Hell and the justice of God

What you'll learn

Summarise what Jesus taught about hell from Matthew 10:28, Matthew 25:41-46, Mark 9:43-48 and Luke 16:19-31
Explain why eternal punishment is just rather than petty, including the seriousness of sin against an infinitely holy God and degrees of punishment (Luke 12:47-48)
Answer annihilationism and universalism charitably from Scripture, and show how the cross and the urgency of loving warning flow from the reality of hell

The doctrine nobody likes

No Christian should enjoy talking about hell. Even John Stott admitted that he found the idea of eternal conscious punishment emotionally intolerable, though he insisted that our feelings cannot settle the question; what matters is what God's word says. Sceptics feel the same pressure from the other side. The philosopher Bertrand Russell, in Why I Am Not a Christian (1927), argued that Christ's teaching on hellfire was a defect in his moral character and a doctrine of cruelty that had brought cruelty into the world.

So we approach this lesson with trembling, not swagger. You studied the last things in Know Your Faith, Lesson 9, and met universalism and Rob Bell's Love Wins in Progressive Christianity, Lesson 3. Here the focus is apologetic: how do we answer an honest person who says, 'A loving God would never send anyone to hell'? We begin where Stott said we must: with what Jesus actually taught.

How did John Stott say feelings and Scripture relate on the question of hell, and what was Bertrand Russell's objection?Show answer

Stott admitted he found eternal conscious punishment emotionally intolerable, but said feelings cannot settle the question; what matters is what God's word says. Russell argued in Why I Am Not a Christian (1927) that Christ's teaching on hellfire was a moral defect and a cruel doctrine that brought cruelty into the world.

Stott: emotionally hard
Scripture, not feelings, decides
Russell: hell a cruel doctrine

What Jesus taught

No one in Scripture speaks more about hell than Jesus, and he does so as a warning, often with tears in his voice. Four passages are central.

Notice three things. Hell is real and personal: Jesus speaks to individuals about their own souls. It is conscious and fixed: the rich man feels, remembers and reasons, and cannot cross over. And it is the opposite of eternal life, not merely the end of life. The images of fire, worm and outer darkness (Matt 8:12) should not be pressed literally in every detail, but images point to realities that are worse, not milder, than the pictures. At its heart hell is exclusion from the blessed presence of God, 'away from the presence of the Lord' (2 Thess 1:9), under his just and holy wrath.

Matthew 10:28: 'fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.' God, not man, is the one to fear.
Mark 9:43-48: it is better to lose a hand or an eye than to go into hell, 'the unquenchable fire', 'where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched' (quoting Isa 66:24).
Matthew 25:41-46: the King says, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels', and 'these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.'
Luke 16:19-31: the rich man is 'in anguish in this flame', fully conscious, while a 'great chasm' prevents anyone from crossing. Abraham says that if people will not hear Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.

Summarise what Jesus taught about hell in Matthew 25:41-46 and Luke 16:19-31.Show answer

In Matthew 25 the King sends the cursed into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels, and sets 'eternal punishment' alongside 'eternal life'. In Luke 16 the rich man is conscious and in anguish, and a great chasm fixes his state so no one can cross. Together they show hell as real, conscious, fixed and the opposite of eternal life.

Eternal fire for devil and angels
Eternal punishment parallels eternal life
Conscious anguish, fixed chasm

How should we understand the images of fire, worm and darkness, and what is the heart of hell?Show answer

The images should not be pressed literally in every detail, but they point to realities that are worse, not milder, than the pictures. At its heart hell is exclusion from the blessed presence of God (2 Thess 1:9) while under his just and holy wrath.

Images not pressed in every detail
Reality worse, not milder
Exclusion from God's blessed presence

Why hell is just, not petty

The most common objection is proportion: how can a few decades of sin deserve eternal punishment? Part of the answer is that the seriousness of a wrong is measured not only by the act but by the one wronged. Kicking a stone, kicking a dog and kicking a child are the same act, but they are not the same wrong. The greater the dignity of the one offended, the greater the guilt.

Sin is not merely breaking rules; it is refusing to honour and thank the God who made us (Rom 1:21), treating the infinitely holy, good and glorious God as worth less than our own desires. Jonathan Edwards made this argument in his sermon 'The Justice of God in the Damnation of Sinners', preached on Romans 3:19: since our obligation to love God is infinite, sin against him is 'a crime infinitely heinous, and so deserving of infinite punishment'.

It is also worth noting that nothing in Scripture suggests the lost stop sinning or start loving God. C. S. Lewis, in The Problem of Pain, put it memorably: 'the doors of hell are locked on the inside.' Lewis captures something true about human rebellion, but be careful not to stop there. Scripture also presents hell as God's active, righteous sentence: 'Depart from me' (Matt 25:41). Hell is not God losing control; it is God doing justice.

