Will One White Lie Send You to Hell for All Eternity?
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
I have heard this since I was a very young Christian. It seemed somewhat reasonable as it was explained to me by pastors in sermons and Christians as they explained the seriousness of sin. The claim goes something like this: All sin is so bad that even the smallest of sins deserves eternal punishment in hell. It does not matter if it is losing your temper at a lousy referee, not sharing your Icee, or speeding 36 in a 35, every sin deserves eternal torment in Hell. Why? Although it may seem unreasonable to us (as depraved as we are), it is fitting for a perfectly holy God who cannot be in the site of sin, no matter how insignificant this sin might seem to us. In fact, there is no sin that is insignificant to God. Because He is infinitely holy, beyond our understanding, all sin is infinitely offensive to Him. Therefore the punishment for all sin must be infinite.
I have to be very careful here since I am going against what has become the popular evangelical way to present the Gospel, but I don’t buy it. Not only do I not buy it, I think this, like the idea that all sins are equal in the site of God, is damaging to the character of God, the significance of the cross, and I believe it trivializes sin. Let me explain.
First off, I don’t know of a passage in the Bible that would suggest such a radical view. It would seem that people make this conclusion this way:
Premise 1: Hell is eternal
Premise 2: All people that go there are there for eternity
Premise 3: Not all people have committed the number or the same degree of sins
Conclusion: All sin, no matter how small, will send someone to hell for all eternity
The fallacy here is that this syllogism is a non-sequitur (the conclusion does not follow from the premises). Could it be that people are in Hell for all eternity based upon who they are rather than what they have done?
Think about this. We believe that Christ’s atonement was penal substitution. This means that it was a legal trade. God counted the sufferings of Christ and that which transpired on the Cross as payment for our sins, each and every one. Therefore, we believe that Christ took the punishment that we deserved. But there is a problem. We are saying that we deserve eternal Hell for one single sin, no matter how small. I don’t know about you, but I have committed enough sins to give me more than my share of life sentences. I have committed sins of the”insignificant” variety (I speed everyday) and significant variety (no description necessary!). So, if Christ were only to die for me and only me and take my penalty and I deserve thousands upon thousands of eternities in hell, why didn’t Christ spend at least one eternity in Hell? Why is it that He was off the Cross in six hours, payment made in full? Combine my sentence with your sentence. Then combine ours with the cumulative sentences of all believers of all time. Yet Christ only suffers for a short time? How do we explain this?
You may say to me that I cannot imagine the intensity of suffering that Christ endured while He was on the cross. You may say that the mysterious transaction that took place was worse than eternity in Hell. I would give you the first, but I will have to motivate you to reconsider the second. Think about it. Do you really believe that the person who has been in hell for 27 billion years with 27 billion more times infinity would not look to the sufferings of Christ and say, “You know what? Christ’s six hours of suffering was bad. It is indeed legendary. But I would trade what I am going through any day for six hours, no matter how horrifying it would be.” You see, what makes hell so bad is not simply the intensity of suffering, but the duration. Christ did not suffer eternally, so there must be something more to this substitution idea and there must be something more to sin.
I believe that Christ did pay our penalty. I believe that hell is eternal. But I don’t believe that one sin sends people to hell for eternity. Sin is trivialized in our day. Sin is first something that we do, not something that we are. In other words, people think of God sitting on the throne becoming enraged (in a holy sort of way) each time that someone breaks the speed limit. It is only the cross of Christ that makes Him look passed the eternally damning sin and forgive us. Don’t think that I am undermining the severity of sin (read here as I deal more with personal sin), but I am trying to bring focus to the real problem that has infected humanity since the Garden. The real problem is that we are at enmity with God. From the moment we are born, we inherit the traits of our father Adam. This infectious disease is called sin. This disease issues forth into a disposition toward God that causes us to begin life with our fist in the air, not recognizing His love for us or authority over us. It is rebellion. While this rebellion does act according to its nature, the problem is in the disposition, not so much the acts. When we sin, we are just acting according to the dictates of our corrupt nature. But the worst of it-the worst sin of all-is that we will never lower our fist to God. We are “by nature children of wrath” (Eph. 2:3) and as a leopard cannot change his spots, so we cannot change our rebellious disposition toward our creator (Jer. 13:23).
