The separation between people after the final judgment, the dual outcome depending on whether one travelled the narrow or the broad way, is and remains a difficult subject, yet we cannot ignore it.

Source: De Bijbel en de Toekomst, 1998. 6 pages.

The Great Separation

Difficult Questions🔗

The separation between people after the final judgment, the dual outcome depending on whether one travelled the narrow or the broad way (see Matt. 7:13, 14) is and remains a difficult subject, yet we cannot ignore it.

Many people have more and more difficulty, for various reasons, with what is taught about this in the church of the ages. One of these reasons is that the world has opened up to us and that a greater number of people have come into our field of vision. Would the millions, who already experience a miserable life in this earthly life, vanish into the outer darkness? Besides, we also meet unbelief in the circle in which we live. We interact with people whom we value, but who show that they do not believe. It is easier to describe that unbelievers will be lost, than to make it concrete and to say: such and so will be lost if they remain unbelieving.

In theology, universalism is gaining ground. This does not only mean the doctrine of general atonement (all people can be saved), but also the doctrine of total atonement (all people will be saved). There are theologians who in the past did not (or at least not necessarily) support this second view of universalism, which is also called absolute universalism, but who will support this view now. This often coincides with a different understanding of the weight of man’s sin and of the severity of God’s judgment. To some, the grounds of this lie in the death of Christ.

This topic is important also because it does not stand on its own. It is not merely a difference of minor significance, where one person will assume that there is such a things as eternal punishment and another does not, or that the one will say that this life can be hell for someone, but does not want to believe in a hell in the hereafter, while another cannot ignore what Scripture has to say about the eternal damnation.

What is the doctrine of the church? Already in the time before the Reformation statements were made about the final judgment and the definitive and absolute separation. In this regards, Rome holds on to the tradition, albeit that there have been diverging views from time to time. Up to the last official manual of the doctrine of Rome, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which was approved by the pope in 1992, there is not only mention of heaven and purgatory, but also of hell.

Just as the Augsburg Confession (1530), the most important confessional document of the Lutheran Churches, the Belgic Confession speaks of the contrast of what the believers and the elect may expect, and what is in store for the unbelievers (BC, Art. 37). The Heidelberg Catechism does not deal extensively with this topic, but the answer of Lord’s Day 19, in which the chosen ones and the enemies of God are positioned opposite of each other, speaks clear language. In Lord’s Day 7 Total Atonement is rejected outright: “Are all men, then, saved by Christ just as they perished through Adam? Answer: No; only those are saved who by a true faith are grafted into Christ and accept all his benefits.”

A Doctrine Against which Objections are Voiced🔗

In our present time several psychological and theological objections are raised against the doctrine that a part of humanity will receive eternal life, yet another part will receive eternal punishment along with the fallen angels. A climate has arisen where such considerations are given more publicity than in the past, even though they have been in existence for a long time. We will mention some:

