Podcast: Without Judgment, Life Doesn’t Make Sense (Tom Schreiner)

May 13, 2024 by: Crossway

This article is part of the The Crossway Podcast series.

A Biblical Case for the Final Judgment

In this episode, Tom Schreiner discusses what the Bible really teaches about hell and the final judgment, and why it’s worth thinking about, even though it’s hard.

The Justice and Goodness of God

The Justice and Goodness of God

Thomas R. Schreiner

Thomas Schreiner offers a comprehensive analysis of eternal destruction, examining themes of sin, death, and redemption repeated throughout the New Testament and other passages of Scripture.

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube | RSS

Topics Addressed in This Interview:

01:13 - Why Would Anyone Want to Listen to a Conversation about the Final Judgment?

Matt Tully
Tom, thanks so much for joining me again on The Crossway Podcast.

Thomas Schreiner
It’s great to be here again, Matt.

Matt Tully
You open your new book with a good question. You write, “Why would anyone even want to write on the final judgment?” So let me ask a similar question: Why would anyone want to listen to a conversation about the final judgment?

Thomas Schreiner
I think I would argue that we need to say that apart from judgment, life doesn’t really make sense. We could use illustrations. It’s like trying to play baseball without rules. Or imagine driving (and there are some places that are kind of like this) and there are no traffic signals and there are no rules. Life doesn’t make sense without judgment, without evaluation. So we tend to think judgment’s a bad thing. But actually, it gives order and structure to life so that we can live in peace and joy. Imagine a world where there was murder and rape but there was no consequence. It’d be like Lord of the Flies, if you’ve read that novel. Life wouldn’t make sense.

Matt Tully
I recently have been on a World War II kick and have been reading lots of books about the Nazis and the Third Reich and Hitler. It’s not the most encouraging, fun reading, but I have had that thought a number of times. So many people in history have “gotten away” with doing terrible things, and there hasn’t actually been any earthly retribution or justice carried out. And so in that context, the final judgment is almost a comfort in a certain sense, because it does promise us that ultimately those things will be made right.

Thomas Schreiner
Paul Johnson’s book, Modern Times, I don’t know if you’ve read that book, but in that book—and I just read two volumes on Stalin, so we’ve been reading some of the same kind of things—but in that book, as Stalin is dying, I don’t know if he was dreaming or if he was imagining, but as he was dying he imagined wolves coming to attack him. And it seemed fitting that there were going to be consequences for the millions of people he put to death. And as he lived his life, it seemed as if he was getting away with it. There were no consequences.

Matt Tully
C. S. Lewis once said, “There’s no doctrine I would more willingly remove from Christianity than hell. If it lay in my power, I would pay any price to be able to say truthfully all will be saved.” I just wonder, even in light of what we just said, is there any part of you that resonates with that? I’m sure there are many people listening who do resonate with what Lewis was saying there.

Thomas Schreiner
I think we can resonate with it in this sense: yes, if all repented and believed, that would be, hypothetically, a good thing, wouldn’t it? But then I think we also should say God is wise. God has structured history a particular way and with his own purposes. So as I’ve meditated on this and we think of history and God as the sovereign over history, I think we need to return often—instead of relying on our own understanding—to God’s words. His judgments are unsearchable and inscrutable to us at the end of the day. So we trust his goodness. I think it’s so fascinating in the story in Genesis 18 where Abraham is pleading, in some sense, for the salvation of everyone in the city. It’s a historical judgment. But he gets down to ten. And God says, Yes, yes, yes. I’ll spare the city. And in the middle of that, Abraham says, “Will not the judge of all the earth do right?” But the answer is Of course! Of course he’ll do right. And one of the striking features of that story to me is I think Abraham’s thinking of Lot. He wants Lot, his nephew, to be spared. But God rescues Lot anyway. There’s not ten. He doesn’t spare the city, but he’s more generous than Abraham even prays for, because Abraham gets down to ten. Lot’s not ten. Lot and his family are not ten. Actually, it was really only Lot. His wife didn’t really qualify and neither did his daughters. That is such a profound question, but I think Lewis is raising the question, What about God’s mercy and goodness? And I think the text is telling us in the story about Sodom that God is merciful, but his justice is right, even if it’s inscrutable at times to us.

