 4.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 11: 10 THE HEATHEN WHO HAVE NOT HEARD THE GOSPEL
========================================================================

The Heathen Who Have Not Heard The Gospel

Another problem which requires special consideration is the fate of the heathen
who have never had an opportunity to hear the gospel. The claim that it would be
unfair that such should go to hell is one of the strongest pleas of the
universalists and especially of those who claim that there is opportunity for
salvation beyond the grave. With regard to this problem, there are certain
Scripture passages which are pertinent. Especially noteworthy are Romans 2:12,
"As many as have sinned without the law shall also perish without the law: and
as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law;" and Romans
10:13-14, "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How
then shall they believe in him whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear
without a preacher?" These passages certainly seem to imply that those who have
never heard the gospel are lost. The Westminster Confession makes this statement
on the subject: "Much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be
saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their
lives according to the light of nature, and the law of that religion they do
profess."1

Boettner says, "The Christian Church has been practically of one mind in
declaring that the heathens as a class are lost."2 After quoting the above
Scripture passages and several others, he adds, "The Scriptures, then, are plain
in declaring that under ordinary conditions those who have not Christ and the
Gospel are lost."3 Our conclusions with regard to this question inevitably
affect our missionary zeal. As one studies the lives of men like Hudson Taylor
and David Brainerd it is obvious that they were driven forward by a deep
conviction that the heathen who did not hear and accept the gospel message were
utterly lost. If they had not had this conviction their work and the great
inspiration produced by their work on each succeeding generation would have been
lost. To the degree that we share their conviction we too will be zealous for
missions, and to the degree that our conviction at this point is weakened, to
that degree our missionary zeal will evaporate. As Boettner points out, "In fact
the belief that the heathens without the Gospel are lost has been one of the
strongest arguments in favor of foreign missions. If we believe that their own
religions contain enough light and truth to save them, the importance of
preaching the Gospel to them is greatly lessened. Our attitude toward foreign
missions is determined pretty largely by the answer which we give this
question."4 The unwillingness of many to believe that the heathen are really
lost is based largely on the crude conception of hell which we attacked in our
final chapter. If we have a conception (as many of the opponents and some of the
advocates of the doctrine have) that all men who are lost will roast for
eternity in a sort of common frying pan, we might well question how it is
possible that those who have never had an opportunity will yet end up in such a
condition. But as we have pointed out, the modern evangelical position need not
be, and is not such a conception. Hell will be the natural and penal consequence
of each man’s sinful life on earth (and all are sinners according to God’s
Word), whether he has heard the gospel or not. The man who has not heard the
gospel will not have committed the sin of rejecting it, and therefore his
condition will not be nearly as terrible as the man who has heard. As the Word
of God says, "And that servant, who knew his lord’s will, and made not ready,
nor did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes; but he that
knew not, and did things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes.
And to whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required; and to whom they
commit much, of him will they ask the more" (Luke 12:47-48). But though their
fate will not be as serious as the man who heard and rejected, still it will be
a condition of eternal lostness. Let us then catch the missionary zeal of the
pioneer missionaries who, believing the heathen were lost, dedicated themselves
completely that they might proclaim to them the gospel which alone has the power
to save.

Appendix III || Table of Contents

1. x, 4.

2. Boettner, Op. Cit., p. 118.

3. Ibid., p. 119.

4. Ibid., p. 119.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 12: 11 DENIAL BY THE CULTS
========================================================================

Denial By The Cults

One of the common characteristics of the modern cults is their denial of the
doctrine of eternal punishment. This is obviously one of the reasons for their
popular appeal. Their success is a witness to the dislike of this doctrine on
the part of the natural man. Since in the main section of our study we have
limited ourselves to beliefs within the main stream of the Christian Church, we
here briefly present the viewpoints of the modern cults.

1. Christian Science. There is no hell in the traditional sense. Rather hell is
"mortal belief; error; lust; remorse; hatred; revenge; sin, sickness, death,
suffering, and self-imposed agony, effects of sin, that which worketh
abomination or maketh a lie."1 There is no such thing as annihilation, but at
death, man passes to another plane of existence where there is further
opportunity to overcome erroneous thinking, and thus attain salvation.

2. Jehovah’s Witnesses. In his early youth Charles Taze Russell was nurtured in
the Presbyterian Church. The traditional belief in hell was one reason why he
turned against historic Christianity. He became a skeptic, but was later deeply
influenced by Seventh-Day Adventism, from which he borrowed the doctrines of
soul sleep and the annihilation of the wicked. Russell spoke very strongly
against what he called "the nightmare of eternal torture."

Russell’s successor, Joseph Franklin Rutherford, was equally vehement in his
opposition to hell. "It was written of him that he went to hell. ’Thou wilt not
leave my soul in hell’ (Psalms 16:10). If hell is a place of endless torment and
Jesus went there, he could not have been released. The fact that he did not
remain in hell is proof conclusive that hell is not a place of eternal
torment."2 "Eternal torture is void of the principle of love. ’God is love.’ A
Creator that would torture his creatures eternally would be a fiend, and not a
God of love."3

