"It comes, it comes!' they sang. 'Sleepers awake! It comes, it comes, it comes.' One dreadful glance over my shoulder I essayed – not long enough to see (or did I see?) the rim of the sunrise that shoots Time dead with golden arrows and puts to flight all phantasmal shapes. Screaming, I buried my face in the fold of the Teacher's robe. 'The morning! The morning!' I cried. 'I am caught by the morning and I am a ghost.' CS Lewis in The Great Divorce
Jezreel Valley and Mount Tabor courtesy of Wikipedia
Today, I am looking at the more traditional views of hell. I will be quoting from some the Calvinistas since they have done much writing on this subject. This does not mean that I necessarily agree with their conclusions but merely want to present another side of current evangelical thinking.
Is God in Hell?
Many have argued that hell will be a place where God is not. In other words, people will be left to their own devices with no moderating influence of the Almighty. However, a number of theologians argue that God’s presence is in hell. In an article at Equip.Org "Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here" we read , LINK
“However, most theologians appear to argue f God’s presence in hell. As Dr. R. C. Sproul explains, we find no relief in them: “A breath of relief is usually heard when someone declares, ‘Hell is a symbol for separation from God.’ To be separated from God for eternity is no great threat to the impenitent person. The ungodly want nothing more than to be separated from God. Their problem in Hell will not be separation from God, it will be the presence of God that will torment them. In Hell, God will be present in the fullness of His divine wrath.”
At the "Against Heresies" blog LINK
“Is God present in Hell? We have to say that he is.
Firstly, because Scripture affirms that he is. In Hell there is torment day and night in the presence of the holy angels and the in the presence of the Lamb (Rev. 14:9-11).
Secondly, to deny that he is present in all of his creation is to deny that God is infinite and immense. Was God present at the cross when Christ was forsaken? He was spatially as present in Jerusalem then as he is today. Nevertheless in a way that we cannot comprehend but which is the cause of all our hope in time and eternity, we believe that the Son of God knew all the torments of a condemned sinner, and all the relational distance that guilty sinners will receive. His experience of being forsaken was not imagined (Mark 15:33-34)"
"When we turn to the Westminster Larger Catechism question 29, which deals with the subject of God's relationship to those who will experience future judgement in Hell, we find a precision of thought on these matters that is often lacking today:
Q. 29. What are the punishments of sin in the world to come?
A. The punishments of sin in the world to come, are everlasting separation from the comfortable presence of God, and most grievous torments in soul and body, without intermission, in hell-fire forever. (emphasis added)
Hell is not spatial separation from God, it cannot be because God is omnipresent. No, Hell is separation from the comfortable presence of God. It is the unshielded experience of the presence of God in his holiness and just wrath, and the absence of his mercy and grace.”
Is Satan in hell and does he rule hell?
In an article by Mark Driscoll at The Resurgence we learn: LINK
“At the end of the age, the Devil will be “thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.” Hell will be ruled by Jesus, and human and demon alike, including Satan, will be tormented there continually. “
But, how do we justify the existence of hell?
In an excerpt from article entitled "Why Should I Believe in Hell," Hank Hanegraaff proses three reasons : LINK
He begins by admitting that the horrors of hell are very difficult for most people to consider. He then offers the following:
- Christ spent more time talking about hell than He did about heaven. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7), He explicitly warned His followers more than a half-dozen times about the dangers that lead to hell. In the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25), He repeatedly told His followers of the judgment to come. In His famous story of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16), He graphically portrayed the finality of eternal torment in hell.”
- “The concept of choice demands that we believe in hell. Without hell, there is no choice. Without choice, heaven would not be heaven; heaven would be hell. The righteous would inherit a counterfeit heaven, and the unrighteous would be incarcerated in heaven against their wills, which would be a torture worse than hell. Imagine spending a lifetime voluntarily distanced from God only to find yourself involuntarily dragged into His loving presence for all eternity. The alternative to hell would be worse than hell itself in that humans made in the image of God would be stripped of freedom and forced to worship God against their will.
- “Common sense regarding justice dictates that there must be a hell. Without hell, the wrongs of Hitler’s Holocaust would never be righted. Justice would be impugned if, after slaughtering six million Jews, Hitler merely died in the arms of his mistress with no eternal consequences. The ancients knew better than to think such a thing. David knew that it might seem for a time as though the wicked prosper despite their evil deeds, but in the end justice will be served.”
Are there any other Bible verses to consider regarding the existence of hell?
Once again, in the aforementioned article from CRI entitled Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here, we read three statements from Christ about the existence of hell.
- “If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell” (Matt. 5:29–30).”
- “Furthermore, in the Olivet Discourse, Christ repeatedly warned His followers of the judgment to come:When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left….Then he will say to those on his left, “Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”…Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life (Matt. 25:31-33, 41, 46).”
- “Lastly, in His famous story of the rich man and Lazarus, Christ portrayed the finality of eternal torment in hell:In hell, where [the rich man] 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 fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us” (Luke 16:23–26)
So, are you saying that Joe Six Pack and Adolf Hitler will get the exact same punishment?
In the Apologetics Press LINK Alden Bass,Bert Thompson, Ph.D., Kyle Butt, M.A.present the following:
Are There Degrees of Punishment and Reward?
First proof text: “Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works had been done in Tyre and Sidon which were done in you, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you. And thou, Capernaum, shalt thou be exalted unto heaven? thou shalt go down unto Hades: for if the mighty works had been done in Sodom which were done in thee, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee (Matthew 11:21-24, emp. added).
