The Fairness of Hell

Introduction

“It takes an almost heroic suspension of moral intelligence, it seems to me, to think instead that this picture permits us to believe that any soul could possibly, under the inevitable conditions of existence in this world, earn for itself a penalty that is at once both ‘eternal’ and ‘just.’ It requires, at the very least, an almost total failure of imagination – by which I mean, principally, a failure to think through what the word ‘eternal’ actually means.”[1] This quote from David Bentley Hart sums up how many feel about the eternal conscious punishment view of hell, also known as the Traditional view. How can a good God punish people for eternity? It seems unfair.

In order to answer this question, two aspects must be addressed: (1) the fairness of punishment; and (2) the fairness of that punishment being eternal. This paper will seek to establish the fairness of hell as eternal conscious punishment by showing that punishment and the length of time for that punishment being eternal are just and compatible with the loving God of the Bible.

Punishment

Punishment for crimes is innate within our nature. When a criminal commits an offense, it is generally accepted that he must make amends for the crime. Yet, not everyone who commits a wrong receives just punishment during their lifetime. Many get away with crimes and never face justice. Hell provides an opportunity for God to set things straight that were not dealt with in this life. In other words, hell is a necessary feature in order for justice to ultimately be accomplished.

Furthermore, when viewed properly, hell is a good thing for those who follow God’s laws. This is because hell quarantines evil and thus promotes well-being for the law-abiding.[2] Just as prisons quarantine criminals from harming the law-abiding citizens of society, so too hell quarantines evil, allowing the righteous to experience the fullness of God’s love unhindered.

While the primary purpose of this paper is to address the fairness of the duration of punishment in hell, one cannot address the issue without first approaching it from the proper view of justice. Among Christians, there is no debate that the Bible speaks of justice and punishment for wrongdoing. The debate, however, is over the kind of punishment to be administered. Is the punishment to be restorative or retributive?

It is important to establish which view of justice is correct before looking at the issue of eternal punishment because one’s view of justice will inevitably impact one’s conclusion about the duration of punishment. If one holds to the restorative justice view, then, by definition, eternal punishment is unjust because it does not permit the lawbreaker to be restored to society. According to restorative justice, the offender must be restored back to society at some point, meaning that the punishment must be limited in duration. As Michael J. McClymond notes, “When a nonretributive and restorative idea of God’s punishment has been fully conceptualized, the outcome is likely to be a doctrine of universal salvation.”[3] Thus, eternal punishment and restorative justice are opposed to one another.

Retributive justice, on the other hand, does not specify a length of time. It can be compatible with a short punishment or an eternal punishment. Retributive justice simply “demands the punishment of sin” and that the punishment be in proportion to the sin committed.[4]

Universalist Robin Parry argues that the Old Testament provides a pattern “of judgment followed by restoration”[5] He believes that the pattern God has laid out in the current age will continue on into the next age.[6] Thus, hell must also be a place with the intent of restoration. Yet, Parry ignores the clear texts of Scripture that speak of hell as retributive. For example, 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10 portrays God’s wrath upon the wicked and how they will be punished with everlasting destruction from His presence. In particular, Paul uses the word “repay” in verse 6, which in Greek is antapodidōmi. This language is used to describe retribution.[7] Additionally, it is important to remember that God does not owe restoration to any man, especially to unrepentant sinners. Moreover, some sinners do not want to be restored because it would require them to submit to God’s laws and turn from their wicked ways.

While the text of Scripture offers both forms of justice, only retributive justice is applied to hell.[8] Due to this fact, the remainder of this paper will address the fairness of eternal punishment in hell through the Biblical framework of retributive justice.

Eternality of Punishment

Perhaps the most common argument against hell being eternal is that it is unfair for people to suffer in hell forever for finite sins committed during their lifetime. In other words, the punishment is disproportionate to the sin committed. As Annihilationist John G. Stackhouse notes, “Finite beings can perform only a finite amount of sin, and therefore a finite amount of suffering is sufficient to atone for it.”[9]

The problem with this objection is that it only takes the wrongful action into account. Yet, the severity of an offense is not judged solely by the wrongful act, but also by the value of the parties involved. For example, imagine three different scenarios. In the first, a man wrongfully attacks a squirrel. In the second, a man wrongfully attacks his neighbor. In the third, a man wrongfully attacks the President of the United States. The man in the first scenario would receive no punishment. The man in the second scenario would spend a small amount of time in prison or perhaps only pay a fine. The man in the third scenario would receive years in prison, perhaps even life. Notice, the action is the same in all three instances. Yet, the severity of the punishment is not based solely on the action; it is also based on the value of the one attacked. Although scenarios 2 and 3 both involve attacks upon fellow humans, the third scenario deserves worse punishment due to the high office the President holds. If an offense against the President deserves a more severe degree of punishment due to the office he holds, how much worse punishment should be given to those who offend the highest office holder: God. God is of infinite value; thus, crimes committed against Him deserve infinite punishment.

