The Reality of Eternal Punishment

“For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord”(Rom. 6:23).¹

The contrast is stark, and the warning is clear. In his letter to the Romans, the Apostle Paul paints a grim picture of those who reject the free gift of salvation. Eternal death is the final destiny for unbelievers. In contrast with the first death, which is temporary, there is no reprieve from what the Bible calls the second death (Rev. 20:11–15). In perhaps the most famous verse in the Bible, Jesus says that “whoever believes in him [Jesus] should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).

This final destiny of unbelievers is typically called hell. However, there are three Greek words in the New Testament that are translated hell and each of these words has a distinct meaning. The word hades appears ten times in the New Testament and is used to describe the place of the dead. It is the approximate equivalent of the Hebrew word sheol, which has a similar meaning. The word tartarus appears only once in the New Testament (2 Pet. 2:4) and describes a prison for rebellious angels. Finally, gehenna occurs twelve times in the New Testament and is a place of fire connected with the final judgment.² Debate over the nature and duration of hell is typically focused on gehenna. Other phrases used to describe hell such as “unquenchable fire” (Matt. 3:12), “outer darkness” (Matt. 8:12), and “eternal fire” (Matt. 25:41) are all believed to be descriptions of gehenna.

Two Key Questions

In order to have a proper understanding of hell, two key questions need to be answered. The first concerns the duration of hell. Is hell a permanent and final fate for nonbelievers or is there a point in time when hell comes to an end? In other words, does hell have an expiry date? Theologians have long debated whether God will provide an opportunity for salvation after death. Retired EMC pastor and author Dr. Arden Thiessen has tentatively answered “yes” to this question and suggests that post-mortem salvation is a real possibility.³ Thiessen believes that it is appropriate for Christians to hope for grace beyond the grave. Obviously, there is a significant difference between a hell that is temporary and a hell that is permanent.

The second question is about the nature of hell. Is hell a place of unending conscious torment or is hell a place where the wicked will eventually cease to consciously exist? Among those who believe that the Bible teaches unending conscious torment, there is disagreement over whether this torment is literal or metaphorical.⁴ However, this is a relatively minor distinction since even the mildest forms of torment become unbearable when stretched out over long periods of time. The alternative view is that the wicked will cease to consciously exist in hell. While advocates of this view differ over how long the torment will continue before consciousness ceases, they agree that the torment does end at some point.⁵ Thus, the nature of hell debate revolves primarily over the length of conscious torment as opposed to the type of torment involved.

Three Main Views on Hell

Throughout church history, Christians have provided three broadly different views about the nature and duration of hell. Each of these views has advocates from early church history as well as contemporary evangelical scholars who defend them. Each will be outlined in turn.

The dominant view among evangelical Christians today is known as traditionalism. This view holds that hell is a place of eternal conscious torment.⁶ The duration of hell is eternal and the nature of it is conscious torment. Tertullian was the earliest church father to explicitly affirm this view. In a letter he wrote in approximately AD 200, Tertullian stated that unbelievers would be punished “in fire equally unending” and that they never cease to exist because they have “a supply of incorruptibility.”⁷ Subsequent prominent church leaders and theologians such as St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas further expanded upon hell as a place of eternal conscious torment. Today, most evangelical Christian scholars hold to the traditional view of hell, and this doctrine is explicitly affirmed in many statements of faith.

The second major view on hell is known as conditionalism (also called annihilationism). This view holds that hell is a place of complete destruction where unbelievers eventually perish and cease to be.⁸ There is no reprieve from hell, nor does anyone receive a second chance after being sent there. Conditionalist scholars argue that when early church fathers such as Clement of Rome (c. AD 100) used words such as “perish” and “destruction” to describe the fate of unbelievers, they were implicitly endorsing conditionalism.⁹ In 1988, well-known evangelical scholar John Stott tentatively endorsed conditionalism and argued that Christians should accept this view of hell as a legitimate possibility.¹⁰ Contemporary evangelical theologians who embrace conditionalism include Preston Sprinkle, John Stackhouse, Jr., Chris Date and Terrance Tiessen.