Matt Tully
And I think that’s an interesting thing to emphasize, the inscrutability of God’s justice at times. And sometimes we’re not comfortable with that. We’re not comfortable with the idea that we might be, at some point at the end of the day, we might reach the limits of our understanding, the limits of our even emotional understanding about some of these things. There is an element of humble submission to what God has said, even if we don’t fully understand.

Thomas Schreiner
Yes. I think that’s a very profound and important truth. And I think people feel it especially if they think of family members, but the scriptural word can be difficult too, and yet strengthening. Jesus says, “He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me.” Now, this is personal to me because I don’t know if my parents who have died belong to God, but I think one thing the Lord has taught me is ultimately, the judge of all the earth will do right. Will any of us go to heaven on the final day and see certain people in hell, and will we object and say, God! they ought not to be there? Is that really even a likely scenario? Won’t we immediately recognize what God does is right. Which I think speaks again to what you said, the limitation of our own understanding. We don’t see the whole. We see things from a very limited perspective. God sees the whole. God’s ways are just. And that’s what it means to trust God—part of what it means. That’s particularly hard, and I’m not trying to say for a minute it’s not hard. When we think of loved ones or even of people we don’t know, it’s a difficult notion to imbibe emotionally.

07:54 - The Impulse to Avoid Thinking about the Final Judgment

Matt Tully I want to spend some time talking about that a little bit later, the personal dynamics this doctrine can have for some of us. But before we get there, as I thought about this issue, the idea of the final judgment and hell, and we’ll get into some of the language that scripture uses to talk about this difficult doctrine in a little bit, I’ve found that for myself I’m not tempted to deny the reality of the final judgment or deny the reality of hell. I’m not tempted to kind of rationalize it away or tweak what Scripture is saying, but I do feel the temptation to just sort of move past it quickly. I don’t want to think about it. I don’t want to dwell on it because frankly, it’s too terrible. It’s too horrible to imagine what that really means and the eternity that that represents. I wonder if there are other conservative Christians who have grown up in the church, who love the Bible, believe it’s true, who might feel similarly, where they’re not denying it but they just try to kind of avoid it? Is there something wrong with that impulse? How do you think about that sense?

Thomas Schreiner
I think some people may have grown up in a situation where it was overemphasized. Perhaps they heard about it too much and that could motivate a person to avoid it. On the other hand, I think avoiding it has some negative consequences altogether. We want to avoid an overemphasis on it, but not to talk about it at all? It’s really stitched into the story of the Bible regularly, whether we talk about the narrative, the Gospels, or the epistles.

Matt Tully
I think you often hear that Jesus talked about hell far more than he talked about heaven or the glorious inheritance of the saints. Do you know the number of how often he mentioned hell or brought up that judgment?

Thomas Schreiner
I don’t know the numbers, but he brought it up a lot. That’s exactly right. And I think if we avoid it, and this is one of the things that motivated me to write the book, I think it can lessen our evangelism. If we avoid it, we begin to think everything’s going to be fine. I think that’s the mantra in our culture. No matter what situation you’re in, whether they’re believers or unbelievers, people tend to envision a future life. And when people die, they say, They’re fine. Someone close to me recently had someone die and they said, They’re in a better place. I think that’s the typical response.

Matt Tully
It’s kind of vague. It doesn’t need to be too specific.

Thomas Schreiner
Right. But as evangelicals, if we’re not thinking about the judgment, obviously it’s not the only motivation for evangelism and it’s not the primary motivation for evangelism, but I think it is one motivation for evangelism. And I think we see in the evangelistic speeches in the New Testament, they regularly mention judgment. Why should you be saved if there’s not going to be a judgment?