Stackhouse responds to this argument saying, “Just as Jesus did not suffer eternally, even for the sins of the whole world, so each person who makes atonement on his or her own will not suffer eternally, either.”[10] Stackhouse is making the point that if offenses toward God require infinite punishment, why then did Jesus not suffer infinitely? Rather than being an argument against the Traditional view, this comment actually furthers the point from the previous paragraph.

As just discussed, the value of the party offended is key in determining the severity and length of the punishment. Since God is of infinite value, offenses against Him result in infinite debt. In order for justice to be satisfied, a punishment of infinite value must take place. This is exactly what happened on the Cross. Jesus, being God, is of infinite value. He freely went to the Cross and bore the just penalty upon Himself. Christ’s infinite value was the amount owed on the debt and was thus able to suffice the demands of justice. William Lane Craig states:

Although a death of infinite value was due for every individual sinner, the dignity of an infinite person swallows up and absorbs all the infinities of punishment due to us. We cannot doubt the infinite value of Christ’s satisfaction, for although His human nature was finite, the satisfaction is infinite, since it is relative to the person, who is the efficient cause and to whom the obedience and suffering are to be attributed.[11]

It is crucial to note that the duration it takes to commit a crime is not associated with the duration of the punishment. As Alan Gomes comments, “[Murder] may take only a moment to commit, whereas it may take a thief several hours to load up a moving van with someone’s possessions. Yet, murder is a far more serious crime.”[12] Therefore, just as punishment is not related to the duration of the crime, so too, the payment of the debt is not concerned with duration but with the sufficiency of the payment. Thus, while Christ’s punishment only lasted hours, due to His infinite value, He was able to pay the amount that was owed.

However, even if this is the case, Parry adds an additional aspect to the argument against the fairness of an infinite punishment saying, “Finite creatures are simply not capable of committing sins that warrant never-ending punishment. Unless God ensures that they keep on sinning to eternity so that he can keep on punishing them — a suggestion with nothing to commend it.”[13] Yet, the continuation of sin in hell is exactly what one should expect. According to Jesus, hell involves “weeping and gnashing of teeth.”[14] Gnashing of teeth is a sign of unrepentance and anger.[15] While Christians are regenerated as they receive a new glorified body, those in hell remain unregenerated. In other words, they remain in a fallen, sinful state. Jerry Walls points out that those in hell remain in an unrepentant state and anger toward God, which is continued sin that goes on forever and thus, requires continued punishment.[16] Therefore, Parry’s argument inadvertently aids the Traditional view.

Stackhouse, being an annihilationist, believes that God’s wrath cannot last forever. Rather, once punishment has sufficed, the person ceases to exist.[17] In other words, God annihilates the sinner from existence. But this idea raises two problems. First, if God were to annihilate people, it would be an attack on His own image.[18] Second, as previously mentioned, people may continue to sin in hell. Thus, the punishment will never suffice because new acts of evil are constantly being committed. Additionally, the sin that one commits is of infinite value since it is a sin against God. How then can a debt of infinite value ever be sufficed within a finite amount of time by a finite being?

Another common objection to the Traditional view is the idea that an eternal hell is incompatible with a God of love because it does not offer sinners a second chance at salvation. Why would God not accept people who repent in hell? Why is a person’s repentance limited only to the finite world? Walls adds, “Are there any persons who die without repenting but who might repent later, if given the opportunity?”[19]

The problem with all of these questions is that they assume one can repent in hell. But is this the case? Scripture offers no support for such a view. In fact, one must ask the deeper question, what causes someone to repent? 2 Corinthians 7:10 says, “For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death.” But where does godly grief come from? According to Jesus, it comes from the Holy Spirit. The mission of the Holy Spirit is to “convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment.”[20] Therefore, it is the Spirit who initiates conviction upon a sinner’s conscience. This conviction either brings sorrow, which leads to salvific repentance, or the sinner chooses to ignore the prompting of the Spirit, resulting in a hardening of the heart. As one continues to reject the conviction of the Spirit, one becomes more and more solidified in their state of unrepentance. Upon death, the Christian becomes perfected in his decision to follow righteousness. He is now free from sinful flesh and is solidified in righteousness. The unrepentant sinner, on the other hand, is solidified in his unrepentance. God’s manifest presence is removed from hell so that the sinner can continue in the unrepentant state that he has freely chosen.[21]

Why can one not repent in hell? First, because those in hell will be fixated in their state of unrepentance. As they continue to sin in hell, their hearts will become ever increasingly hardened. Second, as just noted, it is the Spirit who initiates salvation. Yet, 2 Thessalonians 1:9 tells us that God’s presence is not manifested in hell. If the Holy Spirit is not active in hell, how then can one be moved to conviction? How can one be moved to confess Jesus as Lord without the aid of the Holy Spirit?[22] As Clay Jones comments, “It is the Spirit who persuades unbelievers. So what would lead them to repent in hell, where the Spirit is no longer on hand to work in that way?”[23]

Thus, one must ask if it is unfair for God to allow people to remain in the state of their own choosing? God is simply allowing a person to become fully solidified in the state which they desired while on earth, whether that be with Him (righteousness) or away from Him (depravity). What would be unfair is for God to force people to spend eternity with Him against their will. Such enforcement would be unloving, and thus incompatible with the God of Scripture.

