Conversations about Hell
[The following are extracts from conversations I’ve had in the past month.]
Paul, you’re opposed to inclusionism and you’re skeptical about universalism. Why do you want to condemn people to hell?
Me: Huh?
I’ve come to embrace inclusionism (or universalism) because I cannot conceive of a good God torturing people for eternity.
Neither can I, but what has that to do with inclusionism, universalism, or any -ism?
Uni/inclusionism says God loves his enemies…
Actually, the Bible says that – it’s Romans 5:10. It’s the gospel of grace.
But the traditional church view is that God will torture sinners for eternity.
Since when has the traditional church understood the gospel of grace? If our traditions have misled us about grace, isn’t it possible they have also misled us about hell?
Exactly! So what does the gospel of grace say about hell?
Nothing. The gospel is good news; hell is bad news. There’s no bad news in the good news.
So you don’t believe in hell?
No, I do. Jesus and the apostles spoke about it too often for us to ignore. I’m saying it’s a mistake to use the threat of hell – however you define it – to call the prodigals back to their Father. Love makes no threats.
Yeah, but what is God going to do to those prodigals who refuse to come home?
What makes you think he is going to do anything?
Wait – you just said you believed in hell?
I do. I just don’t believe God sends anyone there. Hell is for those who choose it.
Recall Jesus weeping over the imminent fall of Jerusalem. He said, “How often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing” (Mt 23:37). Jesus is a gatherer, not an executioner. He longs to gather us to himself, but not all are willing.
So what happens to the unwilling?
That’s the $64,000 question, isn’t it? There are three options:
- the traditional view – the unwilling suffer for eternity
- the universalist view – the unwilling become willing and enter the kingdom
- the annihilationist view – the unwilling exit stage left
Some people speculate about the possibility of hell being some kind of waiting room or health spa, but ultimately there are only three outcomes.
You’re not a universalist and you just told us you don’t subscribe to the traditional view, so I guess that makes you an annihilationist.
I hate that word. It sounds like a villain in an Avengers movie.
So if you don’t think the end is annihilation, what is it?
Death, or more specifically, the Second Death. We’ve been told that our souls are immortal, but Jesus never said this. In John 3:16 he gives us two choices and only one of them leads to eternal life. He also said that he who believes has crossed over from death to life (John 5:24).
There are nearly two dozen scriptures in the New Testament that talk about hell and the majority of them – like 80% – indicate a final death for those who refuse life. On top of that there are many passages that don’t mention hell but refer to fatal consequences, such as this one: “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life” (John 3:36). Two outcomes; you either have eternal life or you will not see life.
What about all the babies who die in infancy? What about the children who had the misfortune of dying in non-Christian countries? Are you saying they’re just wiped out?
Not at all! Those kids are with Jesus, every one of them. I know there has been a lot of theological hand-wringing over this issue, but as I explain elsewhere, the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these. Grace is for the helpless, and there’s no one more helpless than a baby or young child.
I’ll have to read that post. Getting back to hell – or annihilationism…
Let’s ditch that word. It’s not scriptural. Why don’t we use the Biblical phrase instead, which is the Second Death.
Okay, Second Death. How does that work? Does God toss the unbelievers in the Lake of Fire?
God gives life, not death. I don’t believe he is the instrument of death. People do it to themselves. God didn’t kill Adam; Adam killed Adam. Because of Jesus we all get the same choice Adam had. Tragically, some people make the same choice Adam did.
I don’t understand.
We were made in God’s image. Define yourself as something less than a dearly-loved child of God and you diminish yourself. You opt for an inferior reality, one defined by limits and fear. The Bible teaches that when we live apart from God we become enslaved to our appetites and anxieties (Eph 4:18-19, Tit 3:3). It’s a degenerative path that leads nowhere good.
I’ve never heard this before. Who else teaches this?
Jesus did. He said, “What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit his very self?” (Luke 9:25). The word for lose in this passage means perish or fully destroy. Jesus is telling us that this broken-down world is doomed. Sell yourself to an idol such as manmade religion or a career and you literally lose yourself – you depersonalize and diminish your true self until you are gone.
And this is God’s punishment for not choosing him?
Not at all. This is the consequence of tying yourself to a sinking ship.
What does that look like?