Matt Tully
Saved from what?

Thomas Schreiner
Right.

10:53 - Beginning with Theology Proper

Matt Tully
So when thinking about the final judgment, it is easy, as we’ve already begun to do, to kind of jump right to questions about hell—about what it’s going to be like, how long it’s going to last, if the punishment really fits the crime, all those kinds of things. But in the book, you encourage us to take a step back and actually start by thinking about God himself, theology proper. I wonder if you can explain why we need to start with God and himself before we really can be ready to engage the issue of judgment.

Thomas Schreiner
Without God, hell doesn’t make any sense. And so we have to reflect on who is God. And the first thing we can say is God is infinitely holy, infinitely just, infinitely righteous, infinitely pure. I was reading a little bit of Calvin last night in the Institutes, and it struck me afresh. He had such a vision of the holiness and the awesomeness and majesty of God. Therefore, hell may not make much sense to us because we don’t see God in his holiness, and so it seems like it doesn’t make sense. I mean, why? The punishment doesn’t seem to be warranted.

Matt Tully
If God is just the man upstairs, and that’s the kind of posture we have towards him, hell is going to seem like a massive overreaction.

Thomas Schreiner
But if God is infinitely holy, and if sin is an infinite offense against a holy God, then hell makes sense, at least some sense to us, right? We don’t fully grasp the weight of our sin. I often say to my students when we read a passage like Romans 3:21–26, we ask the question, Why does God send anyone to hell? But the New Testament authors, not just in this passage but regularly, are asking a totally different question: How can God send anyone to heaven? That shows how anthropocentric we are in our own conception of God and of the final judgment.

12:55 - What Does the Old Testament Say about the Final Judgment?

Matt Tully
We’re going to get to the New Testament in a minute, and that’s what your book focuses on—a New Testament theology of the judgment. But before we get there, can you summarize what the Old Testament had to say about the final judgment? As with most things, the Old Testament doesn’t quite have the fullness of explanation. It’s more of a shadow than it is the final thing like we see in the New Testament. But if you had to summarize, what do we glean from the Old Testament?

Thomas Schreiner
When we look at the Old Testament passages, most of those passages are speaking of a temporal judgment. The flood wipes out the whole human race, or the judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah, even the judgment upon Israel, or the judgment upon the pagan nations. So in one sense, those passages aren’t about the final judgment, are they? Yet the New Testament picks those passages up and sees them as a type, a pattern, a precursor, so to speak, of the final judgment. So I think it is warranted, when we’re talking about the flood, to say this is a picture. Jesus himself does this. This is a picture of the final judgment. It’s the same with Sodom and Gomorrah. The New Testament writers pick this up often as a preview of the final judgment, and even the judgments that come upon Israel. And Jesus himself does this. I think he provides a hermeneutical lens to read the Old Testament. He sees, in Luke 13, the tower falling on the eighteen, which is a temporal judgment, but he sees it as a preview of the final judgment.

Matt Tully
And that’s a common thing between the Old and New Testament. The Old Testament has all kinds of these temporal, historically rooted types that the New Testament writers then go on to kind of use and extend into eternity and through Christ. So it’s not just limited to this idea of judgment.

Thomas Schreiner
That’s right. Same with salvation and many other themes—the servant of the Lord, Israel is the Son of God, and so forth and so on.

14:50 - Key New Testament Words and Concepts for the Final Judgment

Matt Tully
Yeah, that’s a core concept to get in your mind as you read the Bible and try to understand how the two testaments fit together. So what are some of the key New Testament words or phrases or even concepts that we should know when it comes to the final judgment?

Thomas Schreiner
One of the key words is destruction. When we’re judged, we will be destroyed, ultimately. I don’t think that means annihilation, but it means the unraveling of human life. The fullness of what it means to be human will be destroyed.