Jesus offered this censure to those Jewish cities where He had done much of His preaching, and where, on occasion, He even had performed miracles. The citizens of those towns had more opportunity to accept the Messiah than many others living around them, yet they persisted in their rejection of Him. On the other hand, the Gentile cities of Tyre and Sidon—renowned for their wickedness—would receive a lesser punishment at the Day of Judgment for the simple reason that they had been deprived of direct exposure to Christ’s message and miracles.
All were to endure punishment, for all had rejected God’s law. But it would not be equal punishment. The writer of Hebrews further emphasized this point when he addressed the “sorer punishment” that was to befall those who had “trodden underfoot the Son of God” (10:29). Notice also Peter’s stinging statement regarding the terrible fate that awaits unfaithful, backsliding Christians:
Second proof text: For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein and overcome, the last state is become worse with them than the first (2 Peter 2:20-21, emp. added).
If Peter’s statement teaches anything, it teaches degrees of punishment.
Third proof text: But perhaps the most convincing argument for the concept of degrees of punishment derives from Jesus’ parable of the wicked servant, as recorded in Luke 12:42-48.
And the Lord said, “Who, then, is the faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall set over his household, to give them their portion of food in due season? Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. Of a truth I say unto you, that he will set him over all that he hath. But if that servant shall say in his heart, ‘My lord delayeth his coming,’ and shall begin to beat the menservants and the maidservants, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken; the lord of that servant shall come in a day when he expecteth not, and in an hour when he knoweth not, and shall cut him asunder, and appoint his portion with the unfaithful. And that servant, who knew his lord’s will, and made not ready, nor did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes; but he that knew not, and did things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. And to whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required: and to whom they commit much, of him will they ask the more” (emp. added).
The meaning of the last section of this parable is inescapable. All the wicked will be punished; however, those limited in their opportunities to learn about Christ will be punished “with fewer stripes” than those who knew the truth and obeyed it not.”
Equip.org weighs in on the question of degrees of punishment in hell.LINK
"On the basis of the Bible we may safely conclude that not all existence in hell is equal. First, the unified testimony of Scripture is that God is perfectly just and will reward and punish each person in accordance with what he or she has done (Psalm 62:12; Proverbs 24:12; Jeremiah 17:10; Ezekiel 18:20, 30; Romans 2:5–16; 1 Corinthians 3:8, 11–15; 2 Corinthians 5:10; Colossians 3:23–25; 1 Peter 1:17; Revelation 20:12).
Furthermore, the Bible is clear that with greater revelation and responsibility comes stricter judgment (cf. James 3:1). Jesus warned the Pharisees that they would “be punished most severely” for their willful hypocrisy (Luke 20:47).” (v. 22). Moreover, Jesus used the metaphor of physical torture to warn his hearers that those who knowingly disobey will experience greater torment in hell than those who disobey in ignorance (Luke 12:47–48). God is perfectly just and will reward and punish each person in accordance with what he or she has done.
Finally, the canon of Scripture ratifies the common-sense notion that not all sins are created equal (cf. John 19:11). To think a murderous thought is sin; to carry that thought to its logical conclusion is far graver sin. Every sin is an act of rebellion against a holy God, but some sins carry far more serious consequences than others and thus receive severer punishment in this life and the next. Indeed, according to Scripture the torment of Hitler’s hell will greatly exceed that of the less wicked.”
Also, RC Sproul adds his analysis that there are levels of punishment in hell. You can listen to his explanation at this LINK.
Mark Driscoll, in the aforementioned article at The Resurgence says the following:
“However, this does not mean that the relatively nice sinner suffers equally with Satan or his most committed human servants. There are degrees of punishment in hell like there are degrees of reward in heaven. Both in life and in hell some sins receive more severe punishment, because that is just.”
What is hell like?
Once again, at the aforementioned article "Abandon Hope All Ye who Enter Here, we read:
- “darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt. 8:12);
- “fiery furnace” (Matt. 13:42);
- “lake of burning sulfur” (Rev. 20:10).
- “Its torment is said to be continuous” (2 Thess. 1:9),
- “unquenchable” (Matt. 3:12), an
- “eternal” (Jude 7).
Although many words describing hell are symbolic, they signify an even more suffocating reality: wrath.”
Douglas Groothuis in a article entitled "The Doctrine of Hell" LINK adds:
"Jesus asked what a person’s life would be worth if he or she were to gain the whole world but forfeit his or her very soul (Matt. 16:26). So, Hell is also the loss of the soul."
After reading all of these responses, I am left with some questions of my own.
- If there are degrees of punishment in hell, why are the descriptions of hell monolithic? All seem to be in torment and it is unquenchable. In other words, being tormented by fire causes third degree burns. (Correction 5/11- thanks to alert reader Cindy K- second degree burns cause pain. Third degree burns cause deep tissues destruction and infection.)This hurts whether it is on some of the body or all of the body.So is this literal?
- If it is unfair to drag people kicking and screaming into heaven who do not want to be near God, is it then fair to drag them kicking and screaming into hell to be tormented by Jesus who will be there?
- Are the words fire, darkness, lake of sulphur literal or figurative? For example, Jesus is the Light so could darkness merely mean the opposite of Jesus?Why does God have to be in hell? Could He simply remove His presence since He is sovereign? So could hell be simply the removal of the grace of God and people are forced to bear the pain of their own ego? Could certain punishment be added to the Osama Bin Ladens specifically?
May I be transparent? I am confused by this depiction of hell. There are many unanswered questions and I wonder if it is beyond my ability to fully understand in this life.
I still remember a story somebody told me that illustrated the differences of hell and heaven. In hell, everyone was seated at a table and were forced to eat with long handled utensils. But the implements were so long that it was impossible to bring the food to the mouth. So, the people were starving in plain sight of the food.