Religion has told us that sinners are the bad guys, but grace tells us that God loves sinners to bits! Good guys, bad guys, they’re all welcome at the house of grace.
The question isn’t whether you’re good or bad. The question is whether you’ll join the party. Sadly, not everyone does. I’m talking about those who harden their hearts to the Holy Spirit. They are numb to his love, numb to the love of others, even numb to their own God-given desires.
Sounds like you are describing cynics
It goes deeper than that. I’m not talking about people who are a bit skeptical, weary, or sick. I’m talking about those who, for whatever reason, have decided to hate life and love.
A desire for love burns in all our hearts. That desire is there to show us the way home. But some never return. They extinguish the flame, deny their humanity, and refuse to come in. Even if Jesus stood in front of them inviting them to the feast, they wouldn’t be interested.
Can you give us an example?
Think of the religious people who resisted Jesus. How far gone were they?! The Lord of Life walked into town, healing cripples, turning thieves into givers, and restoring dead girls to their daddies, and they wanted to murder him! Who does that?
To me, that’s inconceivable, yet it happened. Heaven came to earth and they said, “We’re not interested.” The Lover of our souls came to wrap his arms around them and they said, “We prefer the cold embrace of our ideology.”
Jesus said to them, “You refuse to come to me to have life” (John 5:40). Let’s not over-spiritualize this. Jesus wasn’t just talking about life in the hereafter but life here and now. These men had sacrificed themselves on the altar of their religion so you can imagine the wreckage. Loveless marriages, dysfunctional families, arguments that were settled by stoning, and an entire nation gone astray.
These men were literally flogging people in their synagogues and killing in the name of God (Matt 23:34). They defined “ministry” as smashing skulls with heavy rocks! (Just ask Stephen and Paul.) They were dealers in death because they themselves were lifeless. They were the original zombies, the walking dead.
And this is why Jesus rebuked them sharply. He was trying to wake them from their stupor. And this is why Jesus wept, because they wouldn’t listen.
Those men were blinded by religion. Do you think if they saw Jesus as he truly is, they would’ve repented?
No. They were blinded by choice. They weren’t born that way; they chose it. They chose worldly religion and lost themselves as a result. Jesus gave them many chances to change their mind and they never did.
It’s a stretch to think that if religious people saw God as he truly is, they would not reject him. Tell that to Adam. Adam was untouched by sin. He saw God as he truly is – walked with him, even – yet he still rejected him.
At least the Pharisees saw Jesus. What about those who have never seen him or heard the gospel?
Jesus is the only way to the Father, but there are a million ways to Jesus. You came one way, I came another. Don’t fret – God’s got this figured out. You’ll see.
Time to wrap up. What would you say to those who have a different perspective of hell?
I know some people will be upset because I refuse to condemn the lost to an eternity of fiery torment. And others will be upset because I don’t assume that all will be saved. But I would say that the choice Christ offers – his kingdom or the sinking ship – is the most gracious option because everyone gets their heart’s desire. Those who want the abundant life that Christ offers shall have it. Those who don’t won’t.
Our Father isn’t going to force the stubborn and the hate-filled to come to his party. He gathers the willing because he’s a God of love, and love must be free.
Can you give us a soundbite to finish on?
Choose life! That’s the central message of the Bible. Not “avoid hell,” or “do nothing,” but “choose life.” That’s what God preached to Adam and it’s what we preach today.
Choose Jesus who is the Life.
___________
Get life-giving articles by email. It’s free!
Imagine if this good news was buried under a wall of adertisements! E2R is kept free and ad-free thanks to the generosity of our readers:
Escape to Reality 
Let’s compare 5 modern religious myths to what Jesus ACTUALLY SAID about Hell.
Modern Myth # 1: “Hell is not a part of the good news (gospel).”
What Jesus actually SAID: All four of the inspired gospels (good news) clearly include a great deal of Jesus proclamations concerning Hell.
Modern myth #2: “God has nothing to do with personally putting people into Hell.”
What Jesus actually SAID: Mtt. 10:28; 13:40-41
Modern myth# 3: “Hell is not a place of eternal torment for any humans.”
What Jesus actually SAID:
Mtt 8:11-12; 25:30,41,46; Mark 9:43-48; Luke 16:19-31; John 5:28-29; 2 Thes. 1:6-10; Rev. 19:20; 20:10-15; 21:7-8.