This disposition is that of a fierce enemy that cannot do anything but fight against its foe. Paul describes this:
Romans 8:7-8 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
We are of the “flesh,” therefore we commit deeds according to the flesh. Does this mean that the person in this state does no good at all? Well, it depends on what you mean by “good.” Can an enemy of God love his neighbor? Sure. Enemies of God can and do all sorts of acts that the Bible would consider virtuous. But from the standpoint of their relationship with God, they cannot do any good at all (Rom. 3:12). Giving a drink to someone who is thirsty with the left hand while having your right hand in a fist clinched toward heaven does not count as “good” before God. Why? Because we are in rebellion against Him. This is our problem. This I propose is the only sin that keeps people in Hell for all eternity.
It is important to understand that hell not is filled with people who are crying out for God’s mercy, constantly hoping for a second chance. People are in hell because they have the same disposition toward God that they had while they were walking the earth. They do not suddenly, upon entrance into Hell, change their nature and become sanctified. They still hate God. People are in hell for all eternity, not because they floated a stop sign, but because their fists are still clinched toward God. They are not calling on His mercy. They are not pleading for a second chance. They are in hell for all eternity because that is where they would rather be. It is their nature. As C.S. Lewis once said, “The doors of hell are locked from the inside.”
Christ, on the other hand, was the second Adam. He did not identify with the first either in disposition or choice. He gained the right to be called the second Adam who would represent His people (Rom. 5:12ff). He is not spending eternity in Hell because He was never infected with the sinful nature which caused Him to be at enmity with God. His fist was never clinched toward the heavens.
Will one white-lie send someone to Hell for all eternity? No! To say otherwise trivializes sin and makes God an overly sensitive cosmic torcher lover. Sin does send people to Hell. People will be punished for their sins accordingly. But the sin that keeps people in Hell for all eternity is the sin of perpetual rebellion.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!- "One White Lie Will Send You to Hell For All Eternity" . . . and other stupid statments
- “Will One Sin Really Send You to Hell for All Eternity?” or “Why is Hell Eternal?”
- "All Sins are Equal in God's Sight" . . . And Other Stupid Statements
- What is Sin? A simple definition
- Thank You God for Imputing Adam’s Sin to Me
Print This Post

JoanieD on 04 Apr 2007 at 7:11 am #
Very well said, Michael. People who suffer from an overwhelming sense of guilt for the small mistakes and sins they make need to read this. My husband was abused as a child and I find that he can barely live with himself when he makes a small mistake. So, instead, he needs to blame someone else for that mistake so that he CAN live with himself. For him, it’s like “mistake equals evil equals useless. If I make a mistake, I am useless. If I am useless, I shouldn’t be alive. Therefore, someone else must really be responsible for this mistake.” No amount of my explaining to him and trying to help him really helps him. He gets angry with me if I try to tell him that the only one that can really help him is God. He does not ever experience the presence or peace that God could give him. He has many nightmares and tries to calm them down and his thinking down with drinking alcohol. The hell he is going through is SO difficult to watch. I pray for him and I pray that God will work through me to help him, but so far, he seems unable, unwilling or unbelieving to accept that help.
C Michael Patton on 04 Apr 2007 at 8:19 am #
Joanie,
I am so sorry that he has such a burden to carry each day. I know that this burden must be difficult for you as well. I will pray for you both as well.
Michael
kolabok21 on 04 Apr 2007 at 11:40 am #
Great Stuff, Where do you get the time to think upon this!
I can agree with all the statements you propose and your right on, humanity
C Michael Patton on 04 Apr 2007 at 12:18 pm #
That is a good question. What I would say is that while blasphemy of the Holy Spirity is very difficult to understand, the best way to understand it is rejecting God’s call through the Holy Spirit. Therefore it is the same as rebellion against God.
sberrios on 04 Apr 2007 at 7:21 pm #
John 3:18-19 seems to say that condemnation is the default position of humans because of their corrupt nature. We don’t fall but the grace of God pulls us out of hell.
