Photo credit: “the Last Judgment” by oriana.italy is marked with Public Domain Mark 1.0.
A review of the scholarly literature reveals a surprising variety of views on when Christians and non-Christians are judged and why. Some, such as Professor Robert Wilkin, argue that “believers and unbelievers will appear at separate judgments.” The Role of Works at the Final Judgment, Contributors Robert N. Wilkin, Thomas R. Schreiner, James D.G. Dunn and Michaael P. Barber, Zondervan, General Editor Alan P. Stanley (2013) (hereafter “Role of Works“) p. 31. Wilkin argues the judgment of believers occurs first, and that this represents the Judgment Seat of Christ as set out in 2 Cor. 5.10. Since salvation occurs at conversion according to Wilkin (Role of Works, p. 48), this judgment venue is solely concerned with the “rewards” Christians may or may not receive for their labors on behalf of the Gospel. Role of Works, p. 25. Non-believers, according to Wilkin, face final judgment later before the Great White Throne as set forth in Rev. 20:11-15 to determine their eternal destiny. Both judgment venues are apocalyptic in that they occur after death.Schreiner on the other hand argues for one judgment at the end of the age at which both believers and non-believers appear. Role of Works, p. 71. According to Shreiner, the purpose of this judgment for believers is to “confirm” the verdict of “not guilty” before the whole world. Role of Works, p. 71, while non-believers will be condemned for eternity. Schreiner further contends that “works constitute the necessary evidence or fruit of one’s new life in Christ. We can even say that salvation and justification are through faith alone, but such faith is living and vital and always produces works.” Wilkin agrees that the eternal condemnation of non-believers here to the “Lake of Fire” is a “foregone conclusion” (Role of Works, p. 47), but that works play no role in determining the salvation of believers.”
There are numerous variations on these themes of judgment. For example, I have heard it preached that believers and non-believers are both judged immediately upon death. Others contend that only believers are judged at death, while non-believers must wait for the end of the age to face the full consequences of their sin. Others, like Shreiner, argue that both groups must wait until Christ’s return for this final judgment to take place. This latter scenario seems to call for some sort of Intermediate State where the disembodied spirits of believers “rest in peaceful repose” in anticipation of their full bodily resurrection. Regardless of their views, adherents cite numerous passages from Scripture in support of their positions.
The point of this article is not to repeat the detailed Scriptural analyses that scholars and others have made over the years, but rather to examine the various judgment scenarios logically to see if any of them make any sense in light of what we know of Christ and his nature, or whether they tend to resemble the disjointed, cumbersome and rather jumbled processes that characterize many human systems of justice. The touchstone for this analysis is Isaiah 55:8-9 (NIV): “‘For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,’ declares the LORD. ‘As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts’.” See also Acts 17:29 (Good News Translation): “Since we are God’s children, we should not suppose that his nature is anything like an image of gold or silver or stone, shaped by human art and skill.” If the result of these various Scriptural investigations and arguments by scholars is a procedure that seems decidedly human in nature rather than Christ-like, the suggestion here is that perhaps we are on the wrong track.
Let us examine first conventional notions about the judgment of non-believers before the Great White Throne. Here, Wilkin sets out the majority view, quoting from Zane Hodges, “The Sin of Unbeief,” Grace in Focus, (Nov. – Dec. 2007): 2-3, available at www.faithalone.org.: “Although the outcome of the whole process is a foregone conclusion, the justice of God requires the process to take place. Even in our own society, a man caught red-handed in the act of murder (or some other crime) must have his day in court. Every unsaved person wil have his or her day in God’s court.” Here we have an equivalency between human and divine justice for non-believers. While I am not advocating for the doctrine of universalism in which all people will be saved, it behooves us to remember that God is merciful even in judgment: Psalm 103:10 (NLT): “He does not punish us for all our sins; he does not deal harshly with us, as we deserve.”
