In the following paragraphs I’m going to argue for something I really don’t want to be true. In fact, I would really like to be wrong on this, but as I’ve searched the Scriptures, I believe this conclusion takes into account the whole of the Biblical account.
READER BE WARNED: YOU NEED FIVE MINUTES TO READ THIS AND 30 TO CONSIDER ITS IMPLICATIONS!
As most people know, the Bible has numerous references to “hell.” As far as I’m aware, few people actually deny hell exists and that people go there. Many people, however, seem to suggest hell won’t endure for eternity. Are they right? (Honestly, I wish they were.)
Here’s how I see it:
On the one hand, the Bible says all people have been forgiven. So that means everyone is/will be saved right? Well, on the other hand, it says some will go away to hell forever. So, the question is: is this hell really eternal – as in never ending torment?
People often object to the doctrine of eternal hell for a few reasons: 1) God says He wants all people to be saved and because He’s sovereign, He’ll accomplish His desires. 2) The punishment of eternal hell doesn’t meet the crime – eternity is too long. 3) God is a God of love and He wouldn’t damn people for eternity.
While several passages talk about hell, here are the ones that mention its eternity:
· Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” (Matthew 25:46)
· But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin. (Mark 3:29)
· If anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck. If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where "'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.' (Mark 9:42-48)
· All this is evidence that God's judgment is right, and as a result you will be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are suffering. God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed. This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you. (2 Thessalonians 1:5-10)
· In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire. (Jude 1:7)
· A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: "If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, he, too, will drink of the wine of God's fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name." (Revelation 14:9-11)
Personally, these verses make me shudder (especially because half of them came from the lips of Jesus)!
Now, some have claimed “eternal” means “for an age” or some such equivalent. And I suppose you could argue that on one or two passages (although I really don’t think it would hold up exegetically), but it really seems unlikely that all six passages actually mean “for an age.” If hell was meant to be understood as non-eternal, why does the Bible nowhere clearly indicate this? Why does it use so many different words for “forever”?
At some point, it becomes quite difficult to make a Scriptural case for a non-eternal hell. Yes, the Bible does say Jesus forgave the whole world, but in my mind, it is far easier to qualify these statements (i.e. Jesus purchased forgiveness for all people, but not all want it) than it is to qualify the statements of hell (i.e. the Bible says hell lasts forever, but it means “for a time”). Even more, the early church fathers interpreted the Scriptures this way as did the Lutheran reformers – and they wrote it in their confessions (The Augsburg Confession and The Apology of the Augsburg Confession).
Now, on the concept of punishment matching crime, I think Aquinas actually explains this well: “The magnitude of the punishment matches the magnitude of the sin… Now a sin that is against God is infinite; the higher the person against whom it is committed, the graver the sin – it is more criminal to strike the head of state than a private citizen – and God is of infinite greatness. Therefore an infinite punishment is deserved for a sin committed against him.”
And as for being uncomfortable that a loving God could send someone to an eternal hell, well, I guess we’ve just got to get our concept of God from the Scriptures and not our own notions of what is just and right.
Obviously, this only scratches the surface, but at least it’s a start and, like I said above, I wish it weren’t true.
6 comments:
Thanks for your very interesting post!
Some thoughts:
(Matthew 25:46)
A tough passage.
(Mark 3:29)
Notice that this verse is about the duration of the sin, not the duration of the punishment for the sin. It may be that there are eternal sins without eternal consequences.
I'm not sure that anyone has a clear enough conception of "eternal sin" to know exactly what is going on, but that's just my impression...
(Mark 9:42-48)
Like a house on fire, the fires of hell could continue burning even if no one is left inside.
(Jude 1:7)
Here's a good example of why we should prefer the "of God" interpretation of "eternal" in some cases. The fire that consumed Sodom and Gomorra has clearly stopped burning. The fire is not eternal in the "everlasting" sense, but in the "from God" sense.
(Revelation 14:9-11)
A tough passage.
