Hell: What Is It Good For

I have often been accused of beating a dead horse until it was unrecognizable. For fear of losing this reputation I have decided once again to speak on the topic of hell. The subject of the eternal place of fiery torment for those who haven’t accepted Christ was resurrected (excuse the pun) when Rob Bell wrote his book, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived. I do not intend to rehash anything here that I have discussed in previous blogs (to see those previous blogs see: Related Posts below). I am writing on the topic again because of the numerous debates I have had with people recently who are so certain the Bible is clear that when unbelievers die, they go to a place of eternal torment. I have decided to do some research on the Christian doctrine of hell and have made some interesting finds. And so I present the findings of this research today.

First off, there was not an official doctrine of hell until 500 years after Jesus’ death in 543 AD at the Council of Constantinople. Before that time, the early Church Fathers were mixed as to what hell was. Geoffrey Bromiley tells us in an article in his International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, “Concerning [hell’s] nature, many early fathers, including the apologist Justin, and the Latin fathers Tertullian and Jerome, assumed a fiery hell. Origen, on the other hand, gave it a spiritualized sense, in which the emphasis fell on remorse and separation from God…Origen…introduced the possibility of a remedial hell that might form a final stage of reclamation even for demons.” Some of Origen’s (an early church father who lived from 185-254 AD) quotes worth noting are as follows:

“We find in the prophet Isaiah, that the fire with which each one is punished is described as his own; for he says, ‘Walk in the light of your own fire, and in the flame which ye have kindled’ (Is 1:11). By these words it seems to be indicated that every sinner kindles for himself the flame of his own fire, and is not plunged into some fire which has been already kindled by another, or was in existence before himself” (De Principiis II, 10, IV).

“And again, if, by means of many severe administrations of punishment, they are able at some future time to recover their senses, and gradually attempt to find healing for their wounds, they may, on ceasing from their wickedness, be restored to a state of goodness” (De Principiis III, 1, XXI).

From the first quote we can see that Origen did not believe in an actual hell, but saw hell as a place we create for ourselves when we engage in sinful behavior, as it makes life difficult for us. From the second quote we can see that Origen believes in a place of purification one who has rejected Jesus goes, where they can be restored because of the punishment they have endured. This is in line with the idea I discussed in Rob Bell, “Love Wins,” and the Universalist in which a punishment must be corrective and therefore cannot be eternal. So as one can tell, the doctrine of hell was not clearly spelled out to the early church fathers, and so there were many different theories to begin with, and it wasn’t until 500 years after Jesus’ death that one theory was picked as orthodox.

But what about the bible itself, doesn’t it say that when people die they will be in eternal torment? The answer to that question is “no.” Hell did not develop as a concept until the intertestamental period after the last book of the Old Testament was written, but before the first book of the New Testament was. When the Old Testament speaks of where the wicked will go after dying, it speaks mainly of Sheol. Sheol, translated from the Hebrew, means “grave” and is the place both the good and the bad go after they die. It was a place void of consciousness, as can be attested from Psalm 6:5, “For there is no mention of You in death; In Sheol who will give You thanks.” In the Old Testament, there is no hell, only Sheol. And Sheol is a place where consciousness does not exist. As the idea of the afterlife began to evolve, Sheol began taking on some aspects that make it seem like a possible hell, such as Daniel 12:2 which says, “Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt.” But any concept of hell such as we have today of a fiery, eternally conscious torment, placed in the Old Testament is wrong as it places a future idea into the minds of those in the past.

There are only a handful of places in the Bible that mention anything resembling an eternal torment: Daniel 12:2 (quoted above) and Matthew 25:46 which says, "These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." I know that the phrases “everlasting contempt” and “eternal punishment” seem damning to my argument, but we often read our pre-set beliefs into passages such as these. We have been conditioned to believe in an eternally tormenting hell and so we simply read into passages like these that concept of hell. But notice they do not say “eternal torment.” When it says “eternal punishment” and “everlasting contempt” it is just as likely that these passages mean that the person who chooses to reject God will be eternally separated from him without consciousness. Essentially, they will eternally cease to exist. The punishment is not being aloud to live in God’s kingdom for all of eternity, instead of being sent to a fiery, tormenting hell. An article which discusses the original Greek in the Matthew passage can be found at "Eternal" Punishment (Matthew 25:46) is NOT True to the Greek Language and discusses that this is the only passage that has the two words “eternal” and “punishment” together, making for a compelling case against the idea of an eternal hell. He also mentions how the term translated “eternal” does not always mean eternal, and can simply mean an indefinite period of time. This makes for a more coherent belief in an all-loving God. It also makes for a more accurate reading of the Bible.