The third major view on hell is known as universalism (also called ultimate reconciliation). This view holds that hell is temporary and that all people will eventually make it into heaven. Advocates of this approach emphasize the broader redemptive hermeneutic found in the New Testament and argue that Christ will literally reconcile all things to himself.¹¹ Origen (c. AD 200) was the first major church father to embrace universalism and he viewed the fires of hell as being more redemptive than retributive.¹² Contemporary theologians who advocate universalism include Robin Parry, Thomas Talbott and David Bentley Hart. Among evangelicals, universalism has the least amount of support.

Key Question #1: What is the Duration of Hell?

On this issue, traditionalism and conditionalism are on one side while universalism is on the other side. Traditionalists and conditionalists agree hell’s duration is eternal and there is no end to the punishment. What they disagree about is the nature of that punishment.

In contrast, universalists assert hell is temporary, and God will eventually reconcile all people to himself. Universalists disagree amongst themselves over whether this is a full reconciliation that includes everyone regardless of their free will or whether some people, through the obstinacy of their own choices, might choose to remain in hell indefinitely. EMC pastor and author Arden Thiessen holds the latter view while most universalist scholars hold the former view.

The Bible is clear that everyone will die one day, “and after that comes judgment” (Heb. 9:27). Jesus told his listeners that there is a broad path that leads to destruction and a narrow gate that leads to eternal life (Matt. 7:13). He also warned against the perils of dying in your sins (John 8:24) and emphasized only those who are born again would see the kingdom of God (John 3:5). The great white throne judgment in Revelation 20:11–15 conveys an air of finality and gives no hint that the judgment could ever be reversed.

In Matthew 25:31–46, Jesus tells the parable of the sheep and the goats. In this parable, those being judged are divided into righteous sheep and unrighteous goats. While the sheep are given words of affirmation and told they will inherit the kingdom (v. 34), the goats are told they will enter the eternal fire that was prepared for the devil and his angels (v. 41). That eternal fire is also described as eternal punishment (v. 46).

Obviously, the meaning of the word “eternal” is critical here. Aionios is the Greek word translated “eternal” and it conveys a clear meaning of eternity.¹³ In addition, the fate of the wicked is directly contrasted with that of the righteous. In other words, if eternal life for the righteous means unending life, then eternal punishment for the wicked means unending punishment. Assuming one meaning for the word aionios in one part of the verse but a different meaning in another part of the same verse leads to a strained reading of the text.

It’s important to note that aionios is also used elsewhere in the New Testament to describe the length of punishment in hell. In 2 Thessalonians 1:9, Paul reminds his readers that those who reject the gospel will “suffer the punishment of eternal [aionios] destruction.” Thus, the destruction described in this verse goes on for eternity.

Universalists rely heavily on texts that speak about all things being reconciled to God. For example, Philippians 2:10–11 states, “So that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Similarly, Romans 11:32 says, “For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all” (emphasis added). Universalists argue that these passages should be taken literally and that if all people have been consigned to disobedience, then all people will ultimately be saved. Similarly, they suggest that if all people and creatures in the universe are going to confess Jesus Christ as Lord, then this speaks of a time when everyone is literally reconciled to him. Hence, hell must be a temporary state that eventually comes to an end.

The problem with this argument is that there is no need to interpret these verses in this fashion, particularly since the overwhelming weight of the biblical evidence points to two separate fixed destinies for believers and unbelievers. For example, since the demons know the truth about Jesus and even confess that he is Lord (Mark 1:24; James 2:19), it makes sense that those who are sentenced to eternal punishment will make the same involuntary confession at the time of judgment.

In addition, there is nothing unusual about using the word “all” in a broad, yet not totally universal, sense. For example, Genesis 41:57 says that “all the earth” came to Egypt to buy grain during the seven years of famine. No one seriously argues that every single nation on the planet, including those on other continents, sent representatives to Egypt during this time. Rather, the writer is saying that all the nations around Egypt came to buy food. Considering the many times that Paul distinguishes between the fate of believers and unbelievers, when he says God has mercy on all, he means all people who have accepted the gospel.

