Five Things You Should Know about Hell: A Response to Aaron Garriott

“X things you should know about Topic Y.” Articles like this abound, each promising to provide key information about an important topic that people simply must know. Aaron Garriott has contributed such an article to the Ligonier website on the subject of hell, which interests me both because of its subject matter and its source. Ligonier is very much in my theological wheelhouse. I am largely Reformed in my own theology, though with an obvious exception as it pertains to the doctrine of hell.

Garriott observes that the doctrine of hell “is difficult to contemplate” and that “many,” therefore, both “inside and outside the church have sought to soften the idea, for how can a loving God send people to such a miserable place?” He is undoubtedly correct, but perhaps the instinct to “soften the idea” owes more to a distorted theology of hell than it does to scriptural teaching. Have we perhaps turned hell into something that God never intended? Perhaps if we simply stick to what the Bible teaches about hell, we will see no need to soften it.

The article continues: “But God hasn’t asked us to get him off the hook for hell, and he doesn’t permit such a softening.” True, but God equally does not permit an intensifying of hell. Sometime, Christians speak of hell as if it must simply be the worst form of punishment we can possibly imagine. I recall a discussion with someone in which he suggested that eternal conscious torment must be correct because it seems worse than annihilationism. But the truth about hell is determined by what the Bible teaches, not by what we can imagine. We must be as careful of adding to Scripture as we are of taking away from Scripture.

While most Reformed teaching on hell, in my experience, claims that the Old Testament says little to nothing about the subject, Garriott helpfully observes that “much of what we learn about hell … comes from the loving Jesus himself, whose teaching concerning hell expands on the teaching of the Old Testament.” I’m glad that he makes that acknowledgement. Contrary to the insistence of many, the Old Testament says a great deal about the reality of final punishment.

The article proceeds to enumerate its five claims about hell.

The first claim is that “hell is a real place of conscious and unending misery.” With this assertion, Garriott dismisses both conditional immortality and ultimate reconciliation.

Here, he offers a somewhat accurate reflection of annihilationism, which he defines as the teaching that “the wicked are destroyed at the last judgment.” Too often, critiques of conditional immortality present it as if it denies the notion of final judgment. Annihilationism concerns itself with what happens after the general resurrection, not what happens at death. I appreciate that Garriott is careful to make this point. Unfortunately, he later asserts that annihilationism teaches that “the souls in hell will eventually be destroyed.” This is not quite accurate. Annihilationism asserts that body and soul will be destroyed in hell.

“Contrary to this view,” Garriott continues, “the Bible presents hell as a place of conscious and perpetual misery.” He offers, without much elucidation, three texts to support this claim.

First, he references Jude 13, where Jude writes of false teachers “for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever.” The implication appears to be that the “utter darkness” must be the literal and conscious experience of those consigned there, which is not a claim that the text explicitly makes. More significantly, the description of “the gloom of utter darkness” appears in a list of metaphors that Jude employs to describe the fate of the false teachers. I doubt that Garriott insists that the false teachers are literally waterless clouds, fruitless trees, or wandering stars. Why, then, would we insist that the description of “the gloom of utter darkness” must be the single literal descriptor in a series of metaphors? In fact, were we to take it literally, might we not suggest that that gloom is not to be the experience of human beings, but of clouds, stars, and trees?

Garriott next references Revelation 20:10, which speaks of the devil, the beast, and the false prophet being “tormented day and night forever and ever” in “the lake of fire.” While unbelieving humanity is not in view here—indeed, God’s human enemies are said to have been “consumed” by fire in the preceding verse—the wicked dead are later consigned to the same place (v. 15), presumably with the same fate. We note, however, that the lake of fire is a symbol in Revelation, which the text Interprets as “the second death” (v. 14). The imagery of unending torment therefore represents a second, eternal death, not ongoing physical torment.

Garriott finally references the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16. The parable describes the rich man in physical torment in Hades but should not be used as a proof text for eternal conscious torment, for at least three reasons. First, parables are fictional stories told to illustrate spiritual truths. We should be careful of treating parables as if they communicate historical reality. Second, parables communicate one primary truth, and we cannot make a parable say more than it was intended to say. The point of the parable in Luke 16 is not final judgment. The focus, as shown in the closing verses, is the sufficiency of Scripture. Third, even if, as some do, we take the parable as historical narrative, the rich man is clearly in the intermediate state, for his brothers are still alive on earth. The intermediate state is not the same as the final state, and, even if it does teach something about postmortem judgment, the parable clearly does not have the final state in mind.

