Statement of Faith Changes: Hell
Andrew Ballitch
The Statement of Faith of The Christian and Missionary Alliance (C&MA) explicitly affirms the eternal punishment of unbelievers in hell. And it must if our denomination is going to continue as an expression of orthodox Christianity. The doctrine of hell is so often the first to go. Our modern world finds the notion abhorrent. We as Christians struggle with the concept when we think about the untold millions who have and will perish without ever hearing the name of Jesus, and especially when the horror is personalized with the faces of those individuals we know and deeply love who refuse to respond to the gospel. The twin realities of hell and a loving God are not easily reconciled.
Despite such difficulties, the Alliance has always confirmed what the Bible teaches about hell. That it is a place of “eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt 25:41, ESV), where “they will be tormented day and night for ever and ever” (Rev 20:10). That it is a place “where the worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:48). That it is a place of “outer darkness” where “men will weep and gnash their teeth” (Matt 25:30). That it is a place where those who die outside of Christ will find themselves “tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night” (Rev 14:10b-11a). Hell is a place of eternal conscious punishment for the wicked.
But how should the doctrine of hell be described in our confession? How is the doctrine best expressed to capture the essence of the biblical teaching? The Statement of Faith currently reads,
“The portion of the impenitent and unbelieving is existence forever in conscious torment.”
The relevant change, which has been affirmed and is waiting to be ratified at General Council 2025, would state,
“The unrepentant and unbelieving are raised to the conscious anguish of eternal separation from God.”
You might be thinking such an alteration benign. Frankly, when the change was first presented, I thought nothing of it. Both hold to the crux of the issue, which is that hell is a place of eternal conscious punishment for the wicked. But do they? Upon further reflection, I am convinced that the proposed change is a dilution of God’s direct activity in the final destiny of the wicked and opens the door to annihilationism.
Torment or Anguish?
While synonyms, torment and anguish are not the same thing. Here is the Merriam-Webster definition of torment: “extreme pain or anguish of body or mind,” “a source of vexation or pain,” “the infliction of torture.” As a verb, the word means “to cause severe usually persistent or recurrent distress of body or mind to.” Now for the definition of anguish: “extreme pain, distress, or anxiety.” Interestingly, anguish only comes in the form of a transitive and intransitive verb. Lots of overlap to be sure, but here is my contention. Torment can bring anguish, though it does not necessitate it. Anguish can be experienced in the absence of torment. This is the case because while torment implies an external force actively inflicting it, anguish can be a merely psychological category, something internally experienced. Put simply, anguish does not demand torment, but torment may bring anguish. This is where God comes in.
“Put simply, anguish does not demand torment, but torment may bring anguish. This is where God comes in.”
Hell is hell because God is there in righteous judgment, justly punishing sinners for their sins by pouring out his wrath upon them. Separation from an omnipresent being cannot mean residence in a different location. Rather, separation from God will be the experience of his justice unmitigated by his mercy, his vengeance without his forbearance, his wrath absent the substitutionary atonement of his Son. God is in hell, active in the punishment of the wicked: “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31). “Torment” at least begins to carry the weight of this terrible thought, while “anguish” falls short. Anguish could be caused by the prospect of missing out on heaven, for example, or regret coupled with guilt, without God’s active engagement in the punishment. But why do the poor souls in hell, bodily resurrected, continue to exist? Because God sustains them. Where does the sulfurous lake come from, if not prepared and upheld with the rest of the created universe by God? The everlasting fire continues because God fuels it. It is not the absence of God that makes hell what it is, but the circumstances of God’s presence.
In hell, God is the tormentor. Those uncomfortable with this should consider king Saul. When the Spirit of God departed from him, “a harmful spirit from the LORD tormented him” (1 Sam 6:14b). And the demons who, before they were cast out into the pigs, asked Jesus, “Have you come here to torment us before the time?” (Matt 8:29b). The time of torment is coming for the devil, his angels, and all people outside of Christ, a time that will most certainly bring anguish.
Forever or Temporary?
The most troubling aspect of the proposed change is a lack of clarity on the duration of hell: “the conscious anguish of eternal separation from God.” “Conscious” and “eternal” are both historically well-worn and biblically fitting terms in these discussions, but they would need to be switched to ensure doctrinal fidelity. As the proposition stands, “eternal” does not modify the anguish of hell, but “separation from God.” Presumably, separation from God could be interpreted to mean that the wicked ultimately cease to exist (and therefore are separated from the life of God in the truest and most literal sense), after some period of anguish at the thought of annihilation. Annihilationism is an unbiblical compromise motivated by a desire to get God off the hook for the traditional conception of hell and bring peace of mind to all of us distressed by its implications. It does not work, of course. At least swapping the terms to state, “the eternal anguish of conscious separation from God” would make the everlasting nature of the conscious punishment lock tight. The language of the current article is already there.
To be clear, I am not charging anyone in the C&MA with adhering to annihilationism or softening the statement to make room for those who might hold the view. For my part, I have heard no such thing hinted at or entertained in C&MA circles. But it takes no imagination at all to conceive of it becoming a problem if the door does not remain authoritatively slammed shut. Statement of Faith revisions are rare, every few generations at most. Any ratification must be beyond confusion and without vulnerability, especially on central tenants of the faith like the eternal destiny of unbelievers.
The duration of hell must be unequivocally eternal in the Statement of Faith. And if forced to choose between torment and anguish as descriptive of the conscious experience of the wicked in hell, torment is by far the stronger of the two. Torment protects God’s active role in punishment and implies anguish. Better yet, the statement might read, “the unrepentant and unbelieving are raised to eternal conscious torment in hell and the anguish of being forever separated from God.”