There is the same scenario in heaven. But everyone was eating the food because they were using the long handled utensils to feed their table mates.
In the end, isn’t it all about serving Jesus as opposed to serving me?
Lydia's Corner: Judges 9:22-10:18 Luke 24:13-53 Psalm 100:1-5 Proverbs 14:11-12
Re. Driscoll, I’m very tempted to say that he seems to have a direct line to God, but then… well. He thought “Avatar” was the most satanic movie he had ever seen.
Guess he never watched Start Trek!
Pingback: The argument for hell | Civil Commotion
In other words, being tormented by fire causes third degree burns.
Second degree burns are horribly painful.
Third degree burns can be deadly, but they are not painful AT ALL. Nerve endings rest in the base layer of the dermis, and third degree burns consume the dermis, exposing the tissue beneath. They are not painful. As the tissue on the margins of the burn begins to die, it has to be debrided, and that is painful when it encroaches upon lesser burns or healthy tissue.
(3rd degree burns, unless they are very small, isolated islands of burn, must be grafted. But they are deadly because there is no barrier to contain not only moisture, but especially potassium. You have to chase low potassium with replacement like crazy, and that causes metabolic balance and cardiac problems if untreated.)
If there was a ST episode where they visited a more primitive planet where that Old Country Doctor had to treat burns, you would already know that and could likely state the name of the episode.
Cindy
Thanks for the correction. I realized my mistake when I went to bed last evening but was too tired to get up and correct it. Sadly, there have been no Star Trek reruns of that nature or I would have been quicker on the draw. So, I shall change the post to reflect my question. I guess I could add that third degree burns include infection and tissue destruction. BTW so what do you think that all means? Is it literal or more figurative.
Questions, Questions…
About time we faced the facts : we don’t know ALL there is to know about the afterlife.
Today counts, its all we have anyway, lets not waste it.
Thanks Dee ( watch out for the doctrine police ),
Yinka
Read Friday’s post-I will address the doctrine police.
Dee,
In a previous thread, you wondered about my beliefs concerning the afterlife. I believe the prophet Daniel. When I am gathered to my fathers, I will sleep in the earth until judgment day. When I am reassembled & reanimated from the dust I returned to, the books will be opened and I will be judged.
I don’t wanna go to conservative evangelical heaven. Pearly gates, gold streets, mansions and jewel encrusted vistas do nothing for me, and I certainly have no desire to rule and reign over others. I’d be far happier with something along the lines of John Lennon’s “Imagine”.
Many conservative evangelicals reject the Creeds not for what they affirm, but rather for what they do not affirm. For example, how can one be sure that no woman will ever deliver a sermon from the pulpit when no proscription against it can be found in the Creeds? The same consternation arises with a belief in a literal hell, and a host of other negotiable doctrines. This is where the emphasis on a strict Biblicism & perspicuity of Scripture comes from.
I agree with Erasmus where he wrote:
“…The first place must indeed be given to the authority of the Scriptures; but, nevertheless, I sometimes find some things said or written by the ancients, nay, even by the heathens, nay, by the poets themselves, so chastely, so holily, and so divinely, that I cannot persuade myself but that, when they wrote them, they were divinely inspired, and perhaps the spirit of Christ diffuses itself farther than we imagine; and that there are more saints than we have in our catalogue…”
The writers of Scripture and the medieval theologians were products of their times. Horrific forms of torture & execution were common place and no big deal just so long as it wasn’t them that fell victim. I am a product of the Enlightenment and I reject cruel and unusual punishment. I also believe that there’s a difference between a hunger for justice and a thirst for vengeance. I like to think that the unrepentant and the worst of the worst are simply winked out of existence. So from that standpoint, yes, I am an annihilationist. Time will tell.
Dee, thanks for the feedback.
Bell is probably an inclusivist ( I know I’m leaning towards that notion ). I think it leaves room for God to be who he said he was: the ultimate judge. Does that mean we stop “witnessing” or sharing our faith ? certainly not, but it sure saves me from untold heartburn.
An interesting link : http://www.ukapologetics.net/evinc.htm
Yinka
I get a little confused between the term inclusivist versus universalist.What would you say are the differences.
Muff
I avve a feeling we will be celebrating together in heaven. I believe, as you have read, that annihilationism is an orthodox, albeit unusual, position. Besides, some of my favorite people tilt that way-Lewis, Stott,and Muff.
Hi, back from a nine-day hiatus, the last day catching up on the hell issue here.
It is important to remember that much language is figurative or illustrative, rather than literal and definitive. Second, the words that get translated as “hell” had different meanings in the times when the scriptures were written. e.g., Gehenna apparently was a large garbage dump that was smoldering continually, a really awful place, where the bodies of non-Jews who were considered to be evil were dumped. Sheol, often translated hell, really means the grave, and is probably the source of the concept that Jesus went to hell between the crucifixion and resurrection. Jewish burial practices of the first century time period included putting the body in a cave or other burial, then disinterring and putting the bones in an ossuary, suggesting a real understanding of decomposition that occurs after death.
I believe that heaven will be beautiful. I think the descriptions are figurative and not literal, but the idea of being in the presence of a loving Savior seems more wonderful than golden streets and jeweled residences.
When I am sad or depressed, I go to him in prayer and imagine myself sitting on the lap of God, with arms wrapped around me, holding me and comforting me and totally enclosing me and protecting me from all threats, internal and external. I imagine heaven being like that.
As to Hell. I really can’t say. But to miss out on the love of Christ would be torment enough for me.
“I believe that heaven will be beautiful. I think the descriptions are figurative and not literal, but the idea of being in the presence of a loving Savior seems more wonderful than golden streets and jeweled residences.”