Church history is actually the main thing that gives me pause when thinking about universalism. I'm always suspicious of theological stories that go "the pure NT church once believed x, but everyone in the church from 200-1600 AD believed the opposite until WE discovered the truth..."
Do you really agree with Aquinas? His view seems to imply that killing the mayor is a worse sin than killing the homeless man under the bridge. But that just seems ridiculous...
What do you think about this? Scripture teaches that all people are saved. Scripture also teaches that some people will spend eternity in hell. These seem like contradictions but, sine scripture teaches both, we should believe and teach both.
I'm still wondering about the bondage of the will. Isn't it especially hard for a Lutheran to justify the existence of hell?
A modern day evangelical can at least appeal to C.S. Lewis' free will defense of hell. But as Lutherans, we believe that God sometimes saves people whether they like it or not.
And unlike the Reformed church, we have no reason to think that God needs to send people to hell to maximize his glory.
It's been great hearing your thoughts on this!
Now, on the concept of punishment matching crime, I think Aquinas actually explains this well: “The magnitude of the punishment matches the magnitude of the sin… Now a sin that is against God is infinite; the higher the person against whom it is committed, the graver the sin – it is more criminal to strike the head of state than a private citizen – and God is of infinite greatness. Therefore an infinite punishment is deserved for a sin committed against him.”
And as for being uncomfortable that a loving God could send someone to an eternal hell, well, I guess we’ve just got to get our concept of God from the Scriptures and not our own notions of what is just and right.
For the "infinite" crime of being morally imperfect we all deserve to be tortured forever?
That's just.....twisted.
And many Christians wonder why I bother to argue against Christianity---as if its beliefs, even if untrue, are harmless.
We atheists are so often told we have no basis for morality if there is no God.
Yet its believers and not atheists who give their approval to someone being subjected to eternal torture. Not once have I yet met an atheist willing to condone that.
Things that make ya go "huh?"
What do you think about this? Scripture teaches that all people are saved. Scripture also teaches that some people will spend eternity in hell. These seem like contradictions but, since scripture teaches both, we should believe and teach both.
Then again, maybe one can still be a christian without believing the writings of the early church figures are anything other than just that---the writings of fallible human beings capable of error.
There are, after all, people who believe mostly as you do without that doctrine of the infallibility of a collection of writings chosen by a committee of mere human beings.
Rev 14:9 Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand.
Rev 14:10 he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
Rev 14:11 "And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."
1. Eternal torment is not mentioned, only smoke from their torment. Can easily mean the left over remains from their final destruction as an eternal testament to the eternal punishment (as opposed eternal punishING). You must admit it says smoke from their torment. "torment" linguistically can mean present OR past tense. ex: i have an eternal photo from my torment in high school.
2. This ONLY talks about those who have the mark beast. I dont know why. Reread it a million times.. it ONLY talks about those. ONLY.
3. On top of all that read vs 10. “IN the PRESENCE of the holy angels and IN the PRESENCE of the Lamb.” Surely angels are not omnipresent.
Heaven is to hold no remembrance of the old, of pain torment and everything else in it.
"For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former things will not be remembered or come to mind. Isaiah 65:17
If no rest day and night refers to eternity... then holy angels who are NON-omnipresenct.. are hovering eternally over hell. How can there be no remebrance if they are spending their eternity over hell?
Surely they don’t intend to spend ALL ETERNITY over the pit watching the eternal torment?
If this phrase speaks of hell. Only the devil and people with the mark are described there. ALL OF THIS takes place in the presence of the angels and Jesus (not eternal separation from Jesus like hell is supposed to be, I understand spiritual separation.. but Jesus who is Light and angels of light being in the presence of the darkest darkness? And its still dark there? Hard to buy, no?)
That’s why it seems we should consider the possibility that this referrers to an eternal fiery wrathful "final" (otherwise known as "eternal) destruction of both soul and body. Like Jesus Said “And do not fear those who kill the body but CANNONT kill the soul. Rather FEAR HIM WHO CAN destroy both soul and body in hell.* Mat 10:28
Post a Comment