In contrast with the biblical portrayal of justice, which harmonizes retribution with mercy, the Augustinian-Calvinist “Hellfire” view asserts that God’s justice demands a rigid, eternal punishment for any sin. When I say rigid, I mean melting your skin in flames of fire forever and ever, a doctrine that always struck me, a Jewish person, as dubious. While human wrath is often cruel and merciless and intended to be destructive, “God’s wrath,” a biblical term describing God’s chastisement of Israel, was always measured and temporary and meant to be corrective and constructive.
The Augustinian-Calvinist view, however, is based on the belief that divine justice always demands severe punishment—Hellfire—for even the smallest of sins:
His holiness is so pure that he cannot forgive without punishing.
-Stan Mast, Calvinist preacher
Why God punishes sin…The primary reason is that God’s righteousness demands it so that he might be glorified in the universe that he has created.
-Wayne Grudem, Reformed theologian
He cannot merely forgive or remit sin without punishing it… Sin left unpunished would leave God’s economy out of order.
-Millard Erickson, Reformed theologian
The above quotes are philosophical arguments rather than biblical ones. Indeed, when we compare them with the New Testament teachings about freely extending forgiveness—such as Matthew 6:14, 18:21-22; Luke 6:37, 7:46-48; Ephesians 4:32; and Colossians 3:13—it becomes clear that the Augustinian-Calvinist view does not hold up theologically. These and other Bible passages emphasize the free nature of forgiveness and mercy, contrasting with the interpretation offered by Mast, Grudem, Erickson, and other Calvinists.
This prompts the inquiry: Is the narrative that God cannot forgive sin without meting out punishment sourced from the Bible, or is it a replication of the philosophical stance posited by thinkers such as Augustine, Aquinas, Anselm, and Calvin?
Not only is their argument philosophical, but if to complicate matters even further—as these individuals believe Jesus is fully God, a question arises: Since God cannot die without ceasing to be God, how can Jesus’s death for only three days be considered a punishment at all? To solve this, they must conclude that something other than just the physical death of Jesus took place—that God the Father killed God the Son.
For instance, Reformed-baptist pastor, author, and member of the Calvinist hub “The Gospel Coalition,” Thabiti Anyabwile, explains:
Spiritual wrath from the Father occurs deep down in the very godhead itself…something was torn in the very fabric of the relationship between Father and Son…the ancient, eternal fellowship between Father and Son was broken as divine wrath rained down like a million Soddoms and Gomorrah’s.
-Thabiti Anyabwile
Likewise, former president of the Southern Baptist Convention, Pastor James Merritt, explains that:
Because of our sin, Jesus experienced total separation, complete isolation, and resolute condemnation from God.
-James Merritt
Similarly, Reformed Pastor Mark Driscoll taught:
That eternal, unbroken communion and union between the Father and Son was momentarily severed.
-Mark Driscoll
This ‘cosmic suicide’ theory depicts God as being angry with Himself, punishing Himself, and hating Himself to the extent of killing and expelling Himself from the Trinity. From the perspective of traditional Christianity, this is considered outright blasphemy and heresy as it claims that the Trinity temporarily turned into a “Binity” of two-in-one. It also portrays the triune God as suffering from a split personality or bipolar disorder.
These concepts are fervently disseminated through sermons, literature, videos, and digital platforms, influencing many millions in America and across the globe under the guise of Fundamentalist Christianity, yet in reality, even the Church Fathers would deem these views heretical.
As you must have realized by now, a significant portion of Augustinian-Calvinist theology is grounded in—arguably flawed—philosophical reasoning and human-crafted doctrines deeply influenced by pagan ideas rather than in the Scriptures. Evidently, the concept of “Sola Scriptura” is, for the most part, a placebo. In fact, the myriad Christian groups and denominations, numbering around 40,000, are all deeply entrenched in traditions and man-made doctrines influenced by extrabiblical sources.
In this specific case, the argument is that God’s inability to forgive without punishment stems from a commitment to justice. Justice, of all things, is their argument for why our loving Father must boil us in lava for a billion years!
If God is our Father and we are His children, then allegorically, it’s as though they are telling us: “Brothers, Dad can’t forgive us unless he takes out his belt and whips us for twelve hours straight. Only then might he consider forgiving us.”