My thoughts exactly. It is about being with HIM!
Dee
Ha ! I doubt there is universally binding definition of those terms ( pun intended ).
Just moments ago, I was surprised to read that a self-proclaimed universalist STILL believed in judgment !
To me, inclusivisim underscores the wideness of God’s mercy; that those who may not consciously self-identify as Christians in this life will be “evaluated” by God and granted eternal life in his kingdom– SOLELY, of course–on account of Christs’ sacrificial work ). Others will be thus judged, yet condemned ( annihilated perhaps ? )
Universalists usually maintain that ALL humanity, will be granted eternal life. No great cosmic evaluation, according to them.
The link I highlighted may help clear some things up.
Congrats on your daughters’ graduation !
I cannot imagine why anyone would want to try and describe eternal torment in flames – especially as a real thing.
Where is the mercy – or the justice – in tormenting people for eternity? I cannot believe in a god who would inflict such torture on any living being.
The image of the Vietnamese child who was hit by napalm (very famous photo from the Vietnam War era) keeps coming to mind.
I think that often our desire for supposed justice is really a desire to make sure that those we perceive to be evil (includes those who truly are) “get theirs.” However, i cannot believe God is ever going to work in that way.
It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of a holy God. With fear and trembling, we work out our salvation. Moses’ hair turned white, and after being with the Lord who had to cover him with His hand, the people could not look at his face. Daniel, if he saw the glorified Christ (the description of one of the emissaries who communicated with him sounds much like John’s description in the Apocalypse) had to go to bed because he was so physically drained. Isaiah saw the Lord, high and lifted up, and the angels had to cover their faces, and the door posts shook, and they cry over and over, ‘Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord.” The shepherds on the hillside outside Bethlehem were terrified when they saw God’s glory. And John’s description when in exile seeing the utterly holy Jesus with His eyes as flames of fire, His voice like many thundering waters as the pound with force, and His face shown so brightly that it was like looking at the sun, and John falls on his face like he’s dead. This is the man who laid his head on Jesus’ bosom! Paul who went blind for a time, and some argue that his vision was affected thereafter wrote of the “terror of the Lord.” These men were not exactly comfortable. The angel wrestled with Jacob, and he limped away. Does any of that sound like justice by our human standards?
I don’t think it is hell or napalm we have to fear. I think it’s the white hot flames of fire of His eyes that peer into our souls, seeing and knowing all of the things about ourselves that we cannot even wrap our minds around. Imagine standing in front of Him, even redeemed and made to be in right standing with Him through the Blood, as if we had never sinned, in the righteousness of the Lamb. Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man…
What happened to Job when he asked about where the his justice was? What did God say to Habakkuk? Be utterly astounded!
There is much that doesn’t make sense to us, but we are to make our enemies a footstool for our feet. Death is going to die. Injustice will be dealt with by the only holy, just and terrible God. He looks to the intent of the heart, and He knows all. He’s going to change us when we see Him.
You can show people a sci-fi movie, and they will be awestruck and shake in their shoes. Yet we dare look up to heaven and shake our fist at Him. I’ve done it myself in my foolish and ignorant anger saying, “Get your hands off of me.” I’d just turned 18, and I was furious and terrified and arrogant. And later, I was glad that God did not let me go, and I cried out to Him to show Himself strong to me. Then, I fell on the Rock and was shattered and would be shattered again in later years. But then, the Master Potter collected all my pieces and remolded me and works on me still.
We can go on and on about how unjust we think God is, just like those we’ve read of in Scripture. I’m going to take a lesson from Job and echo his response when his Advocate on High came down to answer him in his frustration and distress. Even the earth travails and writhes under the effects of sin and cries out for things to be made right because of so much suffering. But I also have faith that God is working His glory into us and into the earth.
I don’t think much about people getting theirs. I think about being fit to stand before a holy glorious terrible God in His might and perfection. I don’t think that it’s hell that we’re going to have to worry much about. I’m concerned about having a lamp full of oil, being found faithful, having a garment that is pure and clean, without spot or wrinkle, and all that comes to me through His help, His work, His mercy, His kindness, and His loving care of me. And I am undone. And I have faith that He is bigger than me and will balance justice, weighing the good and evil in every soul’s heart. He is the only one who can do that, and as He does, I place my hand over my mouth in terms of what I think is just and what is not. That conviction pierces through me like white hot metal, because He sees that there is an evil way in me as He searches and knows my heart. Fear and trembling. Fear and trembling.
Dee,
About the burns. In Luke 16, concerning the rich man in hell. He felt burning and heat but was not consumed. I’ve seen charred bodies of people who have had burns to their mouths (there was a trend 25 years ago in my town in PA where kids were putting M-80s in their mouths) and other kinds of burns.
Flesh gets consumed, so I don’t know what is going to happen. The rich man still had a form of a body that Lazarus could see. I don’t know what that will mean. This is our example of what it is like to peer into that place, and if it was a parable that meant to convey a moral lesson, why go to such lengths about the specifics so as to be confusing? God is not the author of confusion, and Luke 16 uses concepts that build on what we are already told.
Seriously though, the third degree burn issue points out something that I think Stott was getting at in his thoughts about hell which he admits are limited, and I wonder how much of what he said had to do with speculation that was personal and was not meant as instruction in righteousness?
Deut 29:29 — the secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children that we may do all of the works of the law.
and of the law –
Romans 8:3-4 – For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
But some things remain secret. Those secrets test our mettle and our hearts.
What happens to Hitler in hell http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMEv8YYOEgc&feature=related
It’s gotta be true ’cause it was in Little Nicky and Adam Sandler doesn’t lie.