Yet, popular author Rob Bell argues that if one cannot repent after death, the Christian story becomes one of no hope. He then asks, “Is that the Christian message? No hope? Is that what Jesus offers the world?” Two responses can be offered to Bell’s critique. First, as William G. T. Shedd notes, “In Scripture there is no such thing as eternal hope. Hope is a characteristic of earth and time only.”[24] Just because God does not offer hope for those in hell does not negate the hope that is offered to them while on earth. Bell seems to think that the only way one can claim salvation to be a message of hope is if the offer of salvation has no time constraints. But why must this be the case?

Second, Bell seems to miss the point. Those in hell have rejected hope. They have hardened their heart toward the God who sought to release them from their bondage. It is wishful thinking to believe that everyone desires to be set free from their bondage. In fact, the opposite is the case. As Jesus said, “… people loved the darkness rather than the light.”[25] Bell seems to be viewing this issue from the wrong lens. Imagine a criminal who is sentenced to life in prison. He has no hope of ever being released. If the lack of hope for the criminal is the only factor one takes into account, then yes, this seems to be a sad situation. Yet, for the victim, such a prison sentence brings hope. The victim can now live free without the fear of being harmed by the criminal any longer. Thus, Bell’s perspective completely ignores the hope that hell brings to the righteous. Hell offers the hope that all wickedness will one day be quarantined so that the righteous can experience true freedom from the qualms of evil.

Conclusion

David Bentley Hart, one of the leading Christian Universalists, ends his book, That All shall be Saved, with the question of “whether a God who could create a world in which the eternal perdition of rational spirits is even a possibility could be not only good, but the transcendent Good as such.”[26] The sentiment found in Hart’s question is widespread, not only among non-believers, but also among Christians. The God of the Bible is portrayed as loving, and yet, a hell of eternal punishment seems to be incompatible.

In response, it must be noted that God’s love is magnified by the backdrop of eternal punishment. How so? Eternal punishment reveals the seriousness of sin against a holy, infinite God. It reveals the high price that must be paid in order to release guilty humans. It is a reminder that we are not able to pay the debt on our own and are therefore in need of a Savior. And this is where the greatest display of God’s love takes place. Jesus bore the infinite debt upon Himself, paying it in full, to release those who would place their trust in Him. It is among the backdrop of eternal punishment that one sees just how far God is willing to go to save those who are lost. The high price He paid reveals just how valuable we are in His sight. The infinite magnitude of God’s love is displayed brightest by the backdrop of the infinite punishment we deserve. Thus, eternal punishment is not only just and fair, as this paper has argued, it is in complete alignment with the God of love displayed in the Bible.

Citations

[1] David Bentley Hart, That All shall be Saved: Heaven, Hell & Universal Salvation (New Haven, UK: Yale University, 2019), 37.

[2] Frank Turek and Norman L. Geisler, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004), 386.

[3] Michael J. McClymond, The Devil’s Redemption: A New History and Interpretation of Christian Universalism, Vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2018), 242.

[4] William G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, 3rd Edition (Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P&R Publishing, 2003), 723.

[5] Preston Sprinkle, Stanley N. Gundry, Denny Burk, John G. Stackhouse Jr., Robin A. Parry, and Jerry L. Walls, Four Views on Hell, 2nd Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2016), 114.

[6] Ibid., 113-115.

[7] Ibid., 35-36.

[8] See Rev. 20:10-15; 2 Thess. 1:5-10. Several additional passages could be noted here. However, these two passages clearly portray retributive justice in hell. Thus, the burden is on the opponent to offer any Scriptural basis for a restorative view of hell.

[9] Sprinkle, et. al., Four Views, 79.

[10] Ibid., 78-79.

[11] William Lane Craig, Atonement and the Death of Christ: An Exegetical, Historical, and Philosophical Exploration (Waco, TX: Baylor University, 2020), 134.

[12] Alan W. Gomes, 40 Questions About Heaven and Hell (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2018), 318.

[13] Sprinkle, et. al., Four Views, 53.

[14] Matt. 13:42; 8:12; 24:51; Luke 13:28.

[15] See Acts 7:54; also see Clay Jones, Why Does God Allow Evil? Compelling Answers for Life’s Toughest Questions (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2017), 99.

[16] Jerry Walls, Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory: A Protestant View of the Cosmic Drama (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos, 2015), 89-90.

[17] Sprinkle, et. al., Four Views, 47.

[18] Turek and Geisler, Atheist, 386.

[19] Walls, Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory, 191.

[20] John 16:8.

[21] 2 Thessalonians 1:9.

[22] 1 Corinthians 12:3.

[23] Jones, Evil?, 98.

[24] Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, 921.

[25] John 3:19.

[26] Hart, That All shall be Saved, 208.