Moreover, consider Matt. 10:42 where Jesus tells us (NIV) that “if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones who is my disciple, truly I tell you, that person will certainly not lose their reward.” There is no indication that the people giving the cup of cold water to believers are themselves believers, and what is the reward Jesus announces that they can never lose? Could it be eternal salvation? Is it possible that some condemned souls will genuinely confess Christ as Lord before this final judgment venue, and will salvation thereby be possible? Bear in mind that non-believers are not there because of their evil conduct, or we would all be in that sorry boat, but because here on earth they saw no need for Christ or any other savior but felt justified on their own merits. Could a change of heart be possible?
Here is a call for humility. We simply do not know nor can we predict the names of those inscribed in the Book of Life, aside from those saved by faith through Christ’s redemptive work on our behalf. Compare Acts 10:34-35 (NIV): “Then Peter began to speak: ‘I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but accepts from every nation the one who fears him and does what is right’.” Could this promise extend even beyond the grave to those who come to fear God and do what is right by confessing Christ as Lord? Perhaps Christ’s redemptive work extends beyond what our conventional ideas suggest.
Let us turn now to believers who are supposedly also “judged” before the Great White Throne at the end of the age. Schreiner sums up the conventional view of how this judgment unfolds (Role of Works p. 71): “I define justification as being acquitted before the divine judge. Those who are justified are declared to be ‘not guilty’ before God. In addition, justification is understood in this essay to be an eschatological reality. Hence, the verdict of ‘not guilty,’ which believers receive now by faith is confirmed at the final judgment before the whole world. Salvation by contrast means that one has been rescued or delivered; here the focus is on being rescued from God’s wrath or punishment on the last day.”
This approach has many problems. First, why does God’s judgment need to be confirmed? Is it confirmed for God’s benefit as judge? Surely not, since God knows all. Is it confirmed for the believer’s benefit? John is his Gospel tells us (John 17:3, NIV) that “[n]ow this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” Salvation is confirmed for the believer, whether they are actively conscious of it or not, when they enter into a relationship with Christ by faith. No other confirmation is necessary.
Finally, does this verdict of “not guilty” need to be confirmed before the “whole world” as Schreiner and others contend? The judgment of believers as contemplated in 2 Cor. 5:10 is almost universally viewed as an individual rather than a corporate judgment. See The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, Harris, Murray J., NIGTC, Eerdmans (2005) p. 407, who observes in relation to the underlying Greek text that “ἕκαστος, ‘each person,’ indicates that τοὺς πάντας ἡμᾶς does not imply a judgment en masse. Accountability and assessment are individual.” See also 2 Corinthians, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Guthrie, George H., Baker Academic (2015) p. 289: “ἕκαστος … indicates that scrutiny will apply to each individual rather than consisting of a summary judgment on that (πάντας ἡμᾶς) group of people”; II Corinthians, The Anchor Bible, Furnish, Victor Paul, Doubleday (1984) p. 275: “Although we must all appear before the judicial bench of Christ, we are individually accountable”; and World Biblical Commentary, Volume 49, 2 Corinthians, Martin, Ralph P., Word Books Publisher, Waco Texas (1986) p. 115: “judgment is not rendered en masse, but in each case, one by one.”
The bottom line to all this is that the appearance of believers before a post-death apocalyptic tribunal to determine or “confirm” their eternal destiny is unnecessary and superfluous. Rather, it falls more in line with the bureaucratic need to process individuals through some impersonal criminal justice system in a manner wholly unlike the direct and immediate way Jesus goes about the process of judgment. See Luke 23:43 (NIV): “Jesus answered him, ‘Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise’.”
As far as the timing of this supposed “final judgment,” Schreiner and most other observers place it at the consummation of the age when Christ returns. This begs the question about what happens to believers between when they die and Christ’s Second Coming. Many argue that they spend this time in some form of Intermediate State. Doctor N.T. Wright is one of the foremost proponents of this view, N.T. Wright, Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church, Harper One; Reprint edition (February 27, 2018)p. 41:
“When Jesus tells the brigand [the repentant thief on the Cross] that he will join him in paradise that very day, paradise clearly cannot be their ultimate destination, as Luke’s next chapter makes clear [where Luke describes the women from Galilee finding the empty tomb, the walk to Emmaus, the appearance to the disciples, and the ascension of Jesus]. Paradise is, rather, the blissful garden where God’s people rest prior to the resurrection.”