Modern Myth #4: “The second death is either a passing out of existence or merely the absence of life”
What Jesus actually SAID: Rev. 20:10,14; 21:8
Modern Myth #5 “The fear of Hell is not a divinely inspired evangelistic motivation.”
What Jesus actually SAID: Mtt. 10:28; Luke 12:4-5
“Love rejoices in the truth”I Cor. 13:6
What are you going to believe about Hell?- What Jesus actually said or half truths and sentimental modern religious myths?
“and the serpent said to the woman, “Did God really say…?” Gen.3:1
At what point do myths about Hell become heresy?
It is hard to imagine how anyone can engage with you Barry, since you suggest those who disagree with you heretics and say we speak the serpent’s words. It seems your love for scripture is greater than your love for people. If this is the fruit of your graceless religion, you can keep it.
It’s quite obvious that the enemy has a way of manipulating people to dismiss the idea that hell does exist. You have people like atheists who flatly deny that such place exist. Those who believe that this place does exist, the enemy uses another strategy which is based on making them ignorant about that place in the sense that they can live however they like and still escape this horrible place.
If you are going to be happy in heaven , knowing your brother or mother or sister is burning in eternal fire , I sure don’t want to be there with you.With the burdens you put on people, they will have to find Jesus at another source not from you.feel sorry for anyone close to you.You set a standard for them that I am sure you can not reach, other than in your self righteousness.
David Weaver and Arold,
David: you are correct that modern translations are acceptable. “…the world gathered at the doorstep…” Here the word “world” could mean all humans, or, everyone in the neighborhood, or, the actual planet Earth. Greek and Hebrew are not the core issue in such a discussion, though they may (or may not) add light to application. The issue in play is that we allow context and other verses to amalgamate into a composite whole with no internal incoherency. Parable used as Prophesy is another potential issue. Arold, you are correct that the volitionally preferred Outside does exist for the contingent Self (Man) and I’ve not read anything here questioning that. The point in question seems to be a question of Justice, as the Outside is offered as a more robust mode of Justice than that of Christ, which is disturbingly incoherent with scripture, and, the second point seems to be the question of ceaseless persistence. Once Justice falls off of the table as a reason for anything at all, all discussions take far-reaching and necessary turns and begin to cohere with other verses in other scriptures dealing with the work of All-Sufficiency Himself making of Himself mankind’s Means and Ends. The issue of Justice having been taken off of the table by those beautiful ends of regression housed within Christ, all that is left atop the table is the question of ceaseless persistence inside of that sighted-choice of the Outside, which, of course, some interpret differently.
Barry,
You may be correct: the Privation of the contingent Self outside of Immutable Love’s Self-Other-Us ceaselessly persists. Or you may be incorrect. Your use of scripture simply does not allow us to decide. You give Matthew 10:28, but that may actually state that the soul is annihilated. Max Lucado speaks favorably of Edward Fudge ( edwardfudge.com ) who, like others, shows that when scripture is employed in a composite fashion it is not exactly heresy to conclude that the effect of the Outside is eternal while the Conscious Self therein is not. Also, you need not suggest that anyone here has argued that the truth of such an Outside (it does exist) is not a useful means to sway minds and hearts (evangelistic motivation), as all truth is useful at various intervals. Being the Pharisee that I am, I find a great tendency in myself to employ His Word as a damning hammer to those who are in fact part of His Body. However, as I spy ever more of the contours of His Grace I find His uncanny and eerie love of All-Men ever more exquisite, ever more incalculable. Self/Other finds all that is my need to come out on top fading and all that is Other in both God and Neighbor pressing, demanding, increasing. “”But I never knew before. I never dreamed…” I suppose it was at such a moment that Thomas Aquinas said of all his own theology, “It reminds me of straw.”” (CS Lewis)
Scbihrm- thank you for your thoughtful comments- Unlike others it is refreshing not to have my motives or character assaulted for believing that Jesus plain spoken words regarding Hell are accurate descriptions of objective reality. Jesus plain and simple language- His simple and straightforward words spoken on Hell were not spoken to Greek and Hebrew scholars, not spoken to college professors, pastors, theologians or philosophy majors for them to dissect and explain away with a multitude of linguistic or philosophical musings.
