Hell Video 3
Thu, 10/23/2008 - 07:23 | rlp
Here is my third video on hell. I give my thoughts on what the New Testament says about hell.
It now appears that I'm going to need a fourth video. I think Christians have been thinking about hell in the wrong way and asking the wrong questions about it. In the last video I'll suggest a new way to approach this subject.
Tags:
Zen Master Seung Sahn
In one of his talks, he said something along the lines of, when he dies, he'll go to hell. Why? Because there are many people there who need help, and he wants to help them. If you really care about other people, wouldn't you want to go to hell as well so you can help them? When I look at it in this way, going to heaven seems selfish, and going to hell appears to be the way of great love and compassion. Which would you choose?
In the "traditional
In the "traditional Christian view" of hell, there is no helping the people there, no bringing them to salvation, no alleviating their pain--they had their chance, refused it, and are left to face the wrath of God. Therefore, you can do is try to keep yourself and others from going there to begin with. Not saying I agree with that view, of course, just saying what it is.
In the "traditional
In the "traditional Christian view" of hell, there is no helping the people there, no bringing them to salvation,
How about Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.–Matthew 18:20
Why can't believers gather in hell to bring Jesus (and therefore salvation) there as well?
How about with God all things are possible." —Matthew 19:26?
Are you saying that's not part of the "traditional Christian view" either?
The Great Divorce
Gordon said to stick to Scripture, but I have to admit to being powerfully influenced by C. S. Lewis on this point. His logic in The Great Divorce is pretty convincing.
People from Hell go on a bus tour of Heaven--to see if they are interested in moving, I guess. One person from Hell asks, "Why do you make us ride the bus at all? Why not come into Hell and talk with us there."
The spirit in Heaven replies that descending into Hell would be the equivalent of destruction. If he tore himself apart to get into Hell, there would be nothing left of him to talk about Heaven with the people there.
It's not Scripture, but it's logic that I find myself returning to again and again.
Actually, the other thing
Actually, the other thing suggested in that passage is that only the greatest could become small enough to enter hell, and that he already has. I think it's a reference to the idea of the harrowing of hell.
Why can't we go to hell?
Hello BuddhaBoy. I am making an assumption that by your name you are either of the Buddha tradition or are studying it. Your question also seems to suggest that you have a Buddhist world view. According to Buddhism hells are temporary places much the same as being here on earth is only temporary. A person almost endlessly reincarnates (samsara) and, based upon the life lived, can go up or down on the reincarnation ladder which involves other worlds (in essence the heavens and hells of Buddhism are other worlds). Christians who believe in traditional hell do not view hell in the same way as Buddhists. Hell is a place of finality. People do not get the opportunity to try and work off some of their bad karma in hell but spend eternity in it as a result of never reconnecting with God and living for themselves. Hell, in the traditional Christian view, is not temporary but eternal. No one can be saved from it. Those who are there made a choice, in some way, to be there.
Who is that standing next to
Who is that standing next to Homer on your bookshelf? I've been trying to figure that out for three videos ;)
Hell videos
Can I get a copy of this somewhere, or a link to the space they are stored? For whateever reason, I can't watch these off the webpage.
Try these links. In order,
Try these links. In order, 1, 2, and 3.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3516592055241481504&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7395269167502764061&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7813142007572147762&hl=en
Grr. I can't access them
Grr. I can't access them since work is blocking google vids. But you tube is unblocked. Have you put them there?
No, I mean I can only give
No, I mean I can only give so much of my life to this stuff. Uploading videos and messing around with that is already pushing my limits. Maybe you can watch at home or some other place. I am flattered that you want to see them.
sorry if this repeats
If you add in all the talking of "weeping and gnashing of teeth" the mystery surrounding the details of hell isn't so mysterious. They're limited details, but it does offer us an idea of what will be going on in the place. It didn't seem to matter that you left them out in the last video, but in this discussion they are relevant.
I'm going to have to review the verses again because it does mention an eternal fire. Obviously that's an amount of time, but I'm hopng that what you've pointed out in the chart is correct- that's it's for the devil & his minions.
I really appreciate the time you've spent gathering all this info. My children are in AWANA and are learning some pretty harsh yet traditional stuff in those classes. I am making my son learn extra verses to counter the verses they are having him memorize.