The Professor goes on to note (p.41) that when “Paul says that his desire is to ‘depart and be with Christ, which is far better’ [Phil. 1:23], he is indeed thinking of a blissful life with the Lord immediately after death, but this is only the prelude to the resurrection itself.”
Dr. Wright further develops this notion of a temporary resting place later in the book, page 150:
“What does Jesus mean when he declares that there are ‘many dwelling places’ in the father’s house (John 14:2)? This has regularly been taken, not least when used in the context of bereavement, to mean that the dead (or at least dead Christians) will simply go to heaven permanently rather than being raised again subsequently to new bodily life. But the word for ‘dwelling places’ here, monai, is regularly used in ancient Greek not for a final resting place but for a temporary halt on a journey that will take you somewhere else in the long run.”
Dr. Wright goes on to describe (page 150) this “paradise” as “not a final destination but the blissful garden, the parkland of rest and tranquility, where the dead are refreshed as they await the dawn of the new day.” This lovely, at least on its surface, description, however, strikes me as distressingly close to the Platonic notion of the blissfully disembodied state where the spirits slip away after their bodies die, a notion of resurrection which the Professor throughout his book has taken great pains to discredit. Dr. Wright then goes on to observe that Jesus did not rise on Good Friday but rather on Easter, and that this delay of a couple days somehow makes a great difference to where the thief, who in a way is a precursor for all of us believing sinners, will end up immediately following his death.
Another proponent of this notion of Intermediate State is the late Dr. Anthony A. Hoekema who in his excellent book, The Bible and the Future, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Kindle Edition (1994) explains it (page 144) in this way”
“But death brings about a temporary separation between body and soul. Since the New Testament does occasionally speak of the ‘souls’ or the ‘spirits’ of men as still existing during the time between death and resurrection, we may also do so, as long as we remember that this state of existence is provisional, temporary, and incomplete. Because man is not totally man apart from the body, the central eschatological hope of the Scriptures with regard to man is not the mere continued existence of the ‘soul’ (as in Greek thought) but the resurrection of the body.”
The author quickly concedes, however, that there is little in the way of scriptural support for such a “temporary” separation of body and soul, page 142:
“In reply to these objections it must be admitted that the Bible says very little about the intermediate state and that what it does say about it is incidental to its main eschatological message about the future of man, which concerns the resurrection of the body. We must agree … that what the New Testament tells us about the intermediate state is nothing more than a whisper. We must also agree that the New Testament nowhere provides us with an anthropological description or theoretical exposition of the intermediate state. The fact remains, however, that there is enough biblical evidence to enable us to maintain that at death man is not annihilated and the believer is not separated from Christ.”
Moreover, this temporary resting place for those who have presumably already been saved for all eternity apparently has its drawbacks (page 160), drawbacks that do not at all seem consistent with the joy and peace that must necessarily come from being with Christ:
“Paul does not tell us exactly how we shall experience this closeness with Christ after death. We have no description of the nature of this fellowship; we can form no image of it. Since we shall be no longer in the body, we shall be delivered from the sufferings, imperfections, and sins which haunt this present life. But our glorification will not be complete until the resurrection of the body will have taken place. Therefore, the condition of believers during the intermediate state, as Calvin taught, is a condition of incompleteness, of anticipation, of provisional blessedness.”
The question that needs to be asked, I believe, is the following: Is it in Christ’s nature to keep his followers in such a state of suspended uncertainty for in some cases (see the repentant thief) thousands of years before finally permitting them to fully enter his kingdom when it is clear to Christ that they are saved and have already passed from death to life? See John 5:24 (NLT): “I tell you the truth, those who listen to my message and believe in God who sent me have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins, but they have already passed from death into life.” Jesus himself declares that when he returns, he will bring his elect with him, Matt. 24:31 (NIV): “And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.” Where do these elect saints come from? Are they disembodied spirits residing in some netherworld, or do they represent the fully resurrected followers of Christ? I think the latter description is rather clear.