Explain the argument that sin against God deserves infinite punishment, using the section's illustration and Jonathan Edwards.Show answer

The seriousness of a wrong depends partly on the one wronged: kicking a stone, a dog and a child are the same act but not the same wrong. Sin refuses to honour the infinitely holy and glorious God (Rom 1:21). Edwards argued that because our obligation to love God is infinite, sin against him is infinitely heinous and deserves infinite punishment.

Guilt measured by the one wronged
Stone, dog, child illustration
Infinite obligation, infinite guilt (Edwards)

Degrees of punishment

Many people imagine hell as one identical torment for everyone, from the petty thief to the mass murderer. Jesus taught otherwise. The servant who knew his master's will and did not do it 'will receive a severe beating', while the one who did not know 'will receive a light beating' (Luke 12:47-48). It will be 'more bearable' on the day of judgement for Tyre, Sidon and even Sodom than for the towns that saw Jesus' miracles and did not repent (Matt 11:21-24). The dead are judged 'according to what they had done' (Rev 20:12-13; see Rom 2:5-6).

This matters in conversation. Hell is not a blunt instrument but perfectly proportioned justice, carried out by a Judge who knows every motive and every circumstance. No one will be punished one degree more than they deserve, so a kind neighbour and a cruel tyrant will not be treated alike. Knowledge also brings accountability: those who hear the gospel and refuse it face 'much worse punishment' (Heb 10:29), which is one more reason to take the invitation seriously. 'Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?' (Gen 18:25).

What texts show degrees of punishment in hell, and why does this matter in conversation?Show answer

Luke 12:47-48 contrasts a severe and a light beating depending on knowledge; Matthew 11:21-24 says judgement will be more bearable for Tyre, Sidon and Sodom than for towns that saw Jesus' miracles; and Revelation 20:12-13 says the dead are judged according to their deeds. This shows hell is perfectly proportioned justice, not a blunt instrument, and no one will receive more than they deserve.

Severe and light beating (Luke 12)
More bearable for Tyre and Sidon
Judged by deeds (Rev 20)
Perfectly proportioned justice

Annihilationism and universalism

Annihilationism (also called conditional immortality) teaches that the lost are punished and then cease to exist. It is a minority view held by some evangelicals. Edward Fudge set out the fullest case in The Fire That Consumes (1982), and John Stott wrote in Essentials (1988, a dialogue with David Edwards) that he held it 'tentatively'. Annihilationists point out that Jesus speaks of God 'destroying' soul and body (Matt 10:28), that fire consumes what it burns, and they read 'eternal punishment' as a punishment with eternal results. They are brothers and sisters who affirm the authority of Scripture, and they deserve a careful answer, not scorn.

The historic view, held by the Reformed confessions (WCF 33.2), answers from the texts. In Matthew 25:46 the same word, 'eternal', describes both the punishment and the life; if the life is everlasting conscious life, the punishment is naturally read as everlasting conscious punishment. Revelation 14:11 says of those who worship the beast, 'the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night'. Revelation 20:10 says the devil will be 'tormented day and night forever and ever', and Matthew 25:41 sends the lost into that same fire, 'prepared for the devil and his angels'. And the Greek word for 'destroy' in Matthew 10:28 is often used for ruin rather than ceasing to exist, as with the 'lost' sheep of Luke 15.

Universalism, the belief that all will finally be saved, goes further and is outside historic Christian teaching. You met it in Progressive Christianity, Lesson 3. Jesus' great chasm (Luke 16:26) and his warning that some 'will go away into eternal punishment' (Matt 25:46) leave no room for it.

What is annihilationism, who are two evangelicals associated with it, and what arguments do they use?Show answer

Annihilationism, or conditional immortality, teaches that the lost are punished and then cease to exist. Edward Fudge argued for it in The Fire That Consumes (1982), and John Stott held it tentatively in Essentials (1988). They appeal to God 'destroying' soul and body (Matt 10:28), to fire consuming, and read 'eternal punishment' as punishment with eternal results.

Lost cease to exist
Fudge; Stott tentatively
'Destroy', consuming fire, eternal results

How does the section answer annihilationism from Matthew 25:46 and Revelation 14:11 and 20:10?Show answer

In Matthew 25:46 the same word 'eternal' describes both punishment and life, so the punishment is naturally everlasting like the life. Revelation 14:11 says the smoke of the beast-worshippers' torment goes up forever with no rest day or night. Revelation 20:10 says the devil is tormented forever, and Matthew 25:41 sends the lost into that same fire. 'Destroy' can mean ruin, as with the lost sheep.