Just remember you are
Just remember you are relying on the English word eternal. You should do some work to see what is meant by the Greek word ainios. It is quite possible that the idea of a temporal infinity wasn't even in the minds of first century people?
It is not new scholarship to realize that equating the greek word aionios with a modern view of infinity is a violation of the original sense of the word. Take a look at this link. I found it quickly and do not vouch for it fully because I just glanced at it, but it will give you a good idea.
http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/EternityExplained.html
Eternal fire
You are right. Jesus describes Gehenna as being a place where the fire never dies. In one passage he even speaks about it being a place where the worm never dies. I would think this is a strong case for hell being eternal.
Mark 9:48
You're referring to Mark 9:48. Two points: First, there is nothing equivalent to "never" in the Greek, though some translations put it in. The more straightforward translation ("their worm does not die, the fire is not put out"), doesn't directly answer the question "for how long?". Second, even if this verse were to establish that "Gehenna" is eternal, it would take an extra leap to conclude that anyone stays in there eternally.
Semantics
I think it is interesting that even when it is spelled out "the worm does not die, the fire is not put out" people still like to deny what it simply says. If something does not die and is not put out it must remain forever. The very fact that Greek doesn't have an equivalent for "never" would go further to support the fact that it is talking about eternity because the writer is trying to find a way to express the concept never. Just because there may not be a word for "never" doesn't mean there wasn't the concept.
Second, I think the passage concerning the sheep and goats makes a concrete connection between hell and the lake of fire. The lake of fire is an everlasting place. Those whose names are not written in the Lamb's book of life will go there. How does one get their name written in the Lamb's book of life? Jesus said "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except through me." To be with God is to be in heaven.
I can't see how a person can deny the reality of hell. What is the point of Jesus' sacrifice if there is no everlasting punishment? People find it hard to reconcile God's love with his justice. Why?
I believe the comment that
I believe the comment that there is no word for never "in the Greek" meant that "never" does not appear in the Greek text of the story, not that Greek has no word for never.
I'm back
So there are three places that specify an amount of time. One for "sinners in the church", one for "those who don't obey the gospel", and one for "the devil & his angels." Why did they/ he use the word eternal? Can it just be overlooked?
See my comment above. Please
See my comment above. Please remember that the English word eternal does not occur anywhere in the New Testament. In every case it is a translation of the word aionios. The traditional translation of that has been eternal because, well, it's a one-word translation and they have to find an English word to use.
That may make people suspicious. "Yeah, but if you just re-translate the bible whenever you want, you can make it seem like anything."
Translation study can lead to abuse. But in this case, every Greek scholar I've ever read concludes that the greek term aionios, as used in the New Testament, is a complex word and likely did NOT include the idea of infinite punishment.
Seriously - "Unto the ages" is a pretty decent translation. "But what does that mean?" you say. Don't know for sure. You have to read the entire New Testament and try to get a feel for it. That's harder but better than just accepting an obviously simplistic English word. That's why I also mentioned that one can see this as an intensifier. And you can claim that without getting specific. "It's a serious judgment, serious enough to warrant a special, intensifying word, but that's all we know." If you go with that, you have to ask yourself how much doctrine you will build on that kind of witness.
Remember this too: Translations bear a difficult burden. They cannot take 8 or 10 words to translate terms that are hard. If they did the Bible would be a 10-volume set. They have to settle on close English words. Most of the time the meanings are the same or close enough. But sometimes a word just defies easy translation. That is when you have to do a little reading and study.
AND THEN THIS: Define hell however you like. Fire and eternal, whatever. What exactly are you going to do with the overwhelming New Testament witness that hypocritical religious insiders and evil people are going there? Not people just because they aren't Christians. That's really the critical issue here, in terms of our theology and practice.
The traditional Christian
The traditional Christian view is that God sustains all things and that nothing can exist apart from God. So, it has always seemed weird to me that there could be a place like hell where the presence of God is completely absent. So, if God has to be in some way present so that hell can even exist and hell is eternal then God has to be eternally wrathful towards these people. This does not seem to jive with the God that Jesus shows us. It would seem that at some point His love would win out over His wrath. This line of thinking has helped me understand hell more as an eventual ceasing then eternal.
All very logical within the
All very logical within the sphere of what you have said. My purpose here is to seek to know what the New Testament says. For it is my belief that apart from a clear witness in the New Testament, why would we believe anything about hell and punishment? Just because it makes sense in some system of thinking?