Matt Tully
What’s an example passage where that shows up?

Thomas Schreiner
It shows up in so many. First Corinthians 1:18 and 1 Corinthians 10. Apoleia is the Greek word that Paul often uses for the final judgment. They often use the word judge for the final judgment. What does judge mean? That you will be assessed. There will be a verdict declared against you. So the judgment in the English language as well has the idea of a courtroom. So we think of the passage of the sheep and the goats. You’re standing before the king, and the king is adjudicating. The king is separating the sheep from the goats.
So at the judgment, God declares a verdict, which is another word. You’re guilty or you’re innocent. So at the final judgment, we have a pronouncement. You are guilty, and you have to bear the punishment, which is another term that can be used. Second Thessalonians 1:9—they’ll face eternal punishment. Interestingly, you have the idea of a verdict there as well. You have a verdict, and then eternal punishment away from the presence of the Lord and of the glory of his mind.

Matt Tully
Where do we get the English word hell? That’s obviously the most common term that we have in our own modern day to think about this concept. Where do we see that in Scripture?

Thomas Schreiner
The word hell comes from the word Gehenna, which was a valley in New Testament times around Jerusalem.

Matt Tully
So it was an actual historical location?

Thomas Schreiner
Yes, but it just becomes a symbol of final destruction. Some think it was a garbage dump where there was a fire, but that’s not very clear. We have a similar understanding in terms of the lake of fire. That’s not the word hell, but it’s a very similar idea. I think the language of Gehenna and of hell is symbolic of the judgment to come. I don’t take the fire image that is often associated with Gehenna to be literal, but I don’t think that lessens the import of the metaphor.

Matt Tully
Yeah, or even of the suffering.

Thomas Schreiner
Right. It’s intended to communicate to us that the suffering will be agonizing, as Paul says in Romans 2. There will be tribulation and distress. Revelation 14 says there’ll be torment.

Matt Tully
But sometimes in our overemphasis on physical visions of fire and lava or whatever we might be envisioning, that can distract us perhaps from the real purpose of those metaphors.

Thomas Schreiner
Right. Another metaphor is it’s outermost darkness. So people ask, How can it be outermost darkness and fire? But I think they’re both images and metaphors. Neither are to be taken literally, but they both also point to a reality that is horrifying.

Matt Tully
What about the term hades? That’s another word that we hear often in the New Testament. Sometimes it’s a little confusing. How does that relate to these ideas of judgment?

Thomas Schreiner
Hades is not the same thing as hell. Hades refers to, in the Old Testament, Sheol, the realm of the dead. Now, it can be a place of punishment, the realm of the dead, but in and of itself, the term doesn’t designate hell. I think one reason it does overlap is because it can denote a place of punishment. But in a common English understanding, the two are kind of merged together. But it isn’t so in the New Testament.

Matt Tully
Interesting. So what does hades mean? Does it just refer to the place of the dead, where people go after they die?

Thomas Schreiner
The place of the dead. Right. Sometimes in the Old Testament, the righteous go to Sheol, but then there are other texts where Sheol is associated more with a final judgment as well.

Matt Tully
Would a theological way to view it be the intermediate state, where it’s just for Christians and non-Christians and it’s just sort of what’s happening before the final judgment?

Thomas Schreiner
Yeah, I think so. Yeah, I think that’s helpful.

19:26 - Eternal Conscious Punishment

Matt Tully
You summarize the New Testament’s teaching on the final judgment with three words. You call it “eternal conscious punishment.” I wonder if you can just walk us through each of those three and why each of those words matters to your definition. So let’s start with eternal. Why is that an important thing to emphasize?