  1. It is psychologically inconceivable. The eternal blessedness must be disrupted because people will have sympathy with the lost.
  2. It conflicts with the love of God.
  3. On account of the triumph of God’s grace in Christ, which is fixed objectively and has universal application, being lost is an impossible reality (K. Barth).
  4. It is unfair that sin, which has a limited and temporal character, should be followed by an eternal punishment.
  5. The word “eternal” does not mean “forever and always”, for in the Bible it can also indicate a lengthy period.
  6. In addition to Scriptural passages that appear to confirm that there is an eternal blessedness alongside an eternal damnation, there are also texts people can appeal to that indicate a universal blessedness.
    Re:1. The first objection appears stronger than it actually is. Our feelings and emotions can never be the deciding factor. The inner life of saved people will correspond entirely to God’s will, such that their emotions do not turn against it but that they will see it as God sees it.
    Re: 2. God is love. That does not mean that he cannot pronounce a judgment. It has been pointed out that it is exactly the Lord Jesus Christ, in whom God’s love is personified, who has spoken repeatedly and emphatically about the eternal judgment. He warned the children of the kingdom about the outer darkness (Matt. 8:12). In his explanation of the parable of the weeds among the wheat he said, “The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears let him hear” (Matt. 13:41-43).
    God’s love is a holy love. Because God is love and because he wants that we respond to his love he cannot endure it that people despise his love. People can make themselves guilty of this when they keep saying “no” to him. Then they have to fear for “him who is seated on the throne, and for the wrath of the Lamb” (Rev. 6:16).
    Re: 3. In Karl Barth’s views the consequences of unbelief disappear, because God’s grace in Christ has triumphed. His ‘yes’ is stronger than any “no”. The wicked will not escape the rod of God’s wrath, but it is not to be expected that they will be struck by God’s sword.
    However, God’s Word says: “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him” (John 3:36).
    In combatting Barth’s views the Swiss theologian Emil Brunner has made use of the imagery of a storm at sea, where sailors are in danger of perishing. However, in reality the water is too shallow to drown in it. Only, they do not know.
    Re: 4. Is an eternal punishment justifiable? That is not up to us to decide. God’s justice cannot be measured by human standards. The apostle Paul says: “Is there injustice on God's part? By no means” (Rom. 9:14)!
    Often it is alleged that the justice or the righteousness of God can only be bringing salvation and blessings. It is true that righteousness and blessing are closely connected in numerous places in the Bible. And yet, there is also a retaliatory, a punishing kind of justice. Psalm 7:11 can be explained in no other way, and the same goes for Isaiah 5:16, Romans 2:5-8, and other parts of Scripture.
    Re: 5. Is the eternal punishment really forever and ever? That is a weighty question. In the Bible, the word “eternal” does not always carry the same meaning. Sometimes it does not relate to a time or a situation that God allows to continue endlessly, and where nothing else will ever happen. Only then we can deduce this from something else.
    Also someone who does not believe that for some things one will end up in an eternal punishment, will not deny that there are Scripture passages that speak about this, such as Daniel 12:2 and Matthew 25:46. From the continuation of the Gospel according to Matthew, in which the history of Jesus’ sufferings are described (Matt. 26-27), J. Bonda presumes to conclude that Jesus went the way of the cross in order to realize that the “entry into the eternal punishment” would be followed up with the return of many. This is speculative reasoning, for such a connection is not at all given in Scripture.
    Equally untenable is the idea that “eternal punishment” is here not the contrast to “eternal life”, because then it would have said “eternal death”. The fat that Jesus spoke of punishment would mean, according to Bonda, that God does not let go of the disobedient and that they vanish into nothingness, but that he maintains his intention, namely that at one time they will arrive at the life to which he had created them. The eternal punishment is therefore interpreted to be a temporary punishment.
    There is however no essential difference between the eternal punishment and the eternal death. This passage of Scripture does not provide the basis to presume that the eternal punishment would not have a definite character. The eternal life is indeed eternal, and so is the eternal punishment.
    The destruction, against which we are warned, is an eternal destruction (2 Thess. 1:8, 9; Rev. 14:9-11). According to Paul’s words it consists of being far removed from the face of the Lord and from his glory. That lies in the extension of living without hope and without God in this world, and in being alienated from the life of God, in ignorance and hardness of heart (see Eph. 4:18).
    Re: 6. There are indeed texts with a more universal tone, yet these do not teach absolute universalism. Those who plead the idea of the doctrine of total atonement, also identified as “the return of all things”, always need to appeal to Scripture portions where words and expressions are used such as “all” (all men), “all things” and “the whole world”. But the word “all” in these contexts does not include all people, one by one. “The whole world” is not everywhere the entire sum of all humanity, which should include each one of us without exception.
    Romans 5:18 states, “Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.”
    Many want to interpret with “all men”, mentioned twice, the same significance: all people without exception. At the first instance, the descendants of Adam are meant, as may be clear from a comparison with Romans 5:12. However, in the second instance Paul speaks about those who receive the justification unto life, or the gift of righteousness (Rom. 5:17). That is the justification through grace and by faith (Rom. 3:21-30). “All men” is therefore first of all an indication of all who are comprised in Adam, but afterwards of all who are in Christ. The first “all men” concerns the entire realm of the old humanity, and the second instance concerns the entire new mankind. It is not about the principle “all without exception” but about the rule “all through one”, which points to God’s ordination.
    Romans 11:32 reads, “For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.”
    God’s mercy encompasses all: not just the Jews, but also the Gentiles who at first were disobedient. Now that Israel, as a people, has gone the way of disobedience, and many Gentiles have now come to faith, his mercy continues to exist, not only for the Gentiles but also for the Jews. God wants the salvation of them all. However, the apostle is not saying here that all Jews and all Gentiles would then also personally share in the blessing.
    In 1 Corinthians 15:28 we find the words, “that God may be all in all.” It is one of the texts on which Origenes (†253/254) based his theory of general atonement (apokatastatis pantôn or restitution of all things).
    The translation of the last word of this text is not confirmed. Is it about “all men” or “all things”? However the Greek word is translated — whether one thinks here of absolute rule (over all men) or of complete harmony (in all things) — one still cannot use this text as proof for the idea of general atonement. Doing so would mean contradicting Paul. Indeed, in this letter he has shown the contrast between those who will be saved and those who are lost. It is the believers who are being saved (1 Cor. 1:18-21).
    From the writings of John often 1 John 2:2 is quoted: “He [Christ] is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.”
    This means that the atonement was not intended only for the immediate circle of the disciples and those with whom they lived in communion of faith (1 John 1:1-3), but that it has a much wider reach. The work of Christ has universal significance. It affects the whole world. The gospel of atonement is for everyone.