I was talking to one person and he said, "Yeah, but if there is no hell, what are our missionaries doing?"
The idea was, I guess, that there MUST be a hell since our missionaries are out there working to save people from it.
Someone else said, "Yeah but if people can go to heaven without Jesus dying for them, why did Jesus have to die for us?" Again, that is just arguing in circles within some accepted system of thinking. And it assumes that a subtitutionary idea of atonement is the only way to think of Christ's death.
Why did Jesus have to die?
One problem that I have with the substitutionary idea of atonement is that it focuses so much on Christ's crucifixion that it ignores the true miracle of the resurrection. In my mind, Jesus died due to the evil actions of those in power. If it had ended there, Jesus would have been just one in a long line of great teachers and/or Jewish martyrs. But it didn't end there. The power of God was demonstrated in the resurrection of Jesus from the dead -- the power to redeem even the most evil of human acts. I firmly believe that the testimony of the Bible, over and over again, is that God is in the 'redemption' business -- taking a bad situation and bringing good from it. Does that make sense to anyone else?
Love and Wrath
Why do love and wrath have to be opposites? Is it possible for the two to coexist in God? God is not only love but he is perfect and just. Justice demands punishment. Wrath is the carrying out of such punishment. I really don't see a problem with the two coexisting side by side in God.
Justice
That one lifetime worth of even the most horrendous evil should result in an *eternity* of torture can hardly be considered justice. So it can absolutely not be considered just to punish people in that way simply for not choosing to follow Christ.
I've never understood this notion that people are born so tainted that without conversion to Christianity, no matter what kind of life they lead, no matter how they treat others, they are relegated to this fate, where as someone who has lived a life of hatred and violence gets their reward just because they believe a certain thing.
This has never seemed like justice to me. Justice is not *just* punishment. It includes compassion and reconciliation. That's most of what Jesus spent his time talking about.
And, also, just to be picky, can people stop using "he" to describe God? Of course, any way that people try to describe God is a metaphor, but I think its time to retire that one.
Orthodox Hell
Just curious, are you familiar at all with Orthodox (Eastern) concept of hell? I don't feel qualified to explain that here, but some people might find their concept interesting.
No I'm not. Go ahead and
No I'm not. Go ahead and give us a primer if you want. Or a link to a good explanation of it perhaps?
It seems pretty clear that
It seems pretty clear that we can know very little about hell from the New Testiment witness, but for that matter what do we really know about heaven. Jesus spoke of Gehenna several times and the image of that place for His listeners was pretty negative. So, I guess we know hell is bad and so we shouldn't want anyone to go there. I would guess that that is what drives some missionaries. For many others though there work is not about getting people out of hell, but introducing them to "life and life to the fullest."
Amen!
Amen!!! Set aside hell. Who wouldn't want what Jesus offers!!! Well spoken, but I do think the idea of hell gives us even more reason to do what Jesus commanded us (as if we needed more reason).
How does this view of Hell
How does this view of Hell change the way you look at the Crucifixion of Jesus?
I'm not sure how to answer
I'm not sure how to answer that, but it brings up a good point. When I'm trying to figure out what the New Testament teaches about hell, how much of that is determined by my view of atonement? I want to be clear that you didn't say that one's view of atonement should dictate one's view of hell. But your question did make me think of that.
When I want to know about hell, I read everything the New Testament says about it and try to come up with the truth. In this case I don't think the NT is very clear about it. Certainly not enough for me to go around slandering God's reputation with claims that God tortures people forever with fire.
When I view the death of Christ, I read it and read what the rest of the New Testament says about it.
I don't let these too get in the way of each other in terms of seeking the New Testament's teachings. And if paradoxes come up, I'm fine with that. I expect God talk to end up in paradox most of the time. Unexplainable things that are beyond us often present as paradoxes. So, for example, I can say that I am a sinner saved only by the grace of Christ. And I can say that the honest Buddhist is in a relationship with God that uses other language and ways. I don't so much claim that the Buddhist is going to heaven or hell as acknowledge humbly that I have no business making that call.
H&H
In the Catholic tradition, the righteous of other faiths are NOT barred from heaven, except if they have had an opportunity to hear the teachings of Christ and chose not to avail themselves of it.