Thomas Schreiner
The first thing I’d say is it’s in Scripture. Matthew 25:46 says, “The wicked will face eternal punishment.” And eternal means forever. The punishment will never end. There’s not a limitation upon it. And, of course, it’s not just in that passage. It’s 2 Thessalonians 1:9. We see in Revelation 14 that the punishment will be forever and ever. So it doesn’t just use one word. So we have this notion that the punishment doesn’t end. So that itself is sobering. Our destiny—it’s hard for us to conceive of this, isn’t it?—our destiny, what we’re going to, is there are no temporal limits, which is something we can’t conceive of in our earthly lives.

Matt Tully
Both on the good side, the new heavens and new earth, but also on this bad side.

Thomas Schreiner
Yeah. And it reminds us our decisions in life are very important. So that’s the first word. What was the second one?

Matt Tully
Eternal, conscious.

Thomas Schreiner
Yes. So some people argue that instead of eternal conscious punishment, that those who suffer in hell, in contrast to those who go to heaven or in the new creation, but those who suffer in hell will be annihilated, that they will not exist forever. There aren’t a lot of texts that speak directly to this issue, but I think, again, Revelation 14 is very clear that the torment is forever. They have no, rest day and night. Second Thessalonians 1:9 says they are removed from the presence of the Lord. I think the most likely way of reading that is they are removed from his presence consciously. Jesus uses the image several times, “the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.” It is also the historic view of the church as well that there will be eternal conscious punishment. Also, that passage in Matthew 25 is important again because he promises, in that very same verse, the righteous will experience eternal life, but the wicked eternal punishment.

Matt Tully
They are parallel to each other.

Thomas Schreiner
Yes. How can we argue that eternal life is forever but with eternal punishment you’re annihilated?

22:13 - Annihilationism

Matt Tully
So that’s this view of annihilationism, as you’ve kind of defined it there. It’s this idea that ultimately the wicked will be annihilated, will be taken out of existence by God, and that’s the ultimate end to their punishment. And that’s a view that, as you said, is not particularly prominent today, but there have been a number of prominent evangelicals throughout the last hundred years or so—John Stott, F. F. Bruce, Wenham, and maybe C. S. Lewis—who have advocated annihilationism. And I wanted to read this quote from Stott. Stott is obviously considered to be a stalwart evangelical. He held fast to so many important tenets of evangelical theology. And he has this to say: “Scripture teaches that God will judge people according to what they have done [quoting Revelation 20:12], which implies that the penalty inflicted will be commensurate with the evil done. Would there not, then, be a serious disproportion between sins consciously committed in time and torment consciously experienced throughout eternity? I do not intend to minimize the gravity of sin as rebellion against God our Creator, but I question whether eternal conscious torment is compatible with the biblical revelation of divine justice.”
And Stott went on to kind of make the point that we had to decide this issue on the basis of Scripture, not merely our emotions. But he kind of raises a point here of does the idea of eternal conscious torment fit? Does the punishment fit the crime that we’ve committed against God? And I think that’s a question that many Christians might struggle with when they think about these issues. So how would you respond to someone who’s wondering about that?

Thomas Schreiner
Well, the first thing I’d want to say, without answering the question, but I’d want to say the way Stott poses that question can’t distract us from the Scriptural witness. The first thing we want to decide is, What does the text actually say? Because those kinds of objections that are often raised in other areas as well can distract us from and actually move us away from what the text actually says. Our first response shouldn’t be, How does that fit logically with the way we think about reality? Rather, we should ask, What does God say? Because we acknowledge, as Christians, that our minds are also fallen and our grasp of reality is limited. So I want to begin by saying, What does the text say? That’s a very good question. But that question is, in some ways, out of bounds in the sense that it’s gone askew if it contradicts Scripture in some way. And I think it does contradict Scripture. So the second thing I’d say is that I think there is an answer to it, and Stott would know the answer because it’s a historic answer. It’s an answer you see in Jonathan Edwards and others, and that is that God is infinitely holy. And a sin against an infinitely holy God requires an infinite judgment, a judgment that doesn’t end. Now, the interesting thing is Stott rejects that. He says that the crime doesn’t warrant that kind of forever punishment. My response is but it seems the text teaches it does. And secondly, how do you know that? How can you claim? You’re not God. And it seems God has revealed—well, I think God has revealed—punishment is forever. So I think you’re using your human reason.