There is yet another pressing problem in telescoping all final judgment of both believers and non-believers alike before one final apocalyptic tribunal at the end of the age following Christ’s return; namely, creating an unnecessary tension between the doctrines of judgment according to works and salvation by faith. Dr. Hoekema notes (The Bible and the Future, p. 383) that “[t]he Scriptures … teach that all human beings who ever lived will have to appear before this final judgment seat;” that (pages 383-384) the subject of this judgment is “[a]ll things that have been done during this present life” and that “[e]verything a person has done is an expression of the basic direction of his heart, and thus will be taken into account on the Day of Judgment. This includes a person’s deeds, words, and thoughts.” Dr. Hoekema goes on to stress that simply because their sins are forgiven, believers are not spared from this comprehensive works judgment (page 385):
“It is sometimes said that the sins of believers, which God has pardoned, blotted out, and cast into the sea of forgetfulness, will not be mentioned on the Day of Judgment. If it be true, however, that there is nothing hidden which will not then be revealed, and that the judgment will concern itself with all our deeds, words, and thoughts, surely the sins of believers will also be revealed on that day. In fact, if it is true that even the best works of believers are polluted with sin (see Isa. 64:6; Rom. 3:23; James 3:2), how can any deeds of believers be brought into the open without some recognition of sin and imperfection?”
That all sounds consistent with the notion, perhaps best expressed by Peter, an apostle who knew all too well about the need for the forgiveness of sin, that God’s judgment is impartial; in other words, God plays no favorites. 1 Peter 1:17: “And remember that the heavenly Father to whom you pray has no favorites. He will judge or reward you according to what you do. So you must live in reverent fear of him during your time here as ‘temporary residents’.” Compare “God ‘will repay each person according to what they have done’,” Romans 2:6 (NIV); and “Surely you repay all people according to what they have done.” Psalm 62:12 (NLT).
So far, so good, at least with respect to the impartiality of works judgment. But then what do we read on page 385 of Dr. Hoekema’s book? (by the way, all of this is more or less an accurate reflection of currently accepted Christian doctrine):
“The failures and shortcomings of such believers, therefore, will enter into the picture on the Day of Judgment. But—and this is the important point—the sins and shortcomings of believers will be revealed in the judgment as forgiven sins, whose guilt has been totally covered by the blood Jesus Christ. Therefore, as was said, believers have nothing to fear from the judgment—though the realization that they will have to give an account of everything they have done, said, and thought should be for them a constant incentive to diligent fighting against sin, conscientious Christian service, and consecrated living.”
The author goes on to correctly observe (page 387) that the “all-important factor for determining man’s eternal destiny is his relationship to Jesus Christ,” but that (page 388) the “reason why the Bible teaches that the final judgment will be according to works, even though salvation comes through faith in Christ and is never earned by works, is the intimate connection between faith and works. Faith must reveal itself in works, and works, in turn, are the evidence of true faith.” Finally, the author notes that (page 395) “[A]ll who are in Christ will enjoy everlasting blessedness on the new earth, whereas all who are not in Christ will be consigned to everlasting punishment in hell.”
Other scholars generally concur in this view of the necessity of good works to salvation. For example, Schreiner (Role of Works, p. 91) argues that “[n]o one will be justified if he or she fails to do good works. Such works are not autonomous but are the result of the new covenant work of the Holy Spirit. Nor are the works perfect. Believers still sin regularly, so that the good works constitute a new direction or a new orientation in their lives.” The late James Dunn in the same book (pp. 141-142) acknowledges the tension between the doctrines of justification by faith and judgment according to works, but contends that it is impossible for us to reconcile the two and that both should be kept in mind by believers as they go about their daily lives. Michael Barber also in that same book (p. 183) points to “meritorious works” as necessary for salvation, which he defines as works which are empowered “by God’s grace in the believer.”