Jesus plain and simple warnings regarding Hell were spoken to uneducated, simple, red necked fishermen, paupers, soldiers and plain ordinary blue collar type workers. His simple to understand yet precisely accurate words about Hell were inspired by the loving Father who does not desire that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. Considering Jesus original audience- if Jesus didn’t mean what He said about to them about Hell- He would have said what He meant about Hell.
Barry,
That is a very important point. Hence the need – from 2000 years out – to go back and find what X meant to them. The ministry / writings of Edward Fudge are on that basis referred to. Oddly, the Jew and Greek had very different views on immortality – in modern times we’ve sided with the Greeks – granting immortality ipso facto to all lives – not God alone. Eternal life as a gift of / result of the new creation / new birth alone was – truly – Good News to the Jew and meant something very, very different in that audience than to our (Greek) thinking. What Jesus’ audience heard is not what we assume. You’re right about that. Eternal life must be actualized – given – birthed anew – else it is nonentity. Differences here each have weight behind them, and after pondering – weighing – historical settings I tend to lean towards the Jew rather than the Greek. Edward Fudge may be helpful.
Very good, the first six days had only darkness and work , evening to morning, only the seventh day had no evening to morning, and we walk in this light , a new creation, or for better words the eternal creation.
Douglas Barry has done extensive research on the issue of Greek vs. Jewish thinking about immortality. I cannot affirm all that is there, though I am in the process of reading the book linked to there (“Conditional Immortality” by D. Barry). Having said all that, I can see that the concerns of those who affirm eternal conscious torment are valid concerns – and well meaning – and by no means “heresy”. However, the weight of those valid concerns and of all other things considered on the whole lead many of us – and many other well-read theologians – to embrace (both intellectually and spiritually) very different contours as God’s revealed reality.
Immortality is a easy subject, God said in the day you eat of it you will die in dying, animals have the same breath of life as God gave Adam.Jesus came to give dead men life.I am not a theologian but this covers it for me.Only immortal creation can suffer for ever, but then again what is forever, God lives outside the time domain.
Forever is forever. The Scriptures are divinely inspired but they are not communicated in a divine language. They are written in human language to humans and intended to be understood by humans with human language communication and meant for humans to clearly comprehended. It is only the serpent that twists Gods plain human language and causes humans to doubt the clarity and veracity of what is communicated. I may risk being assaulted over this but, ” the serpent SAID to the woman, ‘did God really say?”
If Jesus didn’t mean what He said He would have said what He meant,.
One more note: Each passage must be interpreted in the context of its original intention and purpose. Why did Jesus say what he did? If we can discover who he was addressing in each setting we can ascertain what Jesus motive and purpose was in those statements. If you study Jesus warnings on Hell and His terrible descriptions of Hell you will discover that he was always speaking those warnings to those who he was exhorting, encouraging and warning to believe in Him. That is to say- Jesus always used His warnings on Hell evangelistically – they were not directed to those on the inside ( believers). For one thing this debunks the notion that warnings against Hell is not to be used evangelistically,
For another it shows us Jesus wasn’t warning believers about Hell at all. Why is this? Because :Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. (John 3:18 NIV)
Barry,
Of course forever is forever. No one here disagrees. Matthew 10:28 clearly states that neither the body nor the soul are indestructible. God just may destroy both. So now we come to “destruction” in that very plain and obvious sense and we find the need to interpret. You are more than justified in explaining that in the light of history, of Jewish thought, of Greek, and of other verses in other places in order to end up with a different interpretation than that very plain statement. That method is the proper method of studying scripture. I see no heresy at all in your approach nor in your conclusion. On balance, on the whole, many of us – via those methods – come to a different conclusion. We as a Body have to be okay with that – or – I must put you ahead of my own self-interest. I’m not great at doing that – though the contours of His Immutable Love ever call me outward – out of that Privation within my Self – and into His triune reciprocity amid Self-Other-Us.
But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. (Revelation 19:20 )
And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever. (Revelation 20:10)
How would you interpret “forever ” here in the above verses which speak of the devils torment? Why then are there humans in this same lake of fire that burns “forever and ever” ? Clearly these two humans will be there just as long as the devil. Are the coming world leader and his main false prophet the only humans to end up in this eternal lake of fire to be tormented forever and ever according to this verse:
“And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown.”