Purification or Destruction?🔗

Some theologians recognize that Scripture speaks about the great separation, but they are of the opinion that this does not mean that the last word has been spoken about this matter. Besides various texts of Matthew and a word about eternal destruction from Paul, both Paul’s and John’s writings contain expressions that stress that there is a blessed future for “all”. Both series are not easily equitable, so they need to be put in sequential order, such that everything ends up with the second series of expressions. The darkness of rejection and God-forsakenness can and may not be reasoned away, but neither can it be made to last eternally. In God’s name we are hoping that hell will be a way of purification.

The idea of a catharsis or purification, i.e., the thought of a second chance after death, is gaining popularity in our day with not just a few people. However, in the Bible we find no indication that after this life there will be another chance to come to faith and repentance. It carries eternal weight whether we believe here on this earth or not.

According to another view, which is a bit older but yet is being defended again, at some future point there will no longer be any unbelievers—not because they will ultimately start to believe and be saved, but because they are destroyed. To them, death is final; after this they no longer exist. In this way J. Verkuyl rejects the eternal punishment as the doctrine of general atonement, but at the same time he calls the idea of an “annihilation”, a destruction of all that opposes God’s love and grace, not a vain speculation but a possibility that, according to him, is supported in the Bible. Some authors, who may be identified with the evangelical movement such as John Stott, are also open to the viewpoint of the complete destruction of the unbelievers.

However, there are no biblical grounds to appeal to this opinion. This representation contradicts the words about the eternal punishment and the eternal destruction that we cannot ignore, even though we may have difficulties understanding it.

Ruin and Calamity🔗

 Eternal life and eternal punishment, blessedness and ruin, are opposed to each other. There is a heaven, and there is a hell.

The Bible makes use of various images that give us an impression of the severity of the definitive fulfillment of God’s verdict of hell. The fire that cannot be quenched (Mark 9:48) makes us think of having to suffer God’s wrath; the outer darkness (Matt. 8:12) is the sign of having been left by God; being “outside” (Rev. 22:15) indicates the exclusion of the communion with God and his people, and the weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt. 13:42) point to remorse and self-reproach.

We need to be very careful and cautious when it deals with the eternal ruin. How would we be able to imagine what hell is like? In the Middle Ages, the poet Dante has attempted to describe hell in a remarkable way in his work, Inferno. In the twentieth century the theologian Dr. Klaas Schilder wrote about it as well. Anyone who enters hell must let go of all hope (Dante). We will leave Dante’s fantasies, with his idea of the nine concentric circles of torment, as the poet’s interpretation, however a biblical element is the connection between sin and punishment. Also in hell not everything is the same for everyone (see Matt. 11:24; Luke 10:12). According to G.C. Berkouwer in the New Testament we are continuously faced with an apparent ultimate threat that is inseparable from the proclamation of salvation. He is right when he means to say that the Bible does not provide some neutral information about hell. Jesus also gave no “objective” reply to the question, “Lord, will those who are saved be few?” He answered, “Strive to enter through the narrow door.” And he gave additional warnings as well (Luke 13:23-30).

In a discussion with Dr. M.J. Arntzen it became clear that Berkouwer did not want to admit that hell was a reality. But why then would the Saviour have spoken about it so emphatically? It is not without reason that God’s Word warns us.

The eternal judgment cannot be an independent topic in the preaching, yet neither may it be concealed or ignored.

Add new comment

(If you're a human, don't change the following field)
Your first name.
(If you're a human, don't change the following field)
Your first name.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.