With all due respect to Dr. Hoekema and other scholars who advance this general view of the nature of works judgment, that hardly sounds like equal and impartial treatment to me. Believers will undergo some temporary embarrassment, a public shaming of sorts, and perhaps the loss of some heavenly “rewards” (The Bible and the Future, pp. 378-379) for their bad earthly conduct (this concept of a “Rewards Judgment” advanced most notably by Robert Wilkin is discussed below), that is, their sins, for we are all sinners; while non-believers will be tossed into the Lake of Fire with the devil and his angels for in many cases much the same conduct. Rev. 20:15. Indeed, the judgment venue itself seems hardly to resemble an evaluative tribunal as we might understand it, at least according to Dr. Hoekema, (p. 393):
“In commenting on the nature of the final judgment, E. A. Litton [Introduction to Dogmatic Theology (London, 1960), as quoted in Leon Morris, The Biblical Doctrine of Judgment (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960), p. 54 n. 3] reminds us that we must not apply the analogy of human tribunals too literally: ‘A human trial … is strictly a process of investigation.… In the last judgment, however, the Judge is omniscient, and has no need of evidence to convince him; he presides with a perfect knowledge of the character and history of everyone who stands before him … the great day will be one rather of publication and execution than of judgment strictly so called’.”
Consider whether that view of judgment squares with the clear language of Rev. 15:12 (NIV): “And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.” This strikes me as an evidentiary hearing at which the works as recorded in the “book” for each individual are evaluated on their merits. The result is that believers and non-believers are not evaluated at this supposed hearing in an impartial way in which God plays no favorites as set out in 1 Peter 1:17. This “imputation” of Christ’s righteousness to believers shields them from the full consequences for their wrong-doing, hardly an impartial outcome from the perspective of non-believers, whose sins are not similarly shielded.
Robert Wilkin takes the view that believers’ works are evaluated at a separate apocalyptic judgment separate from the Great White Throne judgment of Revelation 20, but that these works are only taken into account in determining whether heavenly “rewards” will be granted to some believers and denied to others, not in determining salvation, which is by faith alone. Role of Works, p. 104: “Rather than accepting an impossible contradiction, we should embrace the free gift of everlasting life by faith alone apart from works and the related yet distinct promise of eternal (and temporal) recompense for work done.” Yet it is striking that in all these discussions of the role of works, this notion of impartiality advanced so forcefully by Peter never seems to come up. Under Wilkins’ view, the sins of non-believers relegate them to Hell, while in many cases those same misdeeds by believers lead only to a possible loss of heavenly benefits, but do not deprive them of eternal life with our Lord. Here again, hardly an impartial treatment.
How can we find a way out of this doctrinal box? Dr. Wilkin provides us with a clue (Role of Works, p. 102) when he asserts that “God can judge the believer’s sin in this life anytime and anywhere, chastening us for our disobedience” citing 1 Cor. 11:30-32 (partaking of the Lord’s supper unworthily), and Heb. 12:7 (discussing generally the “fatherly” discipline of the Lord). Wilkin calls this a “temporal judgment,” which he distinguishes from the Judgment Seat of Christ intended only to decide the eligibility for believers of various heavenly rewards, and the Great White Throne Judgment for non-believers at which their eternal destiny will be decided. These latter two venues he regards as apocalyptic in that they take place after death, whereas the temporal judgment occurs in this life. But what if this earthly judgment venue involves more than merely an occasional admonishment for bad behavior? What if it constitutes the final judgment for believers; in other words, an ongoing bodily judgment of believers in this life administered by Christ from his Judgment Seat as set out in 2 Cor. 5:10?
How are we to resolve these apparent contradictions and tensions? The solution is not so much a question of deep theology, but rather one of proper and logical procedure regarding the timing and venue of judgment, essentially what the translators of the King James Bible correctly described, 2 Cor. 11:3, as “the simplicity that is in Christ,” which in Greek reads τῆς ἁπλότητος τῆς εἰς τὸν Χριστόν. A correct understanding of 2 Cor. 5:10 (the Judgment Seat of Christ) places the final judgment venue of believers in this life, not in the next. The translation advanced in my articles is as follows: “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive in our bodies what is due us for what we have done, whether good or bad.” Compare this with the conventional translation, for example the NIV: “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.”
The result of a correct reading of 2 Cor. 5:10 is that both believers and non-believers face the identical bodily consequence for their sins; that is, the death of their bodies. This makes perfect sense since all have sinned, believers and non-believers alike, and sin resides in the flesh; Romans 7:18 (ESV): “For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.” Thus, the body bears the brunt of one’s sins, whether one believes in Christ or not. Indeed, Dr. Hoekema observes the following about the consequence of sin, page 126: “Your physical body is dead, Paul is saying—that is, it has the seeds of death in it, and is bound to die eventually. And then he adds significantly, ‘because of sin.’ Again we see that according to Scripture the death of the body is a result of sin.”