Matt Tully
It’s like an intuitive argument rather than an explicitly biblical argument.

Thomas Schreiner
And I think it fits with how our culture is a very sensitive culture, and there’s some good in that, but our culture tends to overemphasize God’s love over against his holiness and justice. So I think C. S. Lewis, I don’t remember what he said on this particular issue but I think C. S. Lewis warns us where our culture is particularly strong. The ancients might be weak, but vice versa as well. The ancients could teach us something about God’s holiness.

Matt Tully
So that’s annihilationism, this idea that ultimately, God would take the wicked out of existence in judgment for their sin. And obviously, the other big category or option that people will sometimes gravitate towards in all of this is universalism—the idea that everyone will be saved, ultimately. Not because they deserve it necessarily, but because Christ’s atonement covered them as well as anyone else. And I think that is an interesting question there. One of the arguments that you advance in support of a biblical position on the final judgment is that, as you kind of started off today, that without judgment, the very concepts of right and wrong and of good and evil would be meaningless. And yet a universalist could respond by saying that they don’t deny the reality of judgment—the need for judgment because of sin. They just think that God’s righteous judgment was fully poured out on the cross, fully satisfied in the punishment meted out against Jesus at the cross. And so they would argue that the cross perfectly captures both God’s love for sinners and his mercy and grace, but also his justice and holiness and righteousness, and that is actually a more beautiful picture of those two facets of God’s character—his holiness and his love. How would you respond to someone saying something like that?

Thomas Schreiner
Again, I would say theoretically and hypothetically, it could be so. I can imagine a world in which people sinned and God saved everyone. But again, I’d want to start again with our touchstone and go to the Scriptures and say the fundamental problem with universalism is first exegetical. There are so many texts that talk about the judgment. How do we make sense of a text like Jesus saying to Judas, “It would be better if you weren’t born.” Now, at one level, someone might say, Well, that’s because you betrayed the Messiah. But if you’re a universalist, you’re going to be blessed forever and ever. Isn’t that better than not being born? I don’t think it makes any sense of what Jesus said to Judas, to say it’s better for him not to be born if he’s going to be saved forever. And that’s just one example.

Matt Tully
It would also render all of the warnings of judgment, all of the pronouncements of final judgment we see in the New Testament, it would kind of render them a little bit false. Why would he be bringing this up if no one’s actually going to experience this?

Thomas Schreiner
Exactly. I think that’s true. I want to mention here a book by Michael McClymond called The Devil’s Redemption. It’s actually two volumes. It’s quite a hefty read. But the amazing thing is I read this book—both of these volumes—and it is so clear that throughout Christian history, when you look at the historical record, not just the exegesis of the text but the theology that’s done throughout the last 2,000 years, Orthodox tradition has never embraced universalism. And I think of something that Ajith Fernando, you probably know that name, who has ministered for so many years with Youth for Christ in Sri Lanka, Ajith wrote his THM thesis at Fuller Seminary on the issue of Universalism. It’s a very good piece of work. And he told me, personally, one reason he did so is in Sri Lanka, liberal Christians came in and they began to preach that everyone will be saved. It dried up all interest in evangelism. People had no interest in evangelizing or, and very few came to Christ. Now, I suppose a Universalist could say, *Well, It doesn’t matter because the Scripture teaches universalism. But then we’re faced again with text after text after text that predicts a judgment. And no one will be judged? We read in Revelation 20 the false prophet, and the beast are thrown into the lake of fire. Even if those are corporate entities, it’s got to be somebody.