When one asks a Quaker, one hears: "There is that of God in every man". And they leave it at that.
What would hell be, if not a last-ditch effort by God to make people see the error of their ways, so to speak? If so, there must then be the possibility of escape once the errors are seen and rejected.
Chuck Nolan
Hey Chuck, That first one is
Hey Chuck,
That first one is really interesting. A lot of people come up with that as a way of preserving the idea of hell for unbelievers, which they believe they must have for either scriptural or theological reasons. It sounds good. It helps with that "but what about the innocent person in Africa who has never heard of Christ?" question.
Then of course, it becomes really cruel to tell anyone about your faith. You tell someone about Christ and now they are going to hell. You should have left them alone.
Absurdities like that pop up all the time with hell. Best to tear down everything we've said about it, read the scriptures fresh, and reevaluate. That's what I've done anyway.
Gordon, I'm not sure there
Gordon, I'm not sure there is, or needs to be, a hell. (Which is not to say I haven't recommended a trip there to some folks at one time or another).
After all, it's completely impossible to prove anyone was ever sent there, and to imply that some person or group is destined for there seems to me to trip over the idea of God's mercy. It also seems, as you said, to be placing limitations on God's power.
As for me, I go with "Judge not, lest ye be judged".
Chuck Nolan
Over Rationalizing
I am guilty of it, I admit. I am a very rational person and I am constantly trying to come up with the answers. When it comes to hell, why does there have to be an answer?
I agree with what you said. We have no right to tell someone they are going to hell. Only God makes that judgment, but we have every right to tell them about what the Scripture says. If the Bible talks about hell, then we talk about hell kept in context. We don't ever tell someone they are going because of the way they live. If we do that we place ourselves above God as judge.
You said earlier that when we do God talk you expect to end in paradoxes. So what's the difference here? Hell doesn't seem to make sense when we look at our God who is an all loving God. Whoever said we would ever come to a complete understanding of God. God is mysterious and beyond comprehension. Sometimes we just have to let things be the way they appear in Scripture. Sometimes we will never be able to rationalize or reason things through and that's okay considering the nature of God.
So I say talk about hell, but more importantly, talk about eternal life found through Jesus Christ and quit trying to rationalize things that can't seem to be rationalized.
Yeah, the paradox itself
Yeah, the paradox itself isn't the issue with hell. I have no problem believing things that don't make sense. I am a Christian, after all. In that alone I'm affirming some fantastic and unbelievable stuff.
The issue I have with the traditional view of hell is that it's not scriptural. So if it's not called for in the New Testament, why believe it? Especially when preaching that kind of thing is so damaging to the reputation of God.
some questions I'd like help with!
Thanks Gordon for taking the time to do this. This topic makes me uncomfortable.
At one point while watching the video I thought of the Great Commission and how it has always been explained to me as motivated by the need to save everyone from hell. I had to stop and think, if nonbelievers are not automatically going to hell, why the commission? What is the good news that Jesus wanted the disciples to share? I think it could have something to do with "life and life to the fullest" as someone mentioned above. Any thoughts?
Secondly, while I do think the many mentions of hypocritical religious people going to whatever hell is should be a bigger part of Christian beliefs, what do we do about the list of murderers, fornicators, liars? In this case, who is exempt? How is liar defined? How frequently must a person tell lies to be an official liar? Fornication - based on Jesus' teaching in Matthew 5: 28 is something more prevalent than one might think. Here is where traditional Christianity would posit that one must be under Jesus in order to escape judgment into hell (Romans 8:1, John 3:16 etc)
My thoughts: The paradox you
My thoughts:
The paradox you mention first is interesting but not enough to build a theology of hell around if it is not in the New Testament. That would be sort of like the Higgs Boson particle for physics:
"We need hell to make our missiology and evangelism make sense. So it MUST be true."
My feelings: If you can't make a New Testament case for it - a good one - then you might have to rethink some things.
Everything Jesus said was said to his disciples. Now look at how he treated outsiders to their faith. Woman from Tyre and Sidon, the Centurion, the Gadarene demoniac.
The rest of the New Testament is kind of the same. Yes you have some lists of sinners. Who can tell who belongs on that list? Exactly. You can't. So what business do we have trying to figure out who is going there?
Final questions:
What does the NT's lack of detail and ambiguity on the subject of hell and the afterlife say to us about what our Christian message should be?