As for the question of post-mortem conversion, this possibility does not appear anywhere in the Bible. If the eternal punishment meted out to unbelievers in Matthew 25:46 is only temporary, this raises the question of whether eternal life for believers is only temporary as well, since these two are juxtaposed. In his letter to EMC church leaders, conference pastor Layton Friesen correctly notes that while God certainly could give unbelievers a second chance after death, there is no biblical warrant for assuming that this will happen.¹⁴ Given this fact, it would be helpful if Friesen’s letter more explicitly ruled out universalism as an acceptable option for evangelical Christians.

The biblical evidence is clear that hell’s duration is eternal. Once people are sentenced to hell, there is no way out and no further offers of salvation. This excludes universalism as a viable view and leaves us with either traditionalism or conditionalism.

Key Question #2: What is the Nature of Hell?

On this question, the traditionalist and conditionalist views on hell diverge. Traditionalists hold that hell is a place of eternal conscious torment while conditionalists believe that hell is a place where the final and irrevocable destruction of unbelievers takes place. Both sides claim to have Scripture on their side, so it is important to examine some of the key biblical texts about hell, beginning with the Old Testament.

In his letter, Layton Friesen states, “It is only really in the New Testament that hell appears openly for the first time.”¹⁵ While the doctrine of hell is more explicitly outlined in the New Testament than in the Old Testament, it’s also true the New Testament is heavily immersed in Old Testament language and thought. In fact, the Old Testament provides significant context that helps readers make sense of the New Testament teachings about hell.

In particular, two key Old Testament passages provide important information about hell. At the end of the book of Isaiah, the final fate of the wicked is depicted: “And they [the righteous] shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh” (Isa. 66:24). Traditionalists emphasize the worm not dying and the fire not being quenched while conditionalists point out that the text explicitly refers to dead bodies rather than to living people. Overall, the image this passage conveys seems to be one of ongoing shame and disgrace but not of eternal torment.

The book of Daniel contains the most explicit statement in the Old Testament about a future resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt” (Daniel 12:2). The Hebrew word translated “everlasting” is olam, which means a long, often indefinite, period of time. Both traditionalists and conditionalists agree that the “shame and everlasting contempt” for the wicked continues forever but they disagree on whether this necessitates conscious suffering.

Traditionalist scholar Larry Dixon argues this passage “assumes the continuing existence of the objects of God’s hatred.”¹⁶ In contrast, conditionalist scholar Edward Fudge connects this passage with the “dead bodies” described in Isaiah 66:24 and says that shame and contempt shall forever be the legacy of the wicked.¹⁷

The New Testament descriptions of hell build on the language of the Old Testament. Jesus issued some dire warnings about hell (gehenna) throughout his ministry.

And if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than with two hands to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire. And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame than with two feet to be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, “where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:43–48).

In his warning about hell, Jesus appropriates the language of Isaiah 66:24 when he says that the worm will not die and the fire will not be quenched. How one reads Mark 9:43–48 is heavily influenced by one’s interpretation of Isaiah 66:24. A traditionalist reads this passage and finds confirmation that the wicked in hell exist forever since the fire is unquenchable and their worm shall not die. In contrast, a conditionalist remembers the reference to “dead bodies” in Isaiah 66:24 and interprets Mark 9:43–48 as referring to the total and irrevocable destruction of the wicked in hell. Conditionalists also point to Jude 7, which describes the fire that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah as eternal. They argue that unquenchable, or eternal, fire refers to a fire that cannot be quenched and that it will burn until it runs out of fuel. The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah hence serves as an illustration of the total destruction that awaits unbelievers in hell.

As noted earlier, Matthew 25:46 provides a stark contrast between the fates of the righteous and the unrighteous. The righteous receive “eternal life” while the unrighteous experience “eternal punishment.” While traditionalists and conditionalists agree on the length of the punishment (unending), they differ over whether this punishment entails ongoing conscious suffering. In the end, while this passage definitely rules out universalism, it is compatible with either traditionalism or conditionalism.

