Print ArticleOne of the great mysteries of the Bible surrounds the question of whether or not it actually teaches the concept of eternal punishment. While the Bible clearly informs us that there is a Hell, it is a little ambiguous as to how long people will stay there. Many people believe that Hell is a place of eternal punishment, and there some passages in the Bible that seem to support this position. However, other parts of the Bible would seem to argue against it. I would like to present two of the major arguments in favor of the latter.
First, the Bible often uses words like ´destroy´ or ´destruction´ to refer to the ultimate fate of people who die in their sins, i.e., without having accepted Jesus as their savior. However, many will argue that the words ´destroy´ and ´destruction´ have a special meaning when used to describe what will happen to a lost person´s soul. Normally the word ´destroy´ means to put to an end to, wipe out, or annihilate. But those who believe in eternal punishment will say the destruction of the soul refers to something totally different -- damnation that will have no end.
However, there´s a passage in Matthews that shoots down this explanation. In Matthew 10:28 (KJV), Jesus says the following, "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is to destroy both the soul and body in hell." One doesn´t have to know Greek to see that the same word is being used here when Jesus refers to destroying both the soul and body. According to Jesus, the soul and body of the unbeliever will meet the same fate, but what is it?
If one argues that this use of the word ´destroy´ means what it usually does, then he or she must conclude that both the body and soul are subject to being snuffed out. Conversely, if one believes that ´destroy´ in this context refers to eternal damnation, then he or she must conclude that the body is just as immortal as the soul. At least in this particular passage, the word ´destroy´ cannot be divided up into two different meanings.
The second argument against eternal punishment is a mathematical one. As Christians, we believe that Jesus paid the full price for our sins when he went to the cross; hence hymns like "Jesus Paid it All." We believe that His suffering and death was an adequate substitute for the punishment we would have had to endure without the sacrifice he made. However, there is a problem with this concept for those who believe in eternal punishment.
However great or horrible Jesus´ sacrifice, he suffered no more than three days to pay for the sins of the entire world. Why then would one be required to suffer eternally to pay for his or her own individual sins? Something doesn´t add up here. How could one finite sacrifice be full payment for millions upon millions of infinite debts? How could the temporary be an acceptable substitute for the eternal? I don´t have the answers, of course, but it does seem to me like the concept of eternal punishment throws the salvation equation all out of proportion.
First, the Bible often uses words like ´destroy´ or ´destruction´ to refer to the ultimate fate of people who die in their sins, i.e., without having accepted Jesus as their savior. However, many will argue that the words ´destroy´ and ´destruction´ have a special meaning when used to describe what will happen to a lost person´s soul. Normally the word ´destroy´ means to put to an end to, wipe out, or annihilate. But those who believe in eternal punishment will say the destruction of the soul refers to something totally different -- damnation that will have no end.
However, there´s a passage in Matthews that shoots down this explanation. In Matthew 10:28 (KJV), Jesus says the following, "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is to destroy both the soul and body in hell." One doesn´t have to know Greek to see that the same word is being used here when Jesus refers to destroying both the soul and body. According to Jesus, the soul and body of the unbeliever will meet the same fate, but what is it?
If one argues that this use of the word ´destroy´ means what it usually does, then he or she must conclude that both the body and soul are subject to being snuffed out. Conversely, if one believes that ´destroy´ in this context refers to eternal damnation, then he or she must conclude that the body is just as immortal as the soul. At least in this particular passage, the word ´destroy´ cannot be divided up into two different meanings.
The second argument against eternal punishment is a mathematical one. As Christians, we believe that Jesus paid the full price for our sins when he went to the cross; hence hymns like "Jesus Paid it All." We believe that His suffering and death was an adequate substitute for the punishment we would have had to endure without the sacrifice he made. However, there is a problem with this concept for those who believe in eternal punishment.
However great or horrible Jesus´ sacrifice, he suffered no more than three days to pay for the sins of the entire world. Why then would one be required to suffer eternally to pay for his or her own individual sins? Something doesn´t add up here. How could one finite sacrifice be full payment for millions upon millions of infinite debts? How could the temporary be an acceptable substitute for the eternal? I don´t have the answers, of course, but it does seem to me like the concept of eternal punishment throws the salvation equation all out of proportion.
view author's RSS feed