And what do you find of hell in the kerygma, the early preached message of the Christians in Acts. Read the whole book and see what they were saying to outsiders. How many times did they talk about hell?
Pretty eye-opening.
Thanks for this, Gordon.
As you so often do, you've managed to express yourself elegantly and succinctly on a topic I've been tangled up over for a long time. I'm very much looking forward to the concluding video.
Where is this heading??
I don't understand. What did Jesus come to save us from? Our sin? The 'fire' of hell?
Looking at Romans 10:9 I ask myself, what am I being saved from? If I fail to believe in Christ then what is going to happen to me?
I'm guilty of trying to make this black and white, but the bible comes off that way to me.
I guess I just don't know where this is heading. Honestly I'm confused by what you are trying to say.
I've always said what is, in
I've always said what is, in fact, an orthodox view of this. Jesus came to save us from sin. We are unable to live the way we think we should. Sin begats sin and the world becomes a mess. It's quite difficult setting things right. Faith in Christ helps me receive forgiveness of sin.
If we reduce salvation to being saved from hell, we do so in spite of the fact that the New Testament doesn't say that. It is sin we are saved from, not hell.
I don't think the afterlife need have anything to do with it.
After much study over the
After much study over the last 8 years or so, I've come to similar conclusions.
I'm enjoying your video series and look forward to watching your fourth video.
The impression I've always
The impression I've always had of the traditional view of hell is that everybody goes to hell (i.e. all are sinners, sinners go to hell), save that those who are Christians are rescued from that fate by the atonement of Christ.
.
I'm not sure that your terms for the discussion do this position justice.
Simple question
Is life in heaven eternal?
Don't know. The New
Don't know. The New Testament says even less about the details of heaven. I think, honestly, we're not really supposed to put much energy into worrying about the afterlife.
don't worry about the afterlife
Gordon, you said ". . . we're not really supposed to put much energy into worrying about the afterlife," and I think that's it!!! You'd almost think that we're all playing out some drama that is centered in another world (sci fi channel christianity?) Anyway, it never made much sense to me to get into an uproar about the un-knowable, so why not concentrate on what's knowable, like love is better than hate and fear, etc.
As usual, a very thoughtful, inspiring video
As an agnostic coming from a Catholic tradition, I've been fascinated by your series on hell. And, in a sense, amazed at how both Evangelical Christians and Catholics seem to have built widely different and quite complex doctrines based on supposedly the same scriptures. And yet, there is so little in there to support those complex constructions.
And I've always been concerned about this relatively petty view of God (If you're not part of the club and don't know the password, well you'll all burn in hell, niahhh!) Makes me curious about what else we might have been getting wrong, or at least distorted...
What about Heaven?
Gordon,
I have always had trouble with the traditional evangelical view of hell in which I was brought up in. Consequently, I have found in myself a loss of faith. I was not able to swallow the "truths of hell" and have for a long time thought that if I was going to be a "smorgasbord-Christian" I might as well just walk away from the church, and that I was obviously not really a "christian". I have no desire to judge other peoples souls and would rather not use the word Christian to describe who I am or what I believe because I have always thought Christianity to be synonymous with Judgment/Hell.
Listening to your videos has made me rethink my current position. However I have a hard time deconstructing my view of Hell without reconstructing a new view of Heaven.
Will you be addressing Heaven any time soon?
I don't know. I'm kind of
I don't know. I'm kind of bored and ready to get back to writing. Off the top of my head, I think I'd end up with something like this:
"The New Testament does seem to hint at some reward, some life after death. But the scriptures obviously don't concern themselves with giving us any details. Therefore, we should pretty much stick with serving Christ by serving people in this life and leave the next life in God's hands."
Maybe sometime I'll do the hell study. Someone else asked. But I have no plans for it currently.
Much applause
I've been out of touch with you, Gordon, but I just wanted to tell you how much I appreciate your work here. It somehow reminds me of Nate Silver & the 538 crowd - very fact-based.
Hell Video 3 - No Literal Hell
Hey RLP. I want to make a couple of comments in this dialogue. First, you mentioned nothing about the lake of fire. I think there is, as I stated in my email to you, a connection between hell (gehenna) and the lake of fire. In Revelation it states that all whose name is not written in the Lamb's book of life will be cast into the lake of fire. How does one get into the Lamb's book of life? Jesus made it clear that he was the way, the truth and the life and NO ONE can go to the Father except through him. Those are some very tough verses to get around and they lead me to my second point.