3. Mormonism. Mormons believe in hell, but they do not believe that it is
everlasting. Braden, who has made a careful study of the cults, says, "Mormonism
believes that salvation is universal and that there is still a chance beyond the
grave . . . . To the many who have died, having deliberately refused to accept
the gospel, must be added innumerable others who died never having heard the
gospel. What provision is there for them? The former are not to be punished
’beyond the time requisite to work the needed reformation and to vindicate
justice, for which ends alone punishment is imposed.’ And it would be
blasphemous, Talmadge asserts, to believe that God would condemn a soul under
any law not known to him. It becomes plain, then that the gospel must be
preached in the spirit world where these dead dwell."4

4. New Thought. Hell is "the torment of experiencing that which contradicts the
truth."5 Says Braden, "What is perfectly clear is that the older stress upon
another worldly heaven and hell of eternal reward or punishment is rejected and
this is a pleasing thought to many who grew up under the older orthodoxy, but no
longer find it possible to believe it, for many reasons."6

5. Spiritualism. Braden says, "The Spiritualists completely repudiate the
traditional concepts of heaven and hell, and of course all idea of ’everlasting’
punishment or reward. In the literature there is frequent report of the surprise
of those who have recently passed over at not finding themselves in heaven or
hell. Yet there is something approximating the idea of both heaven and hell of a
temporary nature. The lower spheres to which those of evil character and a low
state of development go at death constitute a sort of purgatory, at least, where
they must remain until they have developed to a higher degree. If not punitive
it is at least purgative, and the soul remains at this level until it merits
promotion to a higher sphere."7 The following statements from outstanding
spokesmen for Spiritualism give us further understanding of their position.

A. Conan Doyle says, "Hell, I may say, drops out altogether, as it has long
dropped out of the thoughts of every reasonable man. This odious conception, so
blasphemous in its view of the Creator, arose from the exaggeration of Oriental
phrases, and may perhaps have been of service in a coarse age when men were
frightened by fires, as wild beasts are scared by the travelers. Hell as a
permanent place does not exist. But the idea of punishment, of purifying
chastisement, in fact of Purgatory, is justified by the reports from the other
side."8

Colville says, "It (the ancient Egyptian view of trans-migration) is
immeasurably superior to any view of endless useless torment such as many
benighted Christian theologians have proclaimed — a conception for which there
is neither rational explanation nor apology."9

Sir Oliver Lodge says, "There is nothing that can properly be called Hell in the
medieval sense of eternal hopelessness; but yet Hell is very truth in so far as
they suffer the pangs of remorse when their rebellious spirit is broken, and
when in their felt poverty of soul they begin to long to return to the
Father."10

6. Theosophy. This cult also denies eternal punishment. Annie Besant, one of the
leaders of the movement, says, "If this (Luke 13:23-24) be applied in the
ordinary protestant way to salvation from everlasting hell-fire, the statement
becomes incredible, shocking. No Savior of the world can be supposed to assert
that many will seek to avoid hell and enter heaven, but will not be able to do
so. But as applied to the narrow gateway of Initiation and to salvation from
rebirth, it is perfectly true and natural."11

Leadbeater, another leader of the movement, says that the astral life
"corresponds to what Christians (Catholic) call purgatory; the lower mental
life, which is always entirely happy, is what is called heaven" . . . Hell is
"only a figment of the theological imagination."12

7. Unity. Speaking of Fillmore, the founder of Unity, Braden says, "Nowhere that
the writer has discovered, does he enlarge extensively on the idea of heaven,
and it will be noted that here only by silent inference is there any reference
to any opposite state, corresponding to the distressing dreams of the anxious,
troubled sleeper."13 Speaking of the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus,
Fillmore himself says, "The material avenues are lost to the outer, and the soul
finds itself in a hell of desires without the flesh sensations with which to
express itself . . . the body consciousness, the peace of union for all the
attributes of man, has been removed, producing in the life consciousness a great
gulf or chasm that cannot be crossed, except by incarnation in another body."14
Unity’s official "creed" says, "We believe that the dissolution of spirit, soul
and body, caused by death, is annulled by rebirth of the same spirit and soul in
another body here on earth. We believe the repeated incarnations of man to be a
merciful provision of our loving Father to the end that all may have opportunity
to attain immortality through regeneration, as did Jesus."15

Thus we see that the cults, in one way or another, deny the doctrine of eternal
punishment. Could it be that if all who held the orthodox position had been more
careful in their statement of the doctrine, avoiding the excesses which we have
noted to have been all too prevalent in past ages, then some of these cults
would never have arisen? Certainly if all who propounded the doctrine had not
gone beyond a sane interpretation of the Scripture many who have done so would
not have turned from orthodox Christianity to the cults.

Table of Contents 1. M.B. Eddy, Science and Health, 588; 1-4.

2. Rutherford, Harp of God, p. 53.

3. Rutherford, World Distress, p. 40.

4. C.S. Braden, These Also Believe (The MacMillan Co., New York, 1951), p. 443.

5. E. Holmes, New Thought Terms and Their Meanings (Dodd, Mead, and Co., New
York, 1942), p. 58.

6. Braden, Op. Cit., p. 140.

7. Ibid., p. 344.

8. A.C. Doyle, The New Revelation, p. 68.

9. Colville, Universal Spiritualism, p. 82.

10. Oliver Lodge.

11. A. Besant, Esoteric Christianity, p. 42.

12. Leadbeater, Textbook of Theosophy, p. 64.

13. Braden, Op. Cit., p. 161.

14. Fillmore, Talks on Truth, p. 156-157.

15. Unity’s Statement of Faith. Art. 22.


========================================================================
Source: https://sermonindex.net/books/buis-harry-doctrine-eternal-punishment/
========================================================================