Santos
awaynechance on 05 Apr 2007 at 8:54 am #
I think you’re being more than uncharitable to those who would point out (relatively) small sins to the people who are listening.
I think the example you used is a caricature.
I think your syllogism is wrong. It might also go something like this:
1. Everyone who sins is a sinner.
2. Sinners deserve hell.
3. You’ve sinned, therefore you’re a sinner.
4. You deserve hell.
So, while I think you’re correct that sinners deserve hell because they are sinners and in perpetual rebellion against God, many people fail to realize they are sinners unless you point out their sin, particularly if by the standards of society, they are good people.
Meanwhile, even if a preacher believes as you say he believes, I’m not sure this particular statement is quite the crisis you make it out to be.
tnahas on 05 Apr 2007 at 11:11 am #
Michael, didn’t the whole sin thing start with a white-lie? Gen 3:1 “Has God indeed said, You shall not eat of every tree of the Garden?”. It looks to me that it all started with one white-lie.
The holiness of God demands that not even one white-lie is acceptable.
It makes us ponder with awe and gratitude the work of our Lord Jesus Christ,
that He was sinless through His whole life on earth.
May praise and glory be to Him forever and ever.
C Michael Patton on 05 Apr 2007 at 7:33 pm #
Taffy, I agree that all sin is bad by definition. I don’t mean to undermine sin in any way. But it was not one white lie from Adam and Eve that got them expelled from the Garden, but from the snake. Their sin is that they believed the snake rather than God. In doing so they rejected God and his authority in their lives. This is the very essence of the sin nature that makes Hell eternal.
C Michael Patton on 05 Apr 2007 at 7:36 pm #
Awaynechance,
Thanks for the comments. I appreciate your focus. I surely don’t want to undermine white lies or floating of stop signs, but just to bring them into perspective.
Michael
tnahas on 05 Apr 2007 at 7:58 pm #
Michael, I agree with you and that it was a lot more than a white-lie. They were given dominion of the earth and they chose the advice of a snake. They walked in the cool of the day with the Lord and yet they were banished from the Garden. A true sad tale.
Thanks for the blog.
sellison on 08 Apr 2007 at 8:04 pm #
Man, I turn my head for a second and next thing I know you have about 6 new blog posts! It’s great to see – just gotta find time to catch up.
It seems to me that after your initial sin (which I’ll agree is your ‘born with’ rebellion against God); all other sin is simply used by God to grow you closer to him through the conviction of that sin. For a non-Christian, or Christ-Follower
, sin is really irrelevant, correct? But for Christians, sin is God’s way of keeping us inline with His will. So to me, I was going to hell either way, whether I sped today or didn’t, or convicted murder today, or didn’t (had I not accepted Christ as my Lord and Savior).
Not sure if that makes sense – it does in my head, but I don’t think I articulated it as clearly – sorry. I think it’s inline with blog.
So to have a quick little Calvinist fun with you (cause that’s where I left off with my other posts) – is this sentence really accurate for you?
They are in hell for all eternity because that is where they would rather be.
Not looking for a response here, unless you feel obliged – just caught my eye
C Michael Patton on 09 Apr 2007 at 11:42 pm #
I would not say that sin is irrelevant, although I know what you are saying. Sin is hideous in the site of God and we must not make lite of it. Personal sin can still separate the Christian relationally from God even if it will not annul our standing before God.
I think that your articulation “They are in hell for all eternity because that is where they would rather be is great.” Have you ever read C.S. Lewis’ The Great Divorce? A masterpiece on this issue! Says the same thing is such a creative and captivating style. The book is very short too!
sellison on 10 Apr 2007 at 4:51 am #
I didn’t proofread my original comment well – my apologies.