I teach world religions at a local community college (not to mention that I cam a youth pastor and religions has always been a great interest to me). In every religion there is no cut and dry definitive teaching on punishment and many of the adherents of the major world religions believe that in the end everyone will make it. Christianity has been the only religion to really stress the fact that there is a punishment for sin (I admit that there are even pockets of Christianity that believe everyone will make it). What is the point of Jesus' death and resurrection if in the end there is on eternal punishment? For God to become a man and die for sinners says that there is something devastating on the other side of the temporal.
I have often said about other religions "If no one really suffers in the end then why follow such a religion. I am really free to live my life however I want and do whatever I want because I will make it in the end. I may not receive as much as others, but I will not endure eternal punishment."
Without trying to be rude or inconsiderate, I really found your study on hell and its conclusions discouraging. Not because you don't agree with my point of view but, and I admit I am making an assumption so please correct me if I am wrong, none of your views have changed from when you started this.
On the other hand, I do want to commend you for pointing out that all the verses speaking about hell (gehenna) are in conjunction with Christians who are Christians in name only. I think Jesus saw that it was necessary to warn people that being a Christian is much more then just calling oneself a Christian. Being a Christian is living a life that is in a constant transformation of becoming more like Jesus Christ.
On the other hand, I don't think you can say definitively that hell is for false Christians. It would be like any of us warning an ex-thief "If you really haven't changed you are going to end up committing the same crime and go back to prison." In essence, you were headed towards prison before you supposedly changed. If you really didn't change you are still headed towards prison.
Okay, it got a little long. I do appreciate your willing to open up such dialogue. It is good for our souls.
God Bless
Pastor Brian
Brian, I do mention the Lake
Brian,
I do mention the Lake of Fire. In my second video (this was the third in a series of 4) I went through every mention of hell in the New Testament. I don't believe the Lake of Fire is hell for two reasons. 1. The entire book of Revelation is on big series of metaphors, so you can't infer much about hell from that, but more importantly 2) Hades is thrown into the Lake of Fire and destroyed.
Anyway, I spoke at great length about the lake of fire in the second video. It's down the page or on the previous page of entries.
Also, you didn't mention specifically why you found this discouraging. "Not because you don't agree with my view, but.." You kind of trailed off after that. I'd be curious to know what was discouraging about it.
I myself have felt very free and happy when I took the time to actually read what the New Testament has to say about hell.
Lake of Fire
I was referring to this video, but I do remember you talking about it in the second video although I think you misinterpret it. That passage isn't personifying Hades, which I don't believe Hades and Hell are the same thing (thank you King James for the confusion). I merely see it as Hades being destroyed.
What I meant about being discouraged is, I feel a lot of people just don't take Scripture at face value because it doesn't fit their preconceived notions about God and/or Christianity. I think this is completely backwards and very dishonest. To do so is to put ourselves above God. Basically we tell God "Sorry God, but your wrong about this one. It just doesn't fit with what I believe about your nature. You're going to have to make some adjustments for me and fit into my human paradigm. Thanks for your cooperation!!!" Very arrogant! If Scripture speaks of hell, then hell it is, especially when it comes from Jesus' mouth.
Should our evangelism be based upon hell? I think, different things for different people. Some people might need to hear about hell and respond very well to it while others won't. Jesus himself didn't have one pattern of doing things. He often reacted to the person or situation in the way it needed to be addressed. We as Christians have to do the same thing.
I hope I am coming across as respectful. I am not in any way trying to be disrespectful, but I do like to dialogue. As iron sharpens iron so does a man sharpen another.
Ironically, my entire
Ironically, my entire purpose here was to find what the New Testament actually says about hell. And I think I represented it well. Ironically, it is the traditionalists who have read their idea of hell into the scriptures. Can you not at least see that I believe that? Did it not appear to you that I was searching the scriptures?
Appearances
I hate to say it, appearances can be deceiving. I'm not saying you did, but to ask if it appeared so...yes, it appeared so, but I really think you have a problem with reconciling God's love with eternal judgment and as a result you allowed yourself to continuing looking at the Scriptures through rose colored glasses.