Or, as Erickson puts it,
We must ask, is sin really serious if God can forgive without requiring some form of penalty or punishment?
-Millard Erickson, “Christian Theology,” 838.
Oy vey!
The essence of forgiveness is recognizing the gravity of the offense and choosing mercy over retribution. Jesus taught the principle of radical forgiveness, instructing us to forgive others “seventy times seven times” (Matthew 18:21-22), emphasizing that forgiveness should be extended without any prior act of retaliation. Claiming that forgiven sins are not serious sins runs counter to our Rabbis’ teachings.
Forgiveness is a profound act that acknowledges the seriousness of sin while choosing to extend grace. To assert otherwise is to misunderstand the very nature of forgiveness as revealed in Scripture. To forgive someone doesn’t mean you first have to hurt them. Instead, forgiveness entails a cost to you while the other party is set free—for free.
For the sake of illustration, say we had a fight, and I offended you, but you chose to forgive me; it means I am set free—for free—while you absorbed the emotional cost. Or, if using the Parable of the Prodigal Son, forgiveness costs the father a significant portion of his wealth and emotional pain. He absorbs the loss to himself without ever punishing his son. That’s the nature of forgiveness.
The God Who Is Reluctant to Save
Two primary online platforms for contemporary Calvinism are “The Gospel Coalition” and “Got Questions.” On the latter, an article advocates for the Calvinist doctrine of “Unconditional Election,” which posits that God has predestined only a select few for heaven and the majority for eternal punishment in Hellfire. In the article, I came across the following argument:
God elects people to salvation by His own sovereign choice…God, before the foundation of the world, chose to make certain individuals the objects of His unmerited favor or special grace…God elects someone to salvation not because of something worthy God finds in that individual but because of His inscrutable, mysterious will. He makes the choice as to who will be saved for His own reasons…The question we really should ask is not why God chooses only some for salvation but why He would choose any at all.
Got Questions, “Unconditional election – is it biblical?”
Firstly, God’s will is not “inscrutable” nor “mysterious.” In fact, His will regarding salvation is very clear: God “wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:4).
Secondly, In my short book, “Free Will and Christianity: You or God—Who’s Really Buying This Book?” I devoted considerable time to refuting Calvinism’s concept of “Unconditional Election.” However, I would like to touch on one aspect only: “Why would He choose [to save] any at all?”
The answer is simple, and it’s because “He is mighty to save.” (Zephaniah 3:17). But I suppose everything hinges on one’s preconceived theological perspective. For me, it’s not at all surprising that God extends His grace to all humanity, considering His loving nature. God, aware before the world’s creation that all humans, except Jesus, would sin, chose to create us nonetheless. This act demonstrates His deep love for us despite our imperfections. This enduring love suggests that God is inherently disposed to bless all people, not just a select few.
To imply that it’s a “wonder” that God extends His grace to anyone suggests that His natural inclination is not to bless but to punish. This view fundamentally misunderstands God’s character, reducing Him to a pagan-like god who reluctantly shows mercy only out of obligation. But Scripture reveals a different picture—God delights in showing mercy (Micah 7:18) and is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9).
Imagine, as a parent, if your children sin. You don’t hate them—you hate the sin because it harms them and others. You correct and punish them—temporarily—not out of spite but out of love, wanting the best for them. Similarly, God doesn’t despise humanity; He hates sin because it harms us. God’s ultimate desire is to eliminate sin, not the sinner.
The Augustinian-Calvinist view, however, portrays a god who is fundamentally at odds with the compassionate, loving nature of the God revealed in Scripture. It is as if he thinks to himself: “Since they regard me as merciful, I must extend a small measure of favor. I’m not inclined to do so because I despise them, but upholding their perception of me as merciful seems necessary. Otherwise, I might get bad publicity.”
God’s grace isn’t about reluctantly extending favor; it reflects His nature to love and bless all people, good and bad alike (Matthew 5:45), regardless of perceived worthiness. In Jesus, we see God’s loving-kindness, proving we are worthy in His eyes and testifying to His infinite love for all creation.
This article was a copy-paste from my new book on hell: HELL: A Jewish Perspective on a Christian Doctrine