From the earliest centuries of the Church, three different views of the fate of the lost in hell have been held among mainstream Church fathers:
- Annihilationism: This view argues that our souls are not naturally immortal, and will not last forever unless God wills it. Therefore, some will be destroyed at the Second Coming.
- Eternal Conscious Torment: This is the most common view of hell, at least in the west. It holds that the souls of the damned will suffer for eternity commensurate to their sins.
- Restorationism: In this view, God ultimately reconciles all souls to Himself after a period of purgation.
Although the second view became the dominant one in Christianity, all three views of hell have a long history of orthodox Christian defenders, and many Bible verses to support their arguments. Here are the Biblical and theological arguments for each possibility.
Annihilationism, or Conditional Immortality
The doctrine of Conditional Immortality (or Annihilationism) argues that only God is innately immortal (1 Tim. 6:16), and humans, though made in His image, do not possess immortality by default. This view seems to have been held by Barnabas (AD 70-130), Mathetes (AD 125-200), Hermas, and Irenaeus (AD 130-200).
The idea of each person having an “immortal soul” is not found in scripture, and was a feature of Greek philosophy, later adopted by some of the church fathers. On this view, all humans will naturally cease to exist if they fail to obtain immortality, which must be sought in order to be obtained (Rom. 2:7).
The Lake of Fire and the Tree of Life
Eternal life resides, and is found, only in Christ (1 John 5:11-12) and without faith in Christ, all will “perish” (John 3:16), ceasing to exist. This is why the wages of sin is said to be death (Rom. 6:23), and the lake of fire is called the “second death” (Rev. 20:14). The common language for the fate of the lost, in scripture, includes words like to “die,” to “perish,” and to be “destroyed” or “consumed” (Gen. 3:17; Ezek. 18:20; John 3:16; Luke 13:3,5; Rom. 2:12, 6:23; Matt. 10:28; 1 Thes. 5:3; 2 Thes. 1:9, 2:8; etc.).
On this view, man was created naturally mortal, but conditionally immortal. To live forever would require access to the tree of life in the Garden of Eden. Because of sin, man was denied access to the tree of life, so that every person, like Adam, now lives out his or her mortal life and then dies. Christ has come as a sort of second “tree of life” so that He said, “I am the living bread… If anyone eats this bread, he will live forever” (John 6:51 ESV). The Bible says that eternal life is the gift of God to those who believe and who “have” the Son (John 3:16, 20:31; 1 John 5:11-12).
When Jesus returns, all will rise to the judgment (John 5:28-29; Acts 24:15). Physical immortality will be conferred upon the glorified believers (1 Cor. 15:42,53), while unbelievers will be consigned to the lake of fire to experience “the second death” (Rev. 20:15). There, they will experience the destruction of both soul and body (Matt. 10:28).
It is believed, by most who hold this view, that those who are lost will experience a just punishment proportionate to their culpability before passing into non-existence (Luke 12:47-48; Matt. 11:22,24).
The ‘Traditional’ View: Eternal Conscious Torment
On this view, the lost, as well as the saved, will remain conscious throughout eternity. Some believe that immortality and indestructibility of the soul are features of human nature, due to man’s being made in the image of God. Others believe that immortality is a condition that God will confer at the judgment, and will maintain eternally, so that He will keep even the lost alive to suffer for eternity.
Tatian (ca. AD 170), Athenagoras (ca. AD 175), Tertullian (AD 160-240), and Augustine (AD 354-430) defended the view of the Eternal Conscious Torment of the damned. While other views of hell co-existed alongside this view for the first four or five hundred years of Church history, it was Augustine’s advocacy of it that caused it to become the “traditional” view of later Church history, especially in the Latin (Western) Church.
The idea that the punishment is eternal is drawn from scriptures that speak of eternal fires (Matt. 25:41), eternal punishment (Matt. 25:46), eternal destruction from the presence of the Lord (2 Thes. 1:9), and the smoke of their torment ascending forever (Rev. 14:11). While none of these passages speak of the endless consciousness of those thus punished, there are other passages that speak of their experiencing “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt. 8:12, 22:13, 24:51, 25:30) and enduring “shame and everlasting contempt” (Dan. 12:2).
Justification for Eternal Punishment by a Loving God
Eternal conscious punishment is said to be justified because of the infinite culpability incurred by sinning. The objection that endless punishment is a disproportionate and unjust penalty for a man who has sinned only for a finite lifetime is answered by two observations: 1) The magnitude of a crime is unrelated to the amount of time that was spent in committing it, since the most heinous act can be committed in a few seconds; and 2) All sin is committed against an infinite Person (God), and is thus infinite in magnitude.
It is sometimes also argued that the infinite worth of Christ’s sacrifice was necessary to counter an infinite penalty that was deserved by mankind, and that to make hell less than an eternal penalty would degrade the value of Christ’s atonement.
Those who hold this view believe that the saved will not, throughout eternity, be experiencing grief over lost loved ones in hell. Two possible scenarios have been suggested: 1) God may wipe the memory of loved ones in hell from our memories entirely; or 2) Our mind will be so conformed to that of God’s that we will see them as He does, and so will rejoice in their suffering (so Tertullian and others suggest).