According to the following verses these two humans will not be the only two humans to be tormented day and night for ever and ever:
“The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.” (Revelation 20:10, 13-15 )
In the light of a plain reading of this passage it takes some enormous hermeneutical leaps to say no humans will suffer eternal torment.
I basically agree but I have some other perspectives to add. 1) I don’t think you can say that it isn’t God that sends people into the lake of fire because that just totally does away with the reality of the judgement day. 2) Jesus told us that the lake of fire was made for the devil and his angels, which are spirits that don’t die when they sin. And are either totally good or totally evil. Every man is a combination of some good and some evil. So why is it presumed that the lake of fire would have the same effect on a man that it has on a devil. If God would have allowed Adam to eat of the tree of life and live for ever then there would have been the necessity of some kind of hell for man, but God has made it that for man the result is death. 3) Your examples of those with hardened hearts ignores all those others who perhaps have noble hearts and are overall ‘good’ people – how about them? To suggest that somehow they will end up in heaven because God has surprises or there are many ways almost leaves a door open for at least partial inclusivism. But he that does not have the son does not have life. None of us even had to be and if God gives life to a being he created, and through the tragedy of them never obtaining eternal life (or as Jesus said worthy of the next age) they die forever, can we fault God for that? Some good people will nevertheless only know life in this age. That is sad but it maintains God’s goodness and character and glorifies God who made everything for his own pleasure and purposes.
The research of Douglas Barry and of Edward Fudge mentioned earlier offer us insights and coherence worth considering. Of course, there are different conclusions held by others.
God is not in the time dimension, and the time dimension will end forever will be no more. Eternity will be redundant and we will all just be.If you think this is an easy concept to grasp you have not given it thought.
Reading some of those scripture versus above, I would not of suggested they belong in one category or even either in some cases. I think we would all like to see the bias to eternal destruction but that may not be the case. Francis Chan through prayer and study did a lengthy study on scripture about hell. He wrote the book “Erasing Hell” . In the end he said” The debate about hell’s duration is much more complex than first assumed. While I lean heavily on the side that says it is everlasting, I am not ready to claim that with complete certainty. He goes on say a few paragraphs later “The One who invented justice knows perfectly what the unbeliever deserves…….He has only asked us to embrace His Word and bow the knee, to tremble at His word, as Isaiah says (66:2)
Brilliant Article Paul! I thoroughly enjoyed reading it! 🙂
Great article – my theology won’t stretch much beyond, hell isn’t nice, don’t go there, but it is a (civilised) discussion we need to have even if we can’t agree on everything. The Gospel is about life, Jesus was dead and is now alive for ever, and so is anyone who believes in Him. Thanks.
One of the best posts on Second Death / annihilationism I have ever read Paul. As a student of scripture you know one can punt either eternal conscious torment, universal salvation or second death theology, depending on which scriptures you allow to reign supreme. (I have yet to learn of a reasonable explanation how “every knee bowing and every tongue confessing…. to the glory of the Father” can be concluded in ECT or second death. but back to my point: a flat reading of augustine’s canon will leave you in knots no matter which way you pull. add an anthropological, linguistic & historic-literary understanding and the outcomes will surprise. yet for us average believers the arguments of professors and Phd’s often become impossible to critique since we simply have not the facts that fuels the valid counter-argument. so, I’m throwing a basic test out there – one that scores God, both the origin & designer of all things, based on the final outcome of His initiative to create beings whom He loves, individually & immensely:
Eternal Conscious Torment >> god is a monster
Second Death >> god cannot work all things to the counsel of His will (Eph 1:11); god loses untold millions that He loves – FOREVER.
Universal Salvation >> god wins. his love plan succeeds in spite of human sin & blindness.
I honestly do not think Second Death by choice let’s God off the hook if He knew that it would be the outcome for many. I might add lastly that the apostle Paul’s conversion experience shows that choice was not so much at play. Considering “hell” as a “purifying fire” for “aionos – the ages”; resulting in ultimate salvation for all ; is the only option that doesn’t make God look like a monster/loser & adheres to most of scripture.