Yet Dr. Hoekema adds a small qualification, page 128: “Death is for us who are in Christ not a satisfaction for sin. It was for Christ, but it is not for us. Since Christ was our Mediator, our second Adam, he had to undergo death as a part of the penalty for sin which we deserved, but for us death is no longer a punishment for sin. For Christ death was part of the curse; for us death is a source of blessing,” and that is because, page 129: “[w]e shall enter into the full riches of eternal life only after we have passed through the portal of death.”
While it is true that death leads to eternal life for the believer, this does not alter the fact that the “wages of sin” (Romans 6:23) for both believer and non-believer is the death of the body. Thus, in this earthly judgment venue, there is no partiality. Each person, believer and non-believer alike, experiences the just result for their sinful conduct without favoritism. But what else happens? For one thing, we can do away with the need for any shadowy Intermediate State. The judgment of the believer is complete upon his or her death, and thus there is no further impediment to a full bodily resurrection. “[W]hat is central in biblical eschatology is the doctrine of the resurrection of the body,” (page 139). Again, as Dr. Hoekema correctly notes (page 139): “The central message of Scripture about the future of man is that of the resurrection of the body.”
What does Dr. Hoekema say about how this bodily resurrection takes place? On page 103, he points to the Holy Spirit as the connecting link:
“[T]he Holy Spirit is not only active in bringing about the resurrection of the body, but also will continue to sustain and direct the resurrection body after the resurrection has occurred… One more point remains to be made. If it be true, as Paul tells us in II Corinthians 3:18, that the Spirit is already at work in us now, transforming us into the image of Christ, it follows that this progressive renewal is a kind of anticipation of the resurrection of the body. The Holy Spirit is thus the connecting link between the present body and the resurrection body.”
And why is this so? On page 365, the author tells us that the resurrection of Christ-followers hinges on, and follows the pattern of, Christ’s resurrection:
“[W]e find that what stands at the very center of that teaching is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Scriptures make it abundantly clear that the resurrection of Christ is the pledge and guarantee of the future resurrection of believers. All previous resurrections mentioned in the Bible were again followed by death; only the resurrection of Christ is never to be followed by death—and it is this type of resurrection to which believers look forward. Because Christ arose, believers too shall arise.”
With the final judgment as contemplated in 2 Cor. 5:10 already behind the believer, there is nothing in the way of the Holy Spirit completing the task of bodily resurrecting the believer according to the pattern established by Christ, that is, resurrection upon one’s death. Christ did not pass into some vague Intermediate State following his crucifixion, and neither will all those who trust in him. This is admittedly at odds with conventional thinking as described by Dr. Hoekema, page 364: “The clear teaching of the Bible is that at the time of Christ’s return there will be a general resurrection of both believers and unbelievers. After this general resurrection the judgment will follow.” This is true for non-believers, but not for believers since at their death they will have passed through the portal of the final judgment before Christ under a proper reading of 2 Cor. 5:10.
But what of good works, one might ask. How are they taken into account, if at all, in this rather cumbersome eschatological system that Dr. Hoekema and many other scholars have proposed over the years? Here, Dr. Hoekema is quite explicit, and also quite wrong (page 388): “The reason why the Bible teaches that the final judgment will be according to works, even though salvation comes through faith in Christ and is never earned by works, is the intimate connection between faith and works. Faith must reveal itself in works, and works, in turn, are the evidence of true faith.”