Some people may accuse me of doing so as well. Truth of the matter, I've never heard a sermon about hell. I've never had a lesson about hell. Yes, people spoke of hell, but I never put much thought into hell until you posed the question. My evangelism isn't based on hell, but it doesn't mean I don't believe in its reality.
Your challenge set me upon the Scriptures much the same way you claim it has done for you. Studying the Scriptures has led me to a much better understanding of hell then I have ever had. Interesting that two people can look at the same Scriptures and come away with two totally different views.
I would be very interested in seeing what others emailed you concerning hell. Is it possible post those emails?
I'm quite certain I read the
I'm quite certain I read the scripture though my lenses. We all do. That's why we should love each other and honor any honest attempt to find out what is meant in the New Testament. So I honor you in that way.
Possible to print the emails? Yeah, but how much work do I want to give to this? I've already done quite a bit. I would have to write them all and get permission, then go to the considerable trouble of copying and pasting everything into a blog post.
I got a good mix of things. I'll summarize.
Some that gave me no scriptures but ranted on about hell and damnation and fire. Not helpful.
Some that quoted some scriptures and said they believe in hell as taught them.
Some that quoted scriptures but were struggling with the idea of hell.
And even an atheist who weighed in.
I will say this. Every relevant scripture sent to me is on that spreadsheet, along with some I found.
Pastor Brian mentions people
Pastor Brian mentions people who "don't take Scripture at face value because it doesn't fit their preconceived notions about God and/or Christianity." And so is one to think that Pastor Brian (or most anyone for that matter) doesn't have any preconceived notions of his own about God and/or Christianity that affects his interpretation of the Bible?
Forever & Who is there
Preacher - Your conclusion that the hypocritical religious will be there is a good one. But one thought there, hypocrisy in religion is just another way of saying unbelief. There is one verse that does address the forever aspect and who is there together.
The witness of the entire Bible is that it is sin that separated the Holy God from sinful man. That separation means death. Christ paid for that sin for the entire world (I'm not going to be Calvinist there) and opened eternal life. That is a dogmatic account, but in the interest of beveity, it is pretty standard. If you disagree with that, then divergence is at a more fundamental level.
You correctly say the aiwnwn is not really "eternal". It more like 'as long as anyone here can remember'. The problem is the biblical worldview is one of two ages or aiwnos (eons) - the pre-messianic age and the post-messianic time. The new heavens and the new earth are just the final universal revelation of the already inaugurated messianic age. Here is the big problem - Matt 12:31-32. The Sin against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven in this age or the age to come. The sin against the Holy spirit will not be forgiven in either of the two ages - i.e. forever. If the sin is not forgiven, then the sinner can't be in the presence of the Holy God. Back to that fundamental witness. What is that sin against the Holy Spirit? Not accepting the witness of the Spirit about Jesus. Not believing in Jesus.
Matt 12:31-32 when put in the biblical worldview seems to say forever for unbelief. We can't limit God in that he won't offer the chance to repent after death - after all is revealed, but we can't say He will either. The better and safe witness is that this life is important and belief in Jesus saves us from our sins. That is a sure promise. Anything else is part of the hidden God. You can't limit Him, but nothing is sure either.
You know, I kind of lost you
You know, I kind of lost you there in your first point. Hypocrisy is the same as unbelief. I have no idea what that means. I know MANY very sincere people who simply do not believe in God. They are not hypocrites about it. And I know some religious people who truly believe but who are very hypocritical.
I mean, you could push this and say that everyone is a hypocrite to a certain extent. But let's stick to what Jesus actually said. He used gehenna as a punishment against religious insiders. That's what he said. And I don't think you can stretch that and make it fit what everyone wants to believe, that those who are not a part of the Judeo Christian tradition are going to gehenna.
What are we saved from?
I think a very important part of this discussion is the answer to the question "What is it that we are saved from?" Jesus' sacrifice is the biggest and most important sacrifice that has ever or will ever be made...at least that is what we believe. What did he exactly save us from? If there is no eternal punishment then why would God become a man and die for the sins of the world? I can't make sense of it any other way.
Sorry to chime in, just a
Sorry to chime in, just a couple of things I have to add:
- religious hypocrisy is not the same as unbelief - I do not believe, nor do I pretend to, so I am not a hypocrite - hypocrisy of those who say they believe is far worse.