RE: Yinka says: @ Wed, May 11 2011 at 06:33 pm
“…To me, inclusivisim underscores the wideness of God’s mercy; that those who may not consciously self-identify as Christians in this life will be “evaluated” by God and granted eternal life in his kingdom– SOLELY, of course–on account of Christs’ sacrificial work ). Others will be thus judged, yet condemned ( annihilated perhaps ? )…”
Remember all the smug self assurance (proof texts too) around the blogosphere that Gandhi’s being BBQ’d in the infernal regions because he never knew Christ? I wonder what they do with Romans 2:13-16 which argues that Christ may have known and claimed him (Gandhi).
RE: numo says: @ Thu, May 12 2011 at 02:39 am
You might want to read what a gifted young woman at another blog has to say about justice & mercy:
Here’s the link:
http://www.abandonimage.blogspot.com/
Muff – I hear you. Its Ironic how “biblical” folks simply won’t let God be God in this matter.
Seriously, think about it;
Why would God create a place that existed just to torment people?
He would also have to maintain it (second law of thermodynamics and everything.
God loves us and wants us to be with Him forever but he gave us a choice in the matter.
God gives everyone an honest chance (as in He’s rooting for all of us and isn’t impatient to close the door on anyone.
Hell is likely the result of being forever separated from God.
Whatever we think isn’t going to become or change the reality of all God has invested in this issue so it isn’t worth giving someone else grief over a differing viewpoint.
I’ll be sitting back laughing at the expression on various faces when “(fill in the blank, sometimes me) actually snuck into heaven, how’d that happen?”
@ Muff; many, many thanks for the link to that blog!
@ Cindy: if death itself will be extinguished – which is (along with illness) one of the most painful things we experience in this life (those who are left when someone we love dies), well… I cannot imagine a merciful (and just) God bringing about so-called “justice” via eternal torment.
It simply does not compute for me, and never really has, although I guess I believed hell existed (as an eternal place or state that involves torment forever) until relatively recently.
How is the Gospel diminished if that *isn’t* what waits for those who have harmed humanity? How is the Lordship of Christ diminished if, in fact, those passages are not intended to be interpreted in the way you interpret them?
Does it make repentance and faith in Christ any less necessary?
I think not, but that’s just me.
@ Cindy – I know you and I are not going to talk each other out of our respective viewpoints ;), but I wonder, re. the following, if you have ever read Jonathan Edwards’ sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”?
Because what you are saying here sounds far more like the god that Edwards visualizes all too vividly (as if it was enjoyable to do so) than what I read in the NT:
“I don’t think it is hell or napalm we have to fear. I think it’s the white hot flames of fire of His eyes that peer into our souls, seeing and knowing all of the things about ourselves that we cannot even wrap our minds around. Imagine standing in front of Him, even redeemed and made to be in right standing with Him through the Blood, as if we had never sinned, in the righteousness of the Lamb. Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man…”
Here’s a link to the Edwards piece: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/edwards/sermons.sinners.html
I realize Edwards was not always going on about the eternal conscious torment of the damned, but you know… I can’t help thinking of Nathaniel Hawthorne’s work whenever I think about the fire-and-brimstone new England Puritans. Hawthorne’s family was involved in the Salem with trials (and *not* on the side of the angels…).
His “Young Goodman Brown” is superb: http://www.online-literature.com/hawthorne/158/
Also, isn’t the “eye hath not seen” passage referring to God’s love?
I delivered the Edwards sermon in high school class. Scary. BTW, the experience almost made me reject Christianity. I worship a God who is defined by love and mercy more than anger and wrath.
`I delivered the Edwards sermon in high school class. Scary. BTW, the experience almost made me reject Christianity. I worship a God who is defined by love and mercy more than anger and wrath.
I hear you. I had to read it for 11th grade English (survey of American lit), shortly before my conversion, and thought it was more horrific than Poe. Thankfully, the Christians that were talking with me at the time emphasized God’s love, mercy and grace, not hellfire and brimstone, or else I might not be commenting here at all!
I think you’re missing my point. God is holy. We are not in this flesh. We are under the Blood and are declared righteous so that we can approach the Lord. That is not something that is in contrast with God’s lovingkindness or the Abba Father whom we can cry out unto or the God who took Enoch who walked with Him. But His lovingkindness does not make Him less holy or His presence less powerful.
We are human flesh, in the confines of human perspective and limitation. God is not confined by those things. Would you expect your toddler to be able to sit at the kitchen table with you to instruct you on how to balance your checkbook or prepare your taxes? That’s my point. Do we have the right as human beings, even ones who have the mind of Christ, to sit in judgement of God? I can’t get around that.
I think that you’ve also missed my meaning for citing Paul to the Corinthians about what “eye hath not seen…” I cited it to demonstrate that we are confined until we see Him and are changed and are like Him. But even then, I do not believe that we take His seat of position in wisdom or insight. We are like small children in this respect. We are talking about God who when Moses spent time with him, his hair turned white, God had to cover him with His hand, Moses couldn’t even look at Him, and Moses was so affected that people could not look at his face for a time. We are seriously limited creatures by comparison.
God’s holiness is not at odds with His great love for us, but God is not my equal either. I ask Him hard questions and have sung the psalms that ask “How long will you hide?” I tell him when I am angry and ask for deliverance and guidance. I am perfectly honest with Him, so far as I am able and aware. So I am not saying that we cannot be pure with God when we don’t understand. But I will also not assume that I can see what He does.
That’s my point.