Thus, here we have the ultimate outcome of the improper postponing of the final judgment of believers into some vague apocalyptic, post-death future along with non-believers; that is, the dilution of the bedrock Christian doctrine that anyone and everyone who puts their faith in Christ will be saved through the gracious gift of Christ’s redeeming work on their behalf. Compare Eph. 2:8-9 (NIV): “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.” As another scholar wrongly notes, Ortlund, Dane C., Justified by Faith, Judged According to Works, Another Look at a Pauline Paradox, Jets 52/2 (June 2009) 323–39, p. 338: “To exclude moral performance from the ground of justification is not to render such obedience soteriologically irrelevant. Distinction between faith and works must be maintained without sliding into separation.” As with Hockema, Dr. Ortlund tells us that even though believers will face apocalyptic judgment of their earthly behavior, they have nothing to fear regarding their eternal salvation, page 337:
“Paul taught a real judgment that applies to believers and unbelievers alike and is according to, not on the basis of, obedience. Believers will also experience various degrees of reward based on their respective lives of Spirit-ignited, faith-propelled obedience borne out of union with Christ. … [M]oreover, Paul refers to a judgment of that which has been ‘hidden (tav krupta;). Judgment, then, appears to be largely the revealing in the next life of what has been hidden in this one. Ultimately, however, believers have nothing to fear on Judgment Day—every shortcoming is covered by Christ’s sacrifice (Rom 8:31–34; cf. Jas 2:13).”
That might be easy enough to say in theory, but if works are in some form or fashion a necessary “proof” of the genuineness of one’s faith, how can the believer have any real assurance of salvation, knowing that all our works in this life, even the best of them, are nothing more than “filthy rags?” Compare Isaiah 64:6 (NIV), “All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away;” Romans 3:10 (NLT), “As the Scriptures say, ‘No one is righteous— not even one,’ John 1:8 (NIV); “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us;” and Psalm 14:1 (NIV), “There is no one who does good.” Dr. Wilkin is correct when he observes (Role of Works, p. 49) that assurance of salvation is impossible if Christians must appear at a final apocalyptic judgment. This is because if we cannot be sure if our good works are “good enough,” how can we know we will be saved if these good works are a necessary precondition to our eternal salvation? The short answer is that we can’t.
This uneasy relationship between works and faith in the salvation calculus of the final judgment inevitably results from improperly telescoping all such judgment of both believers and non-believers into one post-death, apocalyptic event. This is because at that judgment venue, what is ultimately adjudicated is one’s eternal destiny, which is eternal life for believers and eternal punishment for non-believers, despite their earthly works in both cases being not only inadequate to save them but also downright sinful.
But what of this earthly, bodily judgment of believers? What does it accomplish if our eternal salvation is no longer at issue, since we are already saved by faith alone operating through Christ’s redeeming work on our behalf? The Topical Encyclopedia, which can be found athttps://biblehub.com/topical/t/the_purification_of_the_saints.htm, gives us a hint: “The concept of the ‘Purification of the Saints’ is deeply rooted in the biblical narrative and theological understanding of sanctification, holiness, and the transformative work of God in the lives of believers. This purification is both a positional reality and a progressive experience in the life of a Christian, as they are set apart for God’s purposes and continually refined to reflect the character of Christ.” Acts 14:12 (ESV) gives us another clue: “strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying that through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God.” Finally, we read in Malachi 3:2-4 (NIV): “But who can endure the day of his coming? Who can stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner’s fire or a launderer’s soap. He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver; he will purify the Levites and refine them like gold and silver. Then the Lord will have men who will bring offerings in righteousness, and the offerings of Judah and Jerusalem will be acceptable to the Lord, as in days gone by, as in former years.”
Judgment properly understood, therefore, constitutes the ongoing, daily interaction between Christ and each believer, a relationship that one experiences in the most private and intimate ways; that is, through one’s own body here on earth, including all our senses, thoughts, feelings, and emotions—in other words, through our complete earthly existence with all its manifold and often conflicting circumstances and influences. As a result of this interaction, believers are better equipped to make sense of their lives, their relationships, and their overall purpose as Christ mercifully guides them on their earthly journey toward eternity. Seen in this light, judgment is not only therapeutic, purifying and enriching, but represents in its fullest sense an active, sometimes even a minute-by-minute, spiritual conversation between the believer and the risen Lord. This overall process of judgment, however, is not dependent on believers’ conscious awareness of how and why Christ is interacting with them at any given moment. Christ goes about his work of judgment whether we realize it or not.