In Luke 16:19–31, Jesus tells the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. Because this parable describes the rich man as being a place of conscious torment, it is commonly cited in support of the traditional view of hell.¹⁸ However, there are several factors that need to be taken into consideration. First, the Greek word translated as hell in this section is hades, which describes the intermediate state rather than the final judgment. Thus, even if this parable provides specific information about the afterlife, it would only be applicable to the intermediate state rather than to hell (gehenna) itself.

The parable also shows Abraham and the rich man engaging in conversation. Few Christian scholars believe that people in heaven and hell will be able to converse with each other. Finally, the details in parables are not intended to be taken literally. Typically, a parable is a fictional story intended to convey a specific moral lesson.¹⁹ The moral lesson of this parable is that if people are not convinced by the testimony of Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead. In short, there are good reasons to avoid basing one’s doctrine of hell on this parable.

Another important passage about hell is found near the end of the book of Revelation. “And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever” (Revelation 20:10). Traditionalists argue that a literal reading of this passage makes it clear that the devil, the beast and false prophet will be tormented forever and ever. Since unbelievers are later thrown into the same lake of fire (Revelation 20:11–15), it’s reasonable to conclude that they too will suffer for eternity in hell.

This is probably the most difficult passage in the Bible for conditionalists to explain. However, it is important to remember that Revelation is the most symbolic book in the Bible and that there is significant debate over whether the beast and false prophet are literal people or if they represent a system of government. In any case, conditionalists argue that the doctrine of hell needs to be based on the testimony of Scripture as a whole and not on one passage in the most symbolic book of the Bible.

After examining these passages, we see that the nature of hell is considerably less clear cut than the duration of hell. While there is convincing evidence that the sentence of hell continues forever (thus ruling out universalism), reasonable arguments can be offered for both eternal conscious torment (traditionalism) and eternal annihilation (conditionalism). Overall, the weight of the biblical evidence, apart from Revelation 20:10–15, seems to lean in favour of conditionalism, although traditionalism remains a legitimate interpretation of the biblical text. Layton Friesen is correct that the nature of hell remains “an unresolved exegetical disagreement between scholars.”²⁰

Conclusion

It is important that Christians not shy away from the topic of hell. As Friesen correctly observes, “Hell, to the extent that it is taught biblically, cannot be some unfortunate embarrassment we are nevertheless forced to speak of.”²¹ Jesus warned about the fires of hell regularly and made it clear that hell is an awful fate to be avoided at all costs.

While there are three general interpretations of the duration and nature of hell, only two of these interpretations (traditionalism and conditionalism) are biblically acceptable options. Universalism is not taught within the Bible and should not be considered a legitimate option for evangelical Christians. The Evangelical Mennonite Conference should remain firm in upholding the eternal duration of hell but should show flexibility on the traditionalism/conditionalism debate. Disagreement over the nature of hell is not an issue that necessitates the breaking of fellowship with other believers.

Seventeenth century German theologian Rupertus Melenius coined the famous phrase, “In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity.”²² This phrase is relevant to debate around hell. Because the Bible is clear that the fate of believers and unbelievers are drastically different from each other and are eternal in length, it is reasonable to conclude that the eternal duration of hell is an evangelical essential. In contrast, because there are reasonable biblical arguments for both traditionalism and conditionalism, it makes sense to classify the nature of hell as a non-essential belief and to allow liberty on this issue. Finally, whatever one’s view of hell, it is important to show charity as we engage with fellow believers on this important topic. May we all continue to humbly search the Scriptures as we seek to understand the truth about hell.