I’m well familiar with the “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” but I have not read it in many years. But what has that got to do with what is clear and plain in Scripture, and something that I’ve understood as part of central doctrine. I don’t think that it matters much what Edwards’ wrote, and it is not from him that I determine what I believe. It doesn’t mean that Edwards might not be informative or interesting, but it’s not my central focus on central doctrine. That should come from Scripture, evaluated through a sound hermeneutic.
Dee has already done a very fine job of reviewing many sources on the topic that can be helpful to us if we need them to better understand certain topics. Yet, those writings can give us feedback about our own beliefs and what falls within the pale, but they should never be the bedrock of what we believe. That must come from Scripture. Under the last article here or so, I cited examples from what Jesus said about hell, not even the whole of the Bible. I didn’t get that from Edwards or Calvin or anyone else or because this is what someone told me that’s what I had to believe. That’s my conviction about what is written in the Word, especially in Jesus’ words.
People can do with that what they want. We’re supposed to be ready to give a defense of our faith — why we believe what we believe. This is what I believe and people can do with that what they want. But I think that a great part of why this blog exists involves too much of a dependence on what so and so has said about the Bible and believers who have followed so and so instead of discerning Scripture for themselves. So long as we are working out our salvation, it is a blessing that people are at least thinking about what they believe instead of just absorbing so and so.
And it’s America. You are free to pray to a potted plant if you want. People can knock themselves out doing whatever they want. And they should have the right to make those choices without coercion.
Just so you guys know, Cindy was the one who recommended the lastest book on Anne Hutchinson to me. And it was excellent.
I do get weary of people trotting out Edwards and others to try and carve God up into categories. My God is mericiful. Edwards God is wrath.
Cindy put it in much more eloguent words than I ever could. We must study ALL the attributes of God from scriptures. Isaiah was undone. What do we do with such things as this?
Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Jesus speaking in Matt 10
It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. Hebrews 10
But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him. Luke 12
What concerns me the most is downplaying the absolute Sacrifice that God Himself made on the Cross by giving up His Glory in Heaven to go do what He did. If God is going to save people who not know Messiah then what was the point of the Cross?
Who did Jesus claim that He was when on earth? Yes, Messiah but what does that mean as “Anointed One”. It means He is Yaweh in the Flesh. I AM in the Flesh.
I think we mock Him and insult Him even more when we say that one can be saved without knowing that Yaweh came in the Flesh and died for our sins. In effect, we are denying Him as Messiah when we do this. (Not including children or the simple minded. Jesus said in Matt 18 we are to “become like children to enter the Kingdom of heaven” and he said this for a reason.)
@ Cindy and Lydia: you ladies hold to one interpretation of certain passages while I hold to another.
Is God holy? Of course!
I do think we need to agree to disagree here, as none of us are going to talk the other into our pov.
Shake hands on it? 🙂
Also, I think Dee has been doing a great job of setting out a range of beliefs from within the evangelical community… but keep in mind, not everyone who comments here is evangelical.
There’s more latitude (in terms of the spectrum of churches that hold to the Apostles and Nicene Creeds, throughout the world) than it might seem, at first blush, anyway.
Numo, I am not trying to change your mind. Sorry if it came off that way. blogs are conversations and we post our thoughts. I get the feeling you would rather we didn’t?
Who said I was “evangelical”? I do not even know what that word means anymore. Ted Haggard was ‘evangelical” and the king of their society. We would have to define that word before I could even understand what you mean.
I get the feeling you would rather we didn’t?
no, no, no!!! Not at all.
But sometimes (and I think we are all guilty of this, me included) it’s easy to post our respective views as if they were the only correct way(s) to view things.
In other words, we are coming from different parts of Christianity, but I have no doubt that we are all (or mostly all) Christians.
Does that make sense?
“Agree to disagree” means exactly that, btw. It’s not some kind of weird code for “Don’t post about what you think/believe.”
I think sometimes it’s best to understand that people are not going to all subscribe to the same beliefs, whether it’s about science, medicine, politics… or doctrine. And respect that although we have differences, there is much that unites us.
I do get weary of people trotting out Edwards and others to try and carve God up into categories
To the best of my knowledge, I was *not* attempting to do what you’ve just said.
I guess maybe it would be helpful if you could tell me a bit about why you think that was the case? (I’m not trying to bug you; I would honestly like to know.)
I don’t think it is hell or napalm we have to fear. I think it’s the white hot flames of fire of His eyes that peer into our souls, seeing and knowing all of the things about ourselves that we cannot even wrap our minds around.
Reminds me of the movie Ghost Rider. GUILTY…
My God is mericiful. Edwards God is wrath.
The Bible’s God is both. 🙂
It is important to note that most of the wrath stuff is OT and most of the mercy and love stuff is NT, but both are present in both OT and NT.
Jesus said that the soul that believes in him would not die. The NT uses the words like “What must I do to be saved?” “Saved from what?” is the next question for me. From the permanent grave? From the fiery furnace?
Some of the times the Bible uses “sheol” which means “grave”. Sometimes “gehenna” is used, which was a smoldering garbage dump near Jerusalem, where, sometimes, bad acting non-believers were dumped after their death. Such dumps frequently begin to smolder due to “spontaneous combustion” and continue to smolder for decades or longer. Sometimes “Hades” is used, which was an unpleasant but not particularly tortuous place where the dead continued to have an existence. So we must be careful in linking all of these ideas into a common meaning as “hell”, along with the “lake of fire”. That puts us into the mode of interpreting what the words mean in a particular way, determined by our ‘education’ shaped over 20 or more centuries of thought.
@ Arce: Sheol is the OT word for the abode of the dead.
Hades, Tartarus, Gehenna and “paradise” are all NT. Now, whether these words have been translated correctly… that’s one of the sticking points. The idea of “hell” – as it came to be conceived of in the early medieval period and beyond – isn’t, strictly speaking, anywhere in the Bible 9that I know of, at least… though I may well be wrong on that).