As a result of this intensely personal notion of judgment, the attention of the believer is redirected from some vague, apocalyptic future, which we simply cannot hope to fathom now, to something far more tangible, understandable, and beneficial, that is, our present relationship with Christ. Compare 1 Cor. 13:12 (NLT): “Now we see things imperfectly, like puzzling reflections in a mirror, but then we will see everything with perfect clarity. All that I know now is partial and incomplete, but then I will know everything completely, just as God now knows me completely.”
But what of the requirement of impartiality, some might ask. Is not the ultimate outcome of all this that non-believers are banished to eternal damnation while believers receive the gift of eternal life? How is that impartial? Is not God playing favorites? Not at all! Indeed, this is the culmination of God’s even-handedness. Non-believers do not appear before the Great White Throne Judgment because of their immoral conduct? If bad behavior was the key determinant, no one would escape. They appear there because that is their free choice. They have made the conscious decision that they have no need of Christ or any other savior, and that they are justified as righteous based on their own merits and world view. In other words, under the system of rules which they have chosen to guide themselves and their actions, they pass muster and thus are not in need of grace or any other third-party redemption. In effect, they have redeemed themselves. Believers on the other hand realize that they cannot save themselves and require Christ to deliver them from their sinful flesh. Each group, believers and non-believers, thus chooses their own final judgment venue.
It would seem, therefore, that after death non-believers are relegated to some sort of Intermediate State which Scripture refers to as Hades. Here, we look to the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man for guidance, and read in Luke 16:23-26 (NIV) the following: “In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’ But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us’.” Compare Jude 1:6 (NIV): “And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.”
Why then would the Lord postpone the final judgment of believers until some post-death apocalyptic scenario, whether at the Great White Throne or some other venue, when so much can be accomplished in this life while we are still in our physical bodies with all the possibilities of growth, purification, and strengthening in the faith that such a relationship would entail? What can be accomplished in judgment after our death besides punishing us? At that point, what purpose does punishment serve since we are already saved by faith, and how would punishment even be imposed when we are merely disembodied spirits under the conventional view? Can some sort of spiritual pain be inflicted, and does any of this comport with Christ’s benevolent and wise nature? I suggest that it does not.
Summary.
Conventional views of divine judgment both as to timing and substance represent more of a human understanding of crime and punishment than a reflection of Christ’s nature and purpose with respect to his followers.
For those who would like to explore this topic further, here is a list of articles on the subject of judgment published at this blog.
Prelude To An Article On The Judgment Seat Of Christ In 2 Corinthians 5:10
The Judgment Seat of Christ Revisited (2 Corinthians 5.10) – Full Exegetical Article
Postscript to an Article on the Judgment Seat of Christ in 2 Cor. 5:10
Jeannine K. Brown, Embedded Genres in the New Testament: Understanding Their Impact for Interpretation (Reflections for 2 Corinthians 5:10)
Do Near-Death Experiences Conflict with the Biblical Notion of the Final Judgment?
A Modest Critique of N. T. Wright’s Surprised by Hope from the Perspective of Paradise and the Final Judgment
The Transfiguration of Christ: A Book Review with Reflections on Judgment
Book Review and Essay on The Role of Works at the Final Judgment, edited by Alan P. Stanley.
A Quick Summary in Plain English Why the Conventional Translation of 2 Cor. 5:10 is So Wrong, and Possible Reasons Why It Has Nonetheless Held Up For So Long
Beyond the Current Confusion toward a Coherent and Scripturally Sound View of the Final Judgment
A Suggestion for Future Commentators on 2 Corinthians
The Bottom Line: What does a correct understanding of 2 Cor. 5:10 mean for each of us in particular, and for the spread of the Good News of the Gospel generally?
A Brief Conversation Among Disembodied Spirits Residing in the Intermediate State
The Final Judgment: Should Believers Be Concerned?
Judgment Seat of Christ—In Rebuttal
A Brief Explanation Why Believers’ Behavior, No Matter How Sinful, Plays No Role In Determining Their Eternal Destiny, Which Is Eternal Salvation, But Why It Is Still A Very Good Idea To Obey Christ’s Commands
If God Loves Judgment, Shouldn’t We Love It Too?
Leave a Reply
Your email is safe with us.