30:28 - Giving an Account for Our Actions

Matt Tully
That’s what I appreciate about your book is you are so rigorous and committed to just looking at the text, letting it speak for itself, and interpreting it honestly, no matter what it might say and how it might push against our own intuitive feelings or our emotions on this. One area that I think sometimes we as Christians can feel confused about relates to something that Paul says in 2 Corinthians 5. He writes, “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.” And I think as Christians we also hold that in tension with what Paul sells elsewhere about how we’ve been justified in Christ and our sins have been forgiven and we’re declared righteous. So what is Paul saying in 2 Corinthians 5 when he says that we need to stand before the judgment and give an account for our actions?

Thomas Schreiner
That is controversial. Some understand that text to refer to rewards that are given to us above and beyond eternal life. That is not my understanding of the text. I think that text is saying that those who receive eternal life are judged according to their works, and their works testify that they are truly saved. There are a number of texts that say this—Romans 2, Colossians 3:24, James 2:14–26. They all emphasize that good works are, and I would use the language, necessary for salvation. So some people worry that sounds like justification on the basis of works. But we have to be very careful here, and I think the Reformed tradition has argued no, the works that are necessary are a necessary evidence, not basis. That’s a very important distinction. Those works are not the basis of our salvation. The basis of our salvation is the imputed righteousness of Christ that is given to us when we trust in him. But those works are necessary evidence. First John 2: “By this we know we’ve come to know him if we keep his commandments.” John’s not talking about perfection, but he is saying there are indications in our lives, there’s an orientation in our life, there’s a pattern in our life that shows that we are saved. I realize, and I just want to add this, I realize very sensitive people and introspective people can almost be wrecked by this. And we must always keep the gospel in mind, because I think an introspective person can easily turn those into a basis, and then start beating themselves up and really suffering from all kinds of doubt and worry. But I think those texts are also important because those of us who confess Christ, we’ve been changed. We’re not perfect, but we’re different.

33:26 - Teaching Our Children about the Final Judgment

Matt Tully
Maybe a final couple of questions that are maybe more pastoral in nature. You’re a parent, and you’ve got how many children?

Thomas Schreiner
Four.

Matt Tully
Four children. I wonder if you could think back to when they were young and you were trying to teach them the basics of theology, the basics of what it means to be a Christian, what it means to have faith, and what we’re being saved from. I think sometimes we as parents can struggle to know how to talk about this issue with our children. And we can worry that we’ll talk about it in ways that would maybe be unhelpful for them, would make them scared of God, or, even just cultivate a distorted picture of who God is and why he would do this. So as you think about your own children, were there some things that you did with them when they were young, when it came to explaining this to them, that you could offer to parents listening right now?

Thomas Schreiner
When we talked to our kids about judgment, it was always in the context of the gospel. I think that’s crucial. I think the atmosphere of the home is very important, and the atmosphere of the home emphasizes the love of God in Jesus Christ and the gospel and the incredibly gracious offer of salvation. But I think it’s also important to say to our kids, and I think we said this to our kids, life is serious. There are consequences. If you run out in the street, cars can hit you. And there are consequences if you reject God. We do need to be careful that we don’t terrify our kids. I don’t think God wants us to be paralyzed by fear. That doesn’t work in our lives if we’re paralyzed by fear. But I think God gives parents wisdom and understanding of how to talk to each child. And children are even different. Some children, we all know, you can look at them with reproof and they cry. Others need a little more encouragement. How much we emphasize the final judgment, and we teach it, but how much we emphasize it may even depend upon the child, which is why God gives individual parents for individual children. I don’t think there’s a formula. There’s a parental wisdom that we have as we raise our kids. But yes, at the end of the day, we teach them the Scriptures.

Matt Tully
I think it’s so important that you mentioned always teaching this doctrine in the broader context of the gospel and of salvation history. And even as we started, we talked about theology proper, not having this be an isolated doctrine that is detached from all the other things that we believe about God from Scripture, because apart from those other doctrines, it doesn’t make a lot of sense. It is hard to reconcile with our intuitions or our emotions as people.