The article goes on to quickly dismiss any hope of ultimate reconciliation by noting that “there is also no biblical basis for a ‘second chance.’ The residential status of the inhabitants of hell is fixed forever. Death marks the moment of a permanent address change.” I agree.

On the basis of these three texts, Garriott writes, “So, the ideas that the souls in hell will eventually be destroyed (annihilationism) or that they will be given a second chance have no scriptural warrant.” The small handful of texts that he has supplied, mostly without comment, hardly add weight to his conclusion. While I appreciate that the brevity of the article in question does not allow for extended discussion of the texts, his conclusion strikes me as too easily dismissing alternate interpretations.

The second thing we need to know about hell, says Garriott, is that it is “one of only two possible destinations of every human.” Here, he offers no scriptural support but instead cites the Westminster Confession of Faith. While this does not mean that he does not rest this assertion on the authority of Scripture—indeed, his audience is largely a confessing Presbyterian audience, who will lean on the proof texts the Confession supplies—his assertion might prove more persuasive if he appealed directly to Scripture.

To be fair, the burden of a third way approach actually rests on the claimant. Historic Christianity recognises two eternal destinies and anyone who suggests that Scripture suggests a third must prove it from the text.

The third thing we should know about hell is that it “is a place of God’s wrathful presence.” I appreciate this assertion. As he points out, too many quickly describe hell “as a place of separation from God’s presence,” but this doesn’t square with Scripture. God’s presence is what makes final judgment so terrifying. In the imagery of Revelation, the wicked are “tormented with fire and sulfur in the sight of the holy angels and in the sight of the Lamb” (14:10) and it is, in fact, the Lord’s presence that secures eternal destruction (2 Thessalonians 1:9).

Interestingly, Garriot cites Hebrews 12:29, which describes God as “a consuming fire,” even though he rejects the notion that the fire of God’s wrath will consume the unrepentant at the final judgment.

“If this sounds bad to the Christian,” writes Garriot, “that’s because it’s a side of God that doesn’t accord with our experience of God as his beloved children.” Or perhaps it sounds bad because it is bad! “It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:31). The doctrine of final judgment is not a light doctrine.

Garriott further suggests that “the realities of hell for the reprobate are more miserable than even the symbolic descriptions of it.” He might do well to consider in more detail some of the metaphors the Bible uses and ask what they communicate. The wicked are described as chaff burned in the fire (Matthew 3:12; Luke 3:17). Chaff is quickly consumed by fire; it does not perpetually burn in fire. Matthew 22:13 describe the wicked as being bound hand and foot and cast into outer darkness. In the ancient world, absent of sustenance and subject to wild animals, those bound hand and foot in outer darkness will eventually die. Matthew 24:51 portrays the wicked as cut into pieces (Matthew 24:51), which obviously communicates death. Too often, these metaphors are overlooked or somehow interpreted as if they communicate ongoing life.

The fourth thing we should know about hell, says Garriot, is that its “inhabitants are those who have chosen to be there.” This claim, as stated here, is difficult to substantiate with Scripture. The wicked will certainly receive what they deserve, but it is difficult to imagine anyone choosing unending torture—or, indeed, a painful death—over life.

Far from giving people what they choose, God terrifyingly casts people into hell (Luke 12:5). He does not first ask what they want. Yes, sinners love darkness more than light (John 3:18–21), but final judgment is consistently portrayed as a terrifying experience, not as something the wicked have chosen.

The fifth thing we should know about hell is that it is “consistent with God’s nature.” I fully agree. “God’s justice and his benevolence are not mutually exclusive attributes. They are perfectly consistent, and heaven and hell are expressions of that holy harmony.” Indeed, “the Bible’s many descriptions of hell are intended to magnify the grace of Christ who has saved us from it, and to fuel a zeal in us to warn others to flee from the pains of hell by turning to Christ in true faith and repentance.”

Hell is real, but it is not inescapable. Christ has provided the means of forgiveness and atonement for those who otherwise deserve the eternal punishment of hell. Let us be thankful for God’s grace, which gives sinful humanity the hope of eternal life.