I do know that the Greek and Russian Orthodox churches have a somewhat (well, maybe, very much) different view of the way the NT words ought to be translated (or, for the Greek-speaking Orthodox, brought up to date). They do not believe in the Western church’s idea of hell, although the *do* believe in eternal conscious torment for those who rejected Christ. But the “torment” comes from being in the presence of God, which they believe the blessed will experience as delight. (In other words, hell is not a place or destination in their view; it is a condition.)
I think N. T. Wright and Rob Bell have been digging into some of the theology of the Orthodox Churches re. understanding the concept of “hell” and the afterlife, although both also differ from the Orthodox view in certain respects.
@ Junkster: just curious – do you think there’s much “wrath” in the NT? (An honest question – would really like to know what you think about this.)
Hi Lydia ( HUGE fan of your posts btw, I still remember the missive on Apostle Junia. I can’t wait to see Piper and MacArthur’s faces when they finally meet her. Now that would be PRIME-TIME viewing. You never know, they might learn a thing or two from her–a w.o.m.a.n.
RE: “What concerns me the most is downplaying the absolute Sacrifice that God Himself made on the Cross by giving up His Glory in Heaven to go do what He did. If God is going to save people who not know Messiah then what was the point of the Cross?”
The point, to me, is that Messiah, the anointed son of God, went to the cross. Not YHWH (gasp! ).
Messiah fulfilled his role as the suffering servant; we eagerly await for his return as conquering king–the son of David. I’m not claiming the monopoly on orthodoxy–obviously–but I honestly can’t reconcile things any other way without forcing “stuff” into the narrative…
@ Lydia again:
Who said I was “evangelical”? I do not even know what that word means anymore.
You and me both (on “not sure what it means anymore”). I guess I used the word because it was the only one that seemed to cover the bases, although I’m not sure that it really does.
Numo,
Yes, the wrath of God which I see in the NT is implicit in the concept of salvation (saved from what?) and it is explicit in the suffering of Christ on the cross. Then there’s the whole book of Revelation thing.
This may answer a couple of your remaining questions.
Thanks for the post!
http://www.compasschurch.org/askpastormike/omnipresence-and-hell/
@ Junkster: what happened to “For God so loved the world…”?
@ Junkster again: I don’t view the atonement and Christ’s sacrifice of himself on the cross in the same way that you do – I do not see this as God is wrathful and Christ, the incarnate 2nd person of the Trinity, must sacrifice himself to appease the Father.
Doesn’t jive for me, not in light of how Jesus speaks of himself, and of how he is described in the epistles.
Numo,
The rest of John 3:16 says that God’s love was demonstrated in the sacrifice of His Son to ensure salvation for those who believe. For me, the Bible is clear and definite about the concept of penal substitutionary atonement, that our salvation is from God’s wrath, justly deserved because of our sins and Adam’s . Ok with me if you don’t believe that’s what the Bible teaches, or if you believe that’s what it teaches but don’t believe the teaching anyway. God loves us both in spite of whatever errors either of us believes, and if you’re trusting in Christ as the way to God, you are one of His children. Having a right theory of the atonement never saved anyone.
@ Junkster:
” Having a right theory of the atonement never saved anyone.”
Totally agreed! 🙂
I am a Christian, but not a Calvinist. 😉 However, I think we agree on the essentials.
Cool? 😀
Agreed, numo. 8D
Muff
I have learned that I must speak the truth in love to all I meet.I fail at that all the time, unfortunately. I am called to be a witness. I leave the judging up to God. I bet I will understand it all a darn site more when I am in His glorious presence.
Muff
Thanks for the link to abandon image. I like her. She is real about what she is feeling and, if truth be told, I feel the same way at times.
DB
What scares me about heaven is when somebody looks at me and says, “What in the world is she doing here?”
Numo, Cindy, Arce
That sermon by Edwards was a tough one for me as well. Still is. I believe that hell is a reality but how it all plays out is a mystery.
Cindy
I wholeheartedly agree with you. When we are changed into glory, we will better understand all of this. But I also agree that, even in our glorified state we will not be God and will probably not understand it fully. There are days when if all sounds so logical and clear and on other days, I feel like I don’t understand even a twaddle. So, I keep reading my Bible, books by smart people and praying.
Lydia
You make so much sense. I know that many will not be saved. It is all about Jesus. I, too, believe in all of His attributes. Loving, wrathful, just,merciful, savior, judge. I call it the divine paradox and that is why I am glad that I know Jesus because I can trust Him to do what is right. If i were in charge, things would be a big, fat mess for sure.
Lydia
How do you handle the man who grew up in a remote tribal village and never knew or heard of the Messiah yet sensed there was more beyond himself and tried to serve that which he did not know?
Junkster
Re: The Bible’s God is both. I agree.
Arce
I need to do a whole lot more reading on the subject. Lake of fire, Gehenna, Sheol-all are symbolic and literal. Which was it. Could it be that it is so complicated that God uses these word pictures to point us to the reality without showing us what that reality is? One thing I do know, I will not break fellowship over differing perspectives on hell. I figure the Almighty knows what he is doing and He will help me get a grip on it when I meet Him. In the meantime, I keep spreading the good news.
Numo
The more you write, the moreI understand how little iI do understand. So, it’s back to the drawing board for me. I have some good books around here and its back to elementary school for old Dee.
@ Dee: Well, until last week, i had no idea at all re. the Orthodox view of hell, nor would I make any claim to knowing much of anything about it now… all I can say for sure is that I came across some apparently reputable sources that went into the topic at great length… though I wish they had had bibliographies attached, because i would like to be able to do a bit of following up.