I guess it depends on your definition of love: Universal salvation = God gets what he wants; Eternal separation/death = God gives people what they want. But my chief problem with preaching universal salvation, is that Jesus didn’t. Universalism appeals to reason and logic. Nothing wrong with reason and logic, but they limit us to what we know or understand, whereas I prefer to trust Jesus. Universalism has a big problem with Jesus’ many words about life and death. Universalism must redefine these simple words. That’s a dangerous game to play, the thin edge of a slippery slope. I take the view that Jesus can be trusted and that he’s got this figured out and that he said what he meant and meant what he said.
Mok- your logic escapes me. Accusing God of being a monster over placing people in endless torment for a lifetime of rebellion and insurrection yet mentioning nothing about Him assigning humanity to nearly ten thousand years of death, disease , suffering, pain, misery and torment for a single act of disobedience on the part of Adam and Eve in a moment of temptation and weakness.
If you are going to use your very limited human logic to accuse God of being a monster at least be consistent in your accusations .
The truth is ( and God already explained all this to Job) we humans aren’t capable of judging Gods ways or thoughts nor do we have the capacity to understand his divine justice. He can assign people to endless torment without violating His love or goodness because He is God. God can and does promise eternal torment . God is good and God is just. Accusing Him of being a monster for that may seem humanly logical but it is also incongruent with the plain objective declarations of the Bible.
Your problem is simple to address, you have not believed God when he said to Adam and Eve exactly when they would die, to put it in easy terms, you do not believe I’m zombies.There is only one death and one life.
So Paul are you one of the lost sheep of Israel? That’s who Jesus come for
Matt 15 24,
So if you only live for what Jesus said
Than you are not saved , unless you lived in Israel 2000 years ago.
Jesus also came for “other sheep that are not of this sheep pen” (John 10:16). Jesus is not merely the Savior of Israel but the whole world.
Jesus said in John 3:14, “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up. Those who looked lived. Jesus declared in John 12:32 “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” IF the lifting up of the serpent caused those who looked to live, how much more beholding the ONE who came to save would give life! Now, let us look at one word in this verse. “Will DRAW,” is from the Greek HELKUO which means TO DRAG. Thayer’s Lexicon says; “to draw, to attract; to drag (in connection with coercion). The point here is that the “lifting up” of Jesus would result in the drawing, the dragging, the attracting (think of magnets) toward Jesus the Christ.
Has all men been drawn to Jesus yet or in the past? I would say no , so this must be a future event unless you insert the word some instead of all,
Not every Israelite was healed, but only those who beheld the serpent (Num 21:9). Similarly, salvation is found in beholding Jesus, in recognizing him as the Son of God. Grace attracts and Jesus has been drawing all – not just the lost sheep of Israel, but all – for 2000 years. Jesus draws all, yet some refuse to be drawn. They resist his overtures of love. The grace of God that brings salvation has appeared (not will appear) to all men, yet not all receive it (Tit 2:11).
For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself.” (Acts 2:39 NASB)
and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. (Romans 8:30 NASB)
When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed. (Acts 13:48 NASB)
Simeon has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name. With this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written, (Acts 15:14-15 NASB)
This is an awesome post and I definitely had to share! Threats of hell never worked for me, so why would I think it would work on others! Loved the part about since when has the traditional church understood the gospel of grace?
Wow! I’ve sat for hours reading this and I’m yet to understand many of the posts! 😀 The issue pivots for me on God’s “will” and that God is Love (he actually is LOVE). It’s therefore consistent with His “will” that “ALL come to repentance”.
So ‘when all is said and done’, are we really saying that, The “will” of The God who is LOVE will be overcome by man’s own “will” (i.e a puny man will choose without ever changing his decision not to accept Him)??? Really?! I like to think about that before knee jerk reacting an answer.
It depends on your definition of love and whether love is free. If the universalist is correct, and God gets his way, then why have the Garden of Eden? Why give man a choice if God was going to override him?
History is a collection of stories of man making choices that break our Father’s heart and God forgiving him when man comes to his senses. God is not willing that any perish, yet people perish. God is not willing that people get sick, yet people get sick. God is not willing that little girls be sold into slavery which is why he has gone to such extraordinary lengths to deal with our sin (see the cross). But he cannot violate our freedom to reject him without violating his own character – something he’s never done.