When you read in Scripture any of the passages that refer to a punishment for the wicked after death, you will see that not one of those passage indicates it is eternally conscious, leaving open the option that hell is a place where one can be restored, and for those who are passed the point of restoration there is the option of ceasing to exist for all of eternity. Any indication that hell is eternal, is read into the Bible because of tradition, and cannot be read out of Scripture objectively. Below are some passages that you can read on hell, and you can see for yourself that no indication of eternality can be found (Matthew 8:11-12; Matthew 13:41-42; Matthew 13:49-50; Matthew 22:12-13; Matthew 24:50-51; Matthew 25:29-30; Luke 13:27-28).

I want to end by explaining why I chose to write about this subject on a blog about engaging our society based on how Jesus engaged his. One of the things Jesus fought the Pharisees on was their strict adherence to certain biblical precepts that in the long run excluded people from the kingdom of God, and did not accord with God’s will (Matthew 23). I believe there are certain doctrines that Christians need to stand strong on without budging: the divinity of Christ, the Trinity, the resurrection of Jesus, and so on. But there are other beliefs from which we do not budge that in the long run will exclude people from the kingdom of God. If the eternity of hell were something that was clearly in Scripture, I would say we need to adhere to the doctrine regardless of how wicked it seems. But the Bible is not clear. It is everything but clear. And since it keeps so many people away from Jesus, I think it is a doctrine we as Christians need to be prepared to scrap. We need to stop fighting people as if this is the sole doctrine on which Christianity rests, and do more to bring the doctrines of love and grace to the forefront. Who knows, maybe in the long run we will bring more people to Christ that way.
Blessings,
-Brandon

Related Posts:
http://whatjesusdiddo.blogspot.com/2011/03/threat-of-punishment-or-promise-of-love.html

http://whatjesusdiddo.blogspot.com/2011/03/rob-bell-love-wins-and-universalist.html

http://whatjesusdiddo.blogspot.com/2010/11/is-christian-god-to-be-feared.html

http://whatjesusdiddo.blogspot.com/2010/10/interacting-with-contemporary-church.html

http://whatjesusdiddo.blogspot.com/2010/10/jesus-and-religious-leaders-in-bible.html