Same 'eternal' for life and punishment
No rest day or night (Rev 14:11)
Same fire as the devil's (Rev 20:10; Matt 25:41)
'Destroy' can mean ruin

Hell and the cross

Hell is not the centre of the Christian message, but without it the cross makes no sense. At Calvary Jesus drank the cup of God's wrath (Mark 14:36) and cried, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' (Mark 15:34). God put Christ forward as a propitiation, a sacrifice that turns away wrath, so that he might be 'just and the justifier' of the one who has faith in Jesus (Rom 3:25-26). For everyone who trusts Christ, hell's sentence has already been served by a Substitute: 'There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus' (Rom 8:1). Jesus 'delivers us from the wrath to come' (1 Thess 1:10).

That is why warning people is an act of love. God takes 'no pleasure in the death of the wicked' (Ezek 33:11), and Paul says, 'knowing the fear of the Lord, we persuade others' (2 Cor 5:11). The atheist magician Penn Jillette once said in a widely shared video that if he truly believed a truck was about to hit someone, at some point he would tackle them, and asked, 'How much do you have to hate somebody to not proselytize?' Speak of hell with tears, never with relish, and always with the open door of the cross.

Example: Answering 'How could a loving God send people to hell?'

Friend: I just can't believe in a God who would torture people forever. How is that love?

You: I feel the weight of that, and I don't think any Christian should talk about hell lightly. Can I ask what you'd want God to do about evil, say about someone who trafficked children and never faced justice?

Friend: I'd want him punished, obviously.

You: Me too. So we both want a God who is just, not one who shrugs. The hard part is that by his standard I'm guilty too. Jesus said lust and hatred come from the same heart as adultery and murder. And sin isn't just breaking a rule; it's treating the God who made me as worth less than what I want.

Friend: But forever? That seems out of proportion.

You: Jesus actually taught that punishment is proportioned: a severe beating for some, a light one for others. No one gets a degree more than they deserve. But here's why I call it good news: Jesus took the judgement himself. On the cross he cried, 'My God, why have you forsaken me?' so that anyone who trusts him never has to hear 'Depart from me.'

Friend: So you think I need that?

You: I know I do. And the offer's open to you right now. Can I show you where Jesus talks about it?

How does the cross relate to hell, and why is warning people an act of love?Show answer

At the cross Jesus drank the cup of God's wrath and was forsaken, as a propitiation, so God is just in justifying those who trust Christ (Rom 3:25-26); for them there is no condemnation (Rom 8:1). Warning people is loving because God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, and Paul persuades others knowing the fear of the Lord (2 Cor 5:11). Even Penn Jillette asked how much you would have to hate someone not to warn them.

Jesus bore the wrath as propitiation
No condemnation in Christ
Warning is love (2 Cor 5:11)
Jillette's truck illustration

In their own words

“Christ believed in and threatened hellfire. A truly humane person would not believe in everlasting punishment, and hellfire is a doctrine of cruelty that has brought cruelty into the world.” (Bertrand Russell, Why I Am Not a Christian (1927 lecture))

“The idea of eternal torment developed after Jesus. Jesus taught that the wicked would be destroyed (annihilated), not tortured forever, while the righteous would receive eternal life.” (Bart D. Ehrman, Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife (2020))

“Eternal punishment is incompatible with the goodness of God; a God who created people knowing some would suffer forever could not be truly good, so all must finally be saved.” (David Bentley Hart, That All Shall Be Saved (2019))

“Scripture teaches that the lost will be punished and then destroyed, so that they cease to exist. 'Eternal punishment' is a punishment whose result is eternal, not unending conscious torment.” (Edward Fudge, The Fire That Consumes (1982); an in-house evangelical view, held tentatively by John Stott in Essentials (1988))

Key texts

Matthew 25:41, 46: 'Eternal punishment' set alongside 'eternal life', in the same fire prepared for the devil. The central text against both universalism and annihilationism.
Mark 9:43-48: Jesus' urgent warning about the unquenchable fire, quoting Isaiah 66:24. Better to lose anything than to lose your soul.
Luke 16:19-31: The rich man and Lazarus: conscious anguish and a fixed chasm. Also shows that Scripture is sufficient warning.
Luke 12:47-48: Severe and light beatings: degrees of punishment show hell is perfectly proportioned justice.
Revelation 14:11; 20:10: Torment 'forever and ever' with 'no rest, day or night'. Key texts for answering annihilationism.
Romans 3:25-26: At the cross God is both 'just and the justifier'. Hell and the cross explain each other.
Ezekiel 33:11; 2 Corinthians 5:11: God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, and knowing the fear of the Lord we persuade others. Warning is love.

Objections and answers

Try answering each one yourself before you open the response.

“A loving God would never send anyone to hell.”Show a response

I understand the instinct, but think about what love means. A judge who loved the victims of child abuse would not let the abuser walk free; we would call that indifference, not love. Love that cares about people must oppose what destroys them. Scripture never sets God's love against his justice; at the cross they meet. God was so loving that he sent his Son to bear judgement in our place (1 John 4:10), and so just that sin was really punished rather than ignored (Rom 3:25-26). The question is not whether a loving God will judge evil, but whether we will accept the rescue he has provided. Hell is what happens when people refuse the only refuge from a judgement they really deserve.