I’m a wholehearted believer in limitless boundaries of Grace. Paul’s anointed articles and these blogs are a real blessing and two decades of me dying in religion assured that. May I humbly propose therefore that Grace goes far far further than our time-limited earthly perspectives alone can understand. Could it be possible that God Who is LOVE ultimately overcomes man’s puny ‘will’ to resist Him without ever violating His own character? Would a man who is completely Godless in Hell actually be able to resist God’s LOVE if given that choice? Will death still exist after the ‘Second death’? Did Christ go to Hell to ‘set the prisoners free’ by tormenting them further or providing an ‘escape to reality’ 😀 (uh oh… a long blog I know)
Paul, I love your blogs and books. You always preach/teach grace, pure unadulterated grace. The love of God pours forth from your writings. Thank you for sharing the truth in love. Keep the articles and books coming please!
Thank you, Nancy.
What about Matt 25:40-41? Or Matt 13:40-42? Mark 9:43-48? Jude 1:6-7? Rev. 20:13-15? They all seem to indicate that people will be cast into hell/the Lake of Fire/eternal punishment. If it were just one instance mentioning eternal punishment, that would be one thing, but with so many I don’t think it can mean anything else. Those are just the few that I noticed, I’m sure there are plenty of references that I didn’t. If the NT affirms eternal punishment in multiple places, then how could we deny that?
Those scriptures are listed in the table above. Those are the only scriptures in the Bible suggesting eternal torment. There are far more suggesting eternal destruction. I wonder what how we can deny those?
“having a hope in God, which these men cherish themselves, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.”
Acts 24:15 NASB
It makes no sense whatsoever to have a bodily ressurrection of the wicked only to be disintegrated in a fiery conflagration moments after the final judgement. The spirits of the dead could easily be disembodied and be incinerated just as disembodied fallen angels would be judged and thrown I to the lake of fire. Also clealy according to Rev. we know that at least two human beings will be thrown bodily and tortured endlessly into the lake of fire. Namely; the anitichrist and the false prophet. “And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone.”
Revelation 19:20 NASB
“And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet ARE also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.”
Revelation 20:10 NASB (caps mine to emphasize permanent present tense)
Nor does it make sense for a just God to punish finite crimes with infinite wrath. But what appears to make sense or not make sense to you or me is irrelevant to what the balance of scripture seems to say, and I refer you to the table above.
I remember taking a linguistics course in seminary by a world renowned linguist. He taught us that because of the design of the communication centre of the human brain all human communication in any culture, age , language or ethnicity can be reduced into about 10 basic universal rules or elemental patterns. One of those fundamental universal rules is that when a truth or concept is expressly declared and stated even once in a body of literature (in this case that human punishment for sin is endless torment in a lake of fire) that even if every other time this idea is not fully mentioned or explained in the same body of literature (in this case your list of times the Bible doesn’t specifically mention eternal torment when speaking of the lake of fire) the universal linguistic rule is that we are to interpret that which IS NOT mentioned as assumed to be interpreted IN THE SAME WAY as it IS mentioned.
In other words the number of times it is not mentioned is irrelevant – the correct interpretation and intention of every OTHER mention is to interpret in the light of what IS MENTIONED .
For example- if I say to my staff even once , “if you do not comply with company protocol you will permanently loose your job” and after that every time I mention it I simply say “If you do not comply with company protocol you will loose your job .” But I never again add the word “permanently” again or I never specifically mention that I didn’t really mean “permanently”. By the universal linguistic rules of human communication my staff would be accurately interpreting me by assuming they will loose their job permanently if they do not comply with company policy.
To use your logic here Paul my staff would count the number of times I didn’t use the word “permanently ” and would assume I didn’t really mean “permanently”
What don’t you people understand regarding the words “THEY will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.” (Rev. 20:10)? Even if this were the ONLY mention of eternal torment THAT is what God MEANT in every other text!
I might use the same argument and add the one about first mentions in scripture being especially significant, but I don’t think you will change your mind. To use your logic requires we redefine the words like destroy, death and life, fundamentally altering the meaning of Christ’s words in Matthew 10:28, John 3:16, 10:28, and other places. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
This is great news for Stalin who murdered 60-100 million people either way you look at it no hell great, cease to exist? great also because if you cease to exist you don’t know it nor have any regrets or consequences this is awesome for all serial rapist and killers. but the poor 60-100 million who were tortured to death ahh well their happy in the helless hell or cease to exist so they don’t know what they missed just a short miserable life here on earth. Now did I get it right?