---

¹Unless otherwise noted, all biblical passages referenced are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. ESV® Text Edition: 2016. Copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers.
²Paul Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology, (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2014), 397–98.
³Arden Thiessen, Welcome to Hope!, (Winnipeg: Art Bookbindery, 2019), 140–65.
⁴William Crockett, ed., Four Views on Hell, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992), 11–88.
⁵Edward William Fudge, The Fire That Consumes: A Biblical and Historical Study of the Doctrine of Final Punishment, (Eugene: Cascade Books, 2011), 143.
⁶Larry Dixon, The Other Side of the Good News: Confronting the Contemporary Challenges to Jesus’ Teaching on Hell, (Wheaton: BridgePoint, 1992), 9–10.
⁷Christopher W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson, Hell Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents Eternal Punishment, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), 119.
⁸Chris Loewen, “A Case for Conditionalism,” Rethinking Hell, May 30, 2018. https://rethinkinghell.com/2018/05/30/a-case-for-conditionalism/
⁹LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Conditionalist Faith of Our Fathers vol. 1, (Washington: Review and Herald, 1966), 757–73.
¹⁰David L. Edwards and John Stott, Evangelical Essentials: A Liberal/Evangelical Dialogue, (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1988), 313–20.
¹¹Robin L. Parry, “Universalism,” in Four Views on Hell, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2016), 101–144.
¹²Dixon, op. cit., 27–28.
¹³Walvoord, John, “The Literal View,” in Four Views on Hell, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 23–24.
¹⁴Layton Friesen, Gracious Judge Holy Saviour, Steinbach: Evangelical Mennonite Conference, 2021, 13.
¹⁵Ibid., 9.
¹⁶Dixon, op. cit., 77.
¹⁷ Fudge, op. cit., 81–82.
¹⁸Dixon, op. cit., 133–44. ¹⁹William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004), 411–15.
²⁰Friesen, op. cit., 10.
²¹Ibid., 8.
²²Mark Ross, “In Essentials Unity, In Non-Essentials Liberty, In All Things Charity,” Tabletalk Magazine, September 2009, https://tabletalkmagazine.com/article/2009/09/essentials-unity-non-essentials-liberty-all-things/

Bibliography

Bacchiocchi, Samuele. Immortality or Resurrection? A Biblical Study on Human Nature and Destiny. Berrien Springs: Biblical Perspectives, 1997.

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

Date, Christopher M., and Ron Highfield, eds. A Consuming Passion: Essays on Hell and Immortality in Honor of Edward Fudge. Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2015.

Date, Christopher M., Gregory G. Stump, and Joshua W. Anderson, eds. Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism. Eugene: Cascade Books, 2014.

Dixon, Larry. The Other Side of the Good News: Confronting the Contemporary Challenges to Jesus’ Teaching on Hell. Wheaton: BridgePoint Books, 1992.

Edwards, David L. and John Stott. Evangelical Essentials: A Liberal/Evangelical Dialogue. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1988.

Enns, Paul. The Moody Handbook of Theology. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2014.

Friesen, Layton. Gracious Judge Holy Saviour: A Teaching Letter of the EMC Board of Leadership and Outreach on Salvation, Heaven, Hell and Judgment, Steinbach: Evangelical Mennonite Conference, 2021.

Froom, Leroy E. The Conditionalist Faith of Our Fathers. Washington: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1966.

Fudge, Edward W. The Fire That Consumes: A Biblical and Historical Study of the Doctrine of Final Punishment, 3rd Ed. Eugene: Cascade Books, 2011.

Fudge, Edward W. and Robert A. Peterson. Two Views of Hell: A Biblical and Theological Dialogue. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000.

Klein, William W., Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004.

Loewen, Chris. “A Case for Conditionalism,” Rethinking Hell, May 30, 2018. https://rethinkinghell.com/2018/05/30/a-case-for-conditionalism/

Morgan, Christopher W. and Robert A. Peterson, eds. Hell Under Fire. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004.

Parry, Robin A. and Christopher H. Partridge, eds. Universal Salvation? The Current Debate. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2003.

Ross, Mark, “In Essentials Unity, In Non-Essentials Liberty, In All Things Charity,” Tabletalk Magazine, September 2009.

Sprinkle, Preston, ed. Four Views on Hell, 2nd Ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2016.

Thiessen, Arden. Welcome to Hope! Winnipeg: Art Bookbindery, 2019.