- I think I'm a bit confused by the idea that to question a doctrine of the church due to confusion over scripture is arrogant. Where can the belief come from if not the scripture? If the scripture isn't explicit and therefore you question what it means, you're not rejecting God's teaching, you're trying to clarify the teaching in order to carry out God's will better. If the bible is God's word, it must be more respectful to Him to refer to that over the teachings of the human, fallible church if they differ?
I guess it confuses me where these beliefs come from. Unless the bible explicitly says "all people who aren't saved will go to an eternal hell", making this a core belief is kind of odd -if it was so important, wouldn't it have been made clear?
If RLP can look at scripture, and other Christians can look at scripture and interpret it so differently, the concept of hell must at least be debatable.
his second point, though
RLP, love the discussion, and I know you're probably tired. But how do you respond to Mark Brown's comment about the sin against the Holy Spirit? That analysis seems to suggest at least eternality, though what the sin is exactly might not be as clear as he makes it.
Another point to ponder. The Bible (NT for this discussion) might not describe Hell much, but Jesus and others in using the terms they did probably assumed his readers knew what they meant. Now, we don't, and that's a problem. Have you studied what those terms connoted in the 1st Century? Thanks.
Did they?
Gordon,
Thanks for your study. I to found your hell study bible absolutely hilarious.
Now, the issue seems to me to be one of context. For those of us raised with the "traditional orthodox" views of hell we have been taught to read all of scripture through those eyes. Meaning, we were taught the wages of sin is hell (death) and the only way to avoid death or hell was through acceptance of Jesus. We were taught that death and hell were synonymous and non Christians would go to hell. As Gordon discusses, that view is not in scripture. Secondly, we need to question what the original hearers would have understood. Based on my research I am not sure we can come to any consensus about that. There were multiple schools of thought and for most Jewish people life after death was a mystery that they did not spend much time on.
Personally, I believe that most judgment takes place in this life. It is a consequence of our sin. I say that as one who worked on skid row in Los Angeles for 3 years. I saw hell first hand.
We simply can not use scripture to come to a modern understanding of what we call hell. It is not there. Now, if you can still believe based on tradition and the like good for you. I choose to not focus on it and not preach on it. I would still be a follower of Jesus even if this life is all there is. It is still this life and its all I know.
Blessings
Bill
Blessing,
Bill
bill.finley@gmail.com
Hey everyone, thanks for the
Hey everyone, thanks for the conversations. I tried to spend some time responding. But I need to move on. Video 4 comes out Monday.
In the end, I'm not that interested in proving a point. I'm happy to have caused people to search the scriptures on the subject of hell.
What we are saved from
To suggest an answer for pastor Brian, consider what the biblical record from Genesis forward tells us. The wages of sin in Genesis 3 and onward is death. John 3:16 says that whoever believes in Christ will not perish, but have aionios life. You are asking the wrong question. It's not what Christ died to save us from, but what He died to restore to us as fallen sons and daughters of Adam... life!
Now is there more detail to be filled in? Yes. Paul tells Felix in Acts 24 that he believes in a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. For the wicked, he writes in a few places that there will be judgment and wrath. That's as far as he goes with it. He spends much more time (indeed all of his evangelistic preaching that we have in Acts) talking about the aionios life Christ came to give those who will turn to Him. To all these will come the surpassing joy of participating in the "redemption of our bodies" (Rom. 8:23) that will involve the restoration of this fallen creation "from its bondage to decay" when it will be "brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God." (v. 21)
Very interesting discussion
Very interesting discussion that I have been following from the beginning. I appreciate all of the info and all of your thoughts. I wonder if you are looking for Jesus to say something flat out that he didn't need to because the illustrations he used spoke for themselves and those he was speaking to already understood these points. What did the Jews in that day believe about our eternal destinaion? As you talk about hell I realize that I do not deserve to be in Heaven. Even one sin makes anyone unworthy of God. Jesus is the only one to change this reality for me. Matthew 7 says those who enter the kingdom of heaven must do his will AND know Him. Those things somehow go hand in hand. Jesus was hardest on the religous people and religion is probably the biggest thing to lead someone away from God but I don't see the overwelming number of scriptures condemning the hypocrites to hell. It seems Jesus was making the point that it doesn't matter how religous you are, you have to actually know Him and do HIS will.