One interesting tidbit that i ran across: apparently (as far as I understand it), the Greek and Russian Orthodox churches do not do much of anything with the book of Revelation. While I don’t think I could ever become Orthdox, I really kind of like their stance on that particular book.
Also, you said
Could it be that it is so complicated that God uses these word pictures to point us to the reality without showing us what that reality is? One thing I do know, I will not break fellowship over differing perspectives on hell.
Very much agreed on both points.
and you know… a few years ago, I came across a whole lot of Ethiopian Orthodox music videos on YouTube. And – even though i had known that there was a very ancient Christian presence in East Africa, it kind of bowled me over to see these vids, because they drove something home:
– most of the church is not in North America or Europe
– an awful lot of the church has been doing just fine without American (or European) missionaries for well over a thousand years
– so… maybe we could learn a few things from the brothers and sisters in those places? (In Arab countries, in Iran, in southern India, in Ethiopia, in…)
I only know a very little bit about these non-Western, ancient churches. I do know that all of them have their own problems. But at the same time… there are plenty of professing Christians out there who have never heard of US-style evangelicalism and who could probably care less about the Calvinistas, Rob Bell or whatever other controversies might be facing us.
We are not the center of the world. 😉
Here’s one of my favorite Ethiopian viids for you guys 9I think it was actually shot here in the US). It is a song in praise of the Holy Trinity. The editing is kind of awful, but I don’t think it hurts the overall presentation too much.
About the singer: I only know her 1st name, which is Fantu.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MmE5nYLvJI
Just for fun, here is a more contemporary song by a group of young Coptic (Egyptian) Christians – it even has English subtitles. : )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUhKdg90NJo
Numo
There are a number of former evangelicals who have joined the Russian orthodox church. Here is a fascinating article In Christianity Today from 2006 which looks at this phenomena. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/december/30.40.html
Stephanie
Thanks for this link. http://www.compasschurch.org/askpastormike/omnipresence-and-hell/
JUnkster
I do believe in the wrath of God as well as His mercy. Trying to reconcile the two keeps me up at night.
Catching back up after real life…
If we agree on the essentials of the faith, we have unity and can celebrate that unity. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (believe in your heart and confess with your mouth) and you shall be saved. Provided that it’s the right Jesus, that’s the starting point. We work from there. We don’t always have the same ideas about things, but I am fine to celebrate the unity that we do have.
From there we have sustaining doctrine (where hell would be), and most peripherally, we have intramural or what some call non-essential doctrine.
My great concern in some of what has been said in the thread suggests that we should interpret what the Word says by the standard of men. It should be the other way around. We have discussed sustaining doctrines that I think are important. I understand that I was called upon to give an answer for the hope within me and the reasons why I believed one way or another about a serious doctrine. That should not be taken as something that takes away from the unity that we have in faith in Jesus Christ and the love that we have for one another. I think that we should celebrate that and hash out the rest.
I think that in some ways, the idea that there is no hell or even perhaps no punishment for wrongdoing is difficult based on Scripture which, for the traditional conservative folk, that means that the Scripture is effective and God-breathed. We can agree or disagree on that, too, and offer the reasons why we believe one way or another. That is one of the pleasurable things about this blog. I don’t think that anyone demeans anyone for trying to think about these things and make the best sense of them — that is never a wrong thing to do. In fact, I believe it is a Christian’s duty especially and the duty of all.
I celebrate unity where I find it, but I’m going to contend for some things strongly because of the emphasis that I understand comes from the Word. I’m happy to agree to disagree with all.
Peaking at Dee’s response to Junkster just above,
I can’t help but think of that naughty film, Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life. In the boys’ school scene, they have a chapel service where after Cleese reads some fake version of something that sounds sort of like Scripture (“and slew they the goats and placed they the bits in little pots…”) . Then Palin starts to recite a prayer that goes on to be quite goofy.
Palin says, “Oh Lord, Ooooh you are so big….” That much of the prayer is perfect, I think. He is Ooohh so big to me.
One day, we will be changed when we see Him and are like Him for we shall see Him as He is. And I suspect that so many of these things are not going to matter. And I long so much for that day. The Spirit and the Bride say, “Come Lord Jesus.” My heart aches for it.
Cindy
I raised this issue to show that many Christians deeply struggle with this issue. I am more of a traditionalist when it comes to Scriptural interpretation although there are some who would accuse me of being liberal. That is why i think I am in a good spot. When the conservatives and liberals both are irritated, then I am asking the right questions.
So many Christians are content to be spoon fed and never struggle with the difficult issues of the Bible. I wrestle with God and, along the way, He has blessed that struggle. However, in the end, I am grateful that God is the one who makes the decision on heaven. I am called to witness to the reality of Jesus. And once I get there, I believe He will pat me on the head and open my eyes to the perfect melding of justice and mercy.
And then, I am going to find Johnny Cash and CS Lewis and enjoy talking and worshipping (My voice will finally hold a tune) for a long, long time.
Dee,
We are all supposed to be liberal. Liberal with our money, time, energy and love, both to God and to those around us who have need.
We are all supposed to be conservative. Conservative by preserving the faith which is ancient and protecting those who are weak from abuse.
We are all supposed to read and study the Bible prayerfully, and to use our abilities to strive to understand and apply the Word in our lives. That is neither conservative nor liberal, at least not to the exclusion of the other; perhaps is it both and.
Jesus gave us two great commands: Love the Lord with all your heart, mind, body and soul and Love your neighbor as yourself. Nothing in there allows excluding or dissing those with whom you disagree. But loving your neighbor surely includes working to protect the weak from the strong.