http://whatjesusdiddo.blogspot.com/2010/10/manipulating-scripture.html

Rob Bell, "Love Wins," and the Universalist

Let me start out by saying that I have not read Rob Bell's book "Love Wins." Let me also say that it is my intention to read Rob Bell's book "Love Wins." I have, however, been reading a lot of articles about Rob Bell and his recent book in which he argues against the existence of a hell, stating basically that the idea of a loving, caring, Father God, precludes the idea that a place of eternal punishment exists. For a good explanation of Bell's book, see the blogs at the end of my article. Many are crying that Rob Bell is a heretic, that he is a universalist, and that he needs to be excommunicated from the Church. Those who argue for excommunication apparently do not realize Bell is not a Catholic and therefore cannot be excommunicated. Bell denies being a universalist (the belief that all dogs, and all people, go to heaven regardless of their religion). Whether his argument implies universalism or not, I cannot say, only Bell can. And if he denies being a universalist, I have to accept him for his word. He is probably like me in saying that we really cannot say who God does and does not save. That he is a heretic, is what I here plan on disproving.
Bell is doing what more Christians need to do, he is emphasizing love over hate, grace over judgment. Bell believes that the idea of God's unconditional love contradicts the kind of hell we have come to believe in, a place of eternal, never ending punishment for those who deny Christ. How can an all-loving, merciful God send anyone to such a place? How can a Father do such a thing to His child? What if someone never had the opportunity to hear about Jesus? Do they go to hell? What if someone was horribly abused by a Christian who claimed to be abusing in the name of Christ? Does such a person go to hell? If we can argue that hell does not exist, the problem goes away.
We also have the problem of many evangelicals going around and using hell as a motivator to join the Body of Christ. "If you do not believe in Jesus, you're going to hell," they say. "If you continue in your sin, you won't make it into heaven, but will be punished forever, others say." Jesus says, "love your neighbor as yourself." God says, "I desire that all will be saved." Paul says, "there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." So as you can see, our current language does not match up with the love language of Scripture. If we can disprove the existence of hell, then maybe we can get Christians to stop abusing hell for their own gain. When Jesus spoke, love was always his first and foremost concern. The biggest thing Jesus wanted his followers to understand was the importance of showing love and compassion towards others, not hate. What is happening today, however, is that love has been placed in the background so a message of hellfire and brimstone can scare people into becoming Christians. I've said it once and I'll say it again, when Jesus spoke to people, it was out of love and concern for them, not so he could convince them to follow him. If Jesus left an encounter and the person did not want to follow Jesus, or believe in him, that was ok with Jesus. Their freedom was more important to Jesus than getting them "saved."
So what about hell? What are we to believe? Certainly the bible speaks of such a place, doesn't it? There is the parable of Lazarus and the rich man in which, upon dying, the rich man sees Lazarus across a vast space and resting in Abraham's bosom. The rich man is obviously suffering and Lazarus is obviously in bliss. Jesus speaks of a place where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. And of course there is the imagery in the Revelation. So what are we to think? Let me first say that in the Old Testament, there is no talk of hell. There is talk of "Sheol" which just means the grave and was not a location of the afterlife. There is talk of "Abaddon" which can be interpreted in multiple ways, and is traditionally interpreted as a place of suffering, but without necessary connection to the afterlife. So, the idea of hell (as well as the Devil) was a much later idea and did not start developing until the Jews were exiled in Babylon where they were influenced by the pagan beliefs.
Later on we have 7 passages where Jesus speaks of the children of the Kingdom being exiled to a place where there will be "weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 8:11-12; 13:41-42, 49-50; 22:12-13; 24:50-51; 25:29-30; and Luke 13:27-28). First, let me point out that none of these passages refers to this place as being eternal. So, whatever this place may be, it may simply be a temporary thing. One of the problems with the idea of a place of eternal punishment is that punishment is a corrective thing. What is the point of correcting someone, if there is no chance to be restored. When a parent punishes their child, the intention is to correct a behavior so they no longer behave in that way. It seems to me that eternal "punishment," therefore, cannot truly serve its purpose and is just cruel. What we know about God is that is not a God of cruelty, but a God of love. If God is love, how can He eternally punish someone. Perhaps, then, this place of weeping and gnashing of teeth is a temporary place to punish person, making them ready for heaven. From my studies, I have not yet found a reference to this place we call hell, being eternal. And Jesus does not use this language to scare just anyone. Again, if you look carefully, these speeches are directed at those who should know better, the religious authorities of Israel. Those were the people Jesus was always fighting with, those were the people that were oppressive and misused the Word of God. These verses are directed at those who should know better than to teach and preach what they are teaching and preaching.
Finally, let me direct you to Jesus' actions. His actions were far from condemning of people. Jesus showed nothing but grace and love to others. A good example of this was to the Roman centurion who asked Jesus to heal his servant who was deathly sick. Jesus immediately obliged and even attempted to go with the centurion to help him. He declined having Jesus come into his home because he felt unworthy. Instead he told Jesus that he knew he could heal the servant without setting foot in the home. Jesus said this Roman had a stronger faith than any he had ever known, even within Israel. What is remarkable about this story is that this Roman centurion, would have been a follower of Mithras, a pagan god. He wasn't even a Jew, let alone a follower of Jesus. And yet this man had more faith than Jesus had ever seen. Who are we, as Christians, to say who can and cannot be saved, who goes to hell and who does not? If God desires all to be saved, if God wants none to suffer, why is it so bad saying that either there is no hell and those who do not want to spend eternity with God simply cease to exist, or to say that hell is a place of temporary punishment to prepare the worst of sinners to see God face to face. What is most important is that we stop using hell as a scare tactic and start showing the kind of love for others Jesus has for them. My prayer is that everyone I encounter may know the love of Christ from being with me.
Blessings,
-Brandon

Is Bell Into Hell, a Review of "Love Wins"
The Rob Bell Controversy: Does Anyone Go To Hell?
The Heretical Rob Bell and Why Love Wins