Thomas Schreiner
Yes. And makes me think of Isaiah 28, where Isaiah says, “God’s judgment is a strange work.” And I think we want to hold on to those texts that say God desires all people to be saved. He does not desire the death of the wicked. He’s a gracious and kind God who invites us to turn to him in belief and to be saved. I was reading today Psalm 145, and the psalmist picks up Exodus 34: “God is gracious and compassionate and kind.” So we want to emphasize those truths.

36:46 - Look at the Cross

Matt Tully
Maybe a final question. One of the reasons I think this doctrine can be so difficult to think about and discuss as Christians is because of how intensely personal it can become very quickly for us. For those who have loved ones who aren’t believers, contemplating their fate, if they refuse to embrace Christ, can be unbearable to just think about. So I guess my question for you, as a way to close, is what advice or encouragement would you offer to the Christian listening right now who wants to be biblical in how they think about this? He wants to embrace what Scripture clearly teaches on these things, but just struggles experientially and emotionally with the reality of this doctrine. And maybe more than struggles; maybe they worry that if they were to embrace this or think more deeply about this, it could actually sink their faith. They just feel like they don’t know if they could handle the reality of this doctrine as they think about maybe a loved one. What would you say to that person?

Thomas Schreiner
That is a very profound question. I think the first thing I’d say is there’s a sense in which we can’t handle it. it is finally God’s truth, not our own. And there is a sense in which we’re trying to reach into the heavens with this and to domesticate reality, understand all of truth. And we can’t do that. The second thing I’d say is I think a big part of what it means to be a Christian is to let go of things. And God teaches us this our whole lives, right? As a parent, you have children, and then you let them go. And that’s hard as a parent. When you see them go off to college and leave your home after you’ve raised them, you let them go. But in so many areas of life, perhaps you have to let your health go. Finally, we have to let our lives go. And I think that applies to our loved ones. Finally, they’re not ours. Our kids aren’t ours. Our parents aren’t ours. Those we love aren’t ours. I don’t think it’s wrong; it’s absolutely right. Paul’s in tears in Romans 9 about his fellow Jews who aren’t saved. But I think he finally leaves them with God. He says, You know, that’s not my job at the end of the day. And I don’t want to take away from the fact that I think it was a struggle. So we recognize that’s hard. It’s not like, well, that’s a formula. It’s difficult, but I think Paul did give them to God, and I think that’s what we’re called to do as well. We give everything over to God. At certain times, though, in our lives, I think it may be a reality we can’t handle it right now. If someone begins to obsess over it and they think it’s going to begin to sink their faith, I really think at that point, and I’m sympathetic, but I think at that point, you’re really trying to be God. You’re really trying to run the universe. I found myself doing this at times. Why are so many people not saved? But what am I trying to do? I’m trying to determine what can happen in the universe. It’s just a good reminder to say, Who am I? I’m a creature; a very frail, limited creature. I can acknowledge my feelings, but let God be God. And I just occupy my place in life and trust him and rest upon him. I see his great love in Christ Jesus. And I think this is the most profound answer of all: look at the cross. We always look at the cross and we see God’s great love. We can’t answer every mystery. There are many things in life I don’t understand and we won’t understand. Perhaps we’ll understand them to some extent in glory, but even then I think we won’t understand everything perfectly. But for now, we need to put our trust in God.

Matt Tully
Tom, thank you so much for taking the time to help all of us think a little bit more biblically, perhaps, about this difficult issue. We appreciate it.

Thomas Schreiner
Thank you, Matt. Great being with you.

Popular Articles in This Series

View All

Podcast: Help! I Hate My Job (Jim Hamilton)

January 06, 2020

Jim Hamilton discusses what to do when you hate your job, offering encouragement for those frustrated in their work and explaining the difference between a job and a vocation.

Crossway is a not-for-profit Christian ministry that exists solely for the purpose of proclaiming the gospel through publishing gospel-centered, Bible-centered content. Learn more or donate today at crossway.org/about.