My thought process was the sin was irrelevant for Non-Christians in a way – in that God isn’t necessarily using it do draw them closer to Him like he is Christians. However, after hearing that out loud, it’s probably an incorrect statement too. My guess is that God is using all/many things in the life to draw all of us closer to him – we just have to open our eyes to see it.
I’ve never read any C.S. Lewis actually – I’ll try and pick that up.
JoanieD on 10 Apr 2007 at 4:30 pm #
I LOVE C.S. Lewis! I haven’t read all his books yet, but quite a few of them. I don’t think I have read his Four Loves yet or The Great Divorce so I may do that in the near future. His Mere Christianity is a classic.
sgmen31 on 12 Apr 2007 at 11:21 am #
Personal sin is far from irrelevant and as Michael stated above it does cause us to spearate from God’s will for us and has consequences. One only needs to read about David and Bathsheeba to see how David’s sin had consequences for not only him but his family (ie. baby). I have Christian friends who actually think it is better to keep their faith to themselves and the people they know then openly share it because they don’t want to discourage anyone or turn them away from God due to their “less then perfect” walk. I enjoyed Michael’s article and ask one question: what do you think about the concept of eternal Hell being simply God blotting you out of existence PERMANENTLY?
C Michael Patton on 12 Apr 2007 at 1:32 pm #
Stan, all I can say is that I wish that were the case. Annihilationalism is the belief that after some set amount of time, God will do away with hell and all its inhabitants, annihilating them from existence. While there have been some arguments made for this position from some able evangelicals, I think it is a hopeless cause to think that this is actually what the Scriptures teach. Hell is eternal, even if I don’t like it.
Scroll on 12 Apr 2007 at 10:27 pm #
The following verses would suggest that not all sins are the same. Matt 7:4. I cannot believe that a speck and a beam of wood can be of the same size. (NET Bible)
1 John 3:1-10 and 1 John 5:16-17 might also be helpful. In all these verses the word “brother” can be found, so it does not refer to unbelievers or Pharisees who refuse to believe in Jesus
or falsely accused Jesus of driving out demons with the help or power of the prince of demons.
If a person’s sin is forgiven, is that person still a sinner?
(Luke 7:47-50)
I don’t mean being sinless in this life, but being considered sinless by God the Father because of what God the Son did.(John 1:12-13)
epigamma on 16 Apr 2007 at 2:12 pm #
Very good article.
The only part I disagree with is you questioning “Why is it that He was off the Cross in six hours, payment made in full?” It appears you are viewing the cross as a one-to-one payment of our sins, with each sin resulting in an element of suffering for Christ. But we know from Romans 6:23 that the wages of sin is death, not suffering. So it was Christ
C Michael Patton on 16 Apr 2007 at 3:02 pm #
Thanks epigamma,
You comments are in line with that of a governmental theory of the atonement, not the traditional penal substitutionary theory. The governmental view can still be thought of as a substitution for sin, but not a substitutions for sins (plural) which, according to the penal view, understands that Christ took the punishment vicariously for all our sins.
I am of the traditional protestant reformed tradition believing in a penal substitution for sins. I think the primary passage which compels me in this regard is that of Isa 53.
53:5 He was wounded because of our rebellious deeds, crushed because of our sins; he endured punishment that made us well; because of his wounds we have been healed. All of us had wandered off like sheep; each of us had strayed off on his own path, but the Lord caused the sin of all of us to attack him.
Notice in particular, the sin that fell upon him, in this context is “our rebellious deeds.” I believe that He suffered, not just death, but as a penal substitution for our sins.
Other, usually of the Arminian persuasion, will take the stance that you have with a more governmental view.
Thanks again!
Michael
epigamma on 17 Apr 2007 at 8:39 am #
Thanks Michael.
It might surprise you to know I am a Calvinist, albeit a relatively new one. I appreciate your response, however, I still hold to my view. I believe that Christ
C Michael Patton on 17 Apr 2007 at 1:15 pm #
Bill,
Great comments. I often think about this and then wonder why He said “It is finished” before He died. This seems like it implies that the atonement was complete before His death, which in turn allowed Him to give up His spirit.