Even though suffering in hell is seen as eternal, not all sinners bear the same degree of culpability, so, since God is just and will judge each one according to his individual works, there may be degrees of suffering experienced by those with varying degrees of sinfulness (Luke 12:47-48; Matt. 11:22,24).
Restorationism, or Universal Reconciliation
This view holds that God desires all to be saved (Ezek. 33:11; 1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9), that Christ died for all (John 1:29; 1 Tim. 2:6; Heb. 2:9, 1 John 2:2), and that God has the sovereign right and power to continue seeking to save the lost, even in hell (Eccl. 8:4; Dan. 4:35; Eph. 1:11).
On this view, there is no reason that God, who wants to restore all the creation to Himself, would arbitrarily cut off the opportunities for repentance at the point of the sinner’s death. The sinner in hell is the same sinner whom God loved during his lifetime, and for whom Christ died. If God would welcome repentance of a sinner on his deathbed (Luke 23:42-43), why would He not do so after death? Does God’s love have an expiration date?
Restorationists believe that the scriptures used to support the traditional view are taken out of context and are found only in contexts that are non-literal (especially in Revelation). They also believe that most of the texts about death and destruction of sinners refer to consequences experienced in this life. The scripture says that “it is appointed to man once to die, but after this the judgment” (Heb. 9:27) — but nothing explicit is said about what happens after the judgment. All stand before God and receive a verdict and a sentence. Many are consigned to the lake of fire (Rev. 20:15), but what becomes of them after that is the question at issue, which is answered differently by each of the three views.
It is further added that the restoration of all the creation to God through Christ is actually predicted many times in scripture (Eph. 1:10; Col. 1:16,20) and that all men will be saved (John 12:32; Rom. 5:18; Phil. 2:10-11; 1 Tim. 4:10; Rev. 5:13). If Jesus died for all, and somehow receives less than all in the end, then Jesus gets less than He paid for, and would seem to be the cosmic loser. Yet, Christ is everywhere said to be victorious over Satan (Col. 1:15; Heb. 2:14; 1 John 3:8), which would not seem true if Satan ultimately wins most (or any) of the souls in his tug-of-war with Christ over the souls of men.
The question, “O death, where is your victory?” (1 Cor. 15:55) is not supposed to be answerable.
Why Restorationism Fell Out of Favor
The Restorationist view has come to be regarded as non-orthodox in the Western Church, due to then following historical developments.
The Alexandrian theological school, from the late second century onward, was known for teaching the view that hell is a place for the restoration of recalcitrant sinners who failed to repent in their lifetimes. The leaders of this school, in sequence, were Pantaenus (AD 180-190), Clement (AD 150-215), and Origen (AD 185-254). The latter is widely regarded (along with Augustine) as one of the two greatest theologians of the first five centuries of Christianity, though his view of hell differed completely from that of the later Augustine.
Origen is the most famous early advocate of Restorationism in the post-apostolic Church. His views influenced Christian theology, not only in his native Alexandria, but through much of the Middle-Eastern and Eastern Church. The great fathers, Gregory of Nazianzus (AD 329-390), Gregory of Nyssa (AD 372-394), and Theodore of Mopsuestia (AD 392-428) were also of this persuasion. While not sharing in all of his theological positions, Eusebius (AD 260-340), Athanasius (AD 328-373), and Ambrose (AD 340-397) held Origen in great admiration.
Origen’s view on hell was later opposed by Augustine, in The City of God. Largely due to Augustine’s influence, especially in the Latin church, Origen and his views came to be marginalized. Three centuries after Origen’s death, many of his views were condemned as heresies at the Second Council of Constantinople (553).
Conclusion: Why Hell?
Notwithstanding the prevalence of one view in the theology of the Church for many centuries, the question of hell’s nature and purpose has been disputed from the earliest centuries among believers — and still is today.
What is your own view of the purpose of hell: Closure, Retribution, or Recovery of the lost?
Go deeper into all three major views of hell in Christian history and theology in Why Hell? Three Christian Views Critically Examined by Steve Gregg.
You’ll find:
- Biblical vocabulary of hell and positions held throughout early Christian history
- Positive cases presented on each of the three perspectives
- Critiques of each view
- Helpful charts at the back of the book that summarize and cross-examine the arguments
Steve Gregg provides food for thought for both trained theologians and serious Christian readers who want all the data to then consider for themselves the consequences of these three Christian perspectives on hell.
Steve Gregg is a lecturer, writer, and talk-show host. For 16 years he lectured on the Bible at the Great Commission School. Since 1997, he has hosted the daily radio talk-show, "The Narrow Path." He is also author of Revelation: Four Views: A Parallel Commentary (Thomas Nelson, 1997, 2013), which was the 1998 Final Nominee for the Gold Medallion Book Award of the ECPA. More information about Steve’s books and daily radio program may be found at www.thenarrowpath.com.