“Eternal punishment for a few decades of sin is wildly out of proportion.”Show a response

That depends on how serious sin is, and that depends partly on whom we sin against. Kicking a stone and kicking a child are the same act, but not the same wrong. Sin against the infinitely holy and good God who gave us everything is not a small thing; Jonathan Edwards argued that since our obligation to love God is infinite, sin against him is infinitely serious. There is also no sign in Scripture that the lost ever stop rebelling. And Jesus taught degrees of punishment: a severe beating for some, a light beating for others (Luke 12:47-48). No one will suffer one degree more than they deserve. The real surprise in the Bible is not hell but grace: that God would bear the penalty himself for people like us.

“Jesus never taught eternal torment. That idea came later. He taught that the wicked would simply be destroyed.”Show a response

Bart Ehrman and some annihilationists argue this, and it deserves a careful answer. Jesus did speak of God 'destroying' soul and body (Matt 10:28), but the Greek word often means ruin, as with the 'lost' sheep in Luke 15. Look at the rest of what he said. He set 'eternal punishment' in exact parallel with 'eternal life' (Matt 25:46). He sent the lost into the 'eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels' (Matt 25:41), and Revelation 20:10 says the devil is tormented there 'day and night forever and ever'. He described a place 'where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched' (Mark 9:48), and a rich man who is conscious and in anguish after death (Luke 16:23-24). The plainest reading of Jesus' words is conscious, unending punishment.

“Annihilationism is kinder and makes God look better. Why not just believe that?”Show a response

Annihilationism is held by some sincere evangelicals, such as Edward Fudge and, tentatively, John Stott, and they should be treated as brothers, not heretics. But the test cannot be which view feels kinder; Stott himself said our emotions cannot decide the question, only God's word can. When we read the texts, Matthew 25:46 uses the same word 'eternal' for punishment and life. Revelation 14:11 speaks of human beings who have 'no rest, day or night', with the smoke of their torment rising 'forever and ever'. And the lost share the fire 'prepared for the devil' (Matt 25:41), where he is tormented forever (Rev 20:10). We also need to be careful: if we soften God's justice to make him look better, we may end up shrinking the cross, which shows how serious sin really is.

“In the end love wins. God will save everyone, even if it takes a long time after death.”Show a response

Many people find that hope attractive, and the desire behind it is often compassion. But the question is not what we hope; it is what Jesus taught. He said some 'will go away into eternal punishment' (Matt 25:46), described a 'great chasm' that cannot be crossed after death (Luke 16:26), and warned of 'the unquenchable fire' (Mark 9:43). Hebrews says 'it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment' (Heb 9:27), not a second chance. Universalism also quietly undermines the urgency of the gospel: if everyone is saved anyway, why did Jesus weep over Jerusalem, and why did Paul plead with people to be reconciled to God (2 Cor 5:20)? Love does win, at the cross, for all who come to Christ.

“Christians only talk about hell to scare people into church. It's emotional manipulation.”Show a response

Fear can be misused, and I'm sorry for preachers who have used hell to manipulate people. But warning someone about a real danger is not manipulation; it is love. If a doctor sees a tumour, the kind thing is to tell you. Jesus spoke about hell more than anyone else in the Bible, not to control people but to rescue them: 'fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell' (Matt 10:28). God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked; he says, 'Turn back, turn back... for why will you die?' (Ezek 33:11). And Christianity does not leave you with fear. It points you to a Saviour who bore judgement in your place, so that 'there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus' (Rom 8:1).

Written task

A thoughtful friend says: 'I could maybe believe in God, but not one who sends people to hell forever. If Christianity is true, why isn't annihilation or everyone being saved more likely?' Write a 300-450 word reply. Summarise what Jesus taught about hell, explain why eternal punishment is just (including degrees of punishment), answer annihilationism and universalism charitably from Scripture, and close by showing how the cross is God's answer to the judgement we deserve.

Hand this in to Mr Scott. He will look for:

Accurately summarises Jesus' teaching from at least three of Matthew 10:28, Matthew 25:41-46, Mark 9:43-48 and Luke 16:19-31
Explains why eternal punishment is just, using the seriousness of sin against God and degrees of punishment (Luke 12:47-48)
Answers annihilationism from Matthew 25:46 and Revelation 14:11 or 20:10 while treating its evangelical holders as brothers, and rejects universalism from Jesus' words
Connects hell to the cross clearly (e.g. Rom 3:25-26; 8:1) and ends with a warm, personal gospel invitation
Gracious, sober tone without relish or sarcasm, within 300-450 words