>
Well this backfired! Last week was “hellish” and I was so excited to tackle the subject that I re-arranged the next month of posts to get to it!
We were having a wonderful conversation here about it last week and then on Friday, the Rob Bell “Love Wins” rumors started and I researched all weekend and followed the buzz. I was all ready to go to town in this week’s post. Here is how it was going to start:
Do you need to believe in Hell to follow Jesus?
Do you need to believe in Hell to be a Christian?
Do you need to believe in Hell to go to Heaven?
Is there a difference between following Jesus, being a Christian, and going to heaven?
The answer the that last question is “yes” there can be a difference between those three.
This is a very tricky set of questions and I want to be careful with how we chat about it.
Let me say right up front where I am on the issue.
- I do believe in an existence called “hell”… mostly because of the verses in the Bible.
- I do not believe that it is necessarily what has been pictured in Dante’s Inferno or what has been described in Fire and Brimstone sermons over the years.
- I am not sure that all the humans souls that I was taught would go there will end up there.
- I am not convinced that Hell is only a place after you die.
- I do not think that the Gospel is to get you to pray one prayer, one time, so that one part of you (your soul) will not go to hell after you die.
I was off to a good start.
I read posts by Rachel Held Evans, and by Tony Jones , a whole bunch of conservative blogs and then this one on hell.
I read posts by Rachel Held Evans, and by Tony Jones , a whole bunch of conservative blogs and then this one on hell.
I was rounding the corner – I was going to talk about how Hebrews 9:27 “Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment” does not settle the matter in a single verse.
I was going to try and connect with historical views of Biblical words and concepts that have so much variation and how exciting it can be to think outside of the one dimensional “Heaven and Hell” we have been given to see that God’s love and God’s justice are not two different things.
I got in Facebook debates where I said things like
“ It comes with a deep misreading of the NT texts and especially the Apocalyptic literate of books like Revelation. but that is for another conversation… as far a Bell’s book goes: what if he comes out and says that God’s love seethes in a holy judgment against injustice and burns away our sin and shame in the end? That would be cool.”
and
I am not a universalist. I am not saying Rob Bell is right. I am not saying that Love Wins. I am simply saying that A) maybe it is not as cut and dried and we have been told and that B) maybe we missed the good news of the Gospel and think that it was the suit & tie preachers say through the microphone.
I talked to friends and family on the phone about it. Then I rounded the corner into the week and … I just petered out. I start my new job this week. I have several projects coming due at school and with different partnerships I have been developing… and I just don’t feel like constructing the smorgasbord I had planned on. I am just not feeling it. I lost the steam.
I mean – I could say again that I think it is odd how the Apostle Paul never – not even once – in all of his letters or sermons in Acts – uses the word ‘hell’ and that it does not seem to be a motivating factor for him for preaching the gospel or for the work of salvation.
I could reiterate the verses about Christ’s work of reconciliation that seem far more relevant this week than they even did last week when I used them.
- Colossians 1:20 “and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.”
- Romans 5:10 “For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!”
- 2 Corinthians 5:18 “All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation”
I could go a number of directions with it… but in the end I guess I will just put it out there and see if anybody has an aspect of this that they are especially interested in talking about?
… otherwise I will just wait for the “Love Wins” book to come out at the end of march and we can take it up then.
Bo Sanders: Public Theology 
March 2, 2011 at 7:28 pm
>I personally think we have dramatically over-emphasized hell. The fact that "fire and brimstone" is the common perception of a typical sermon to people outside the church is a pretty good indicator of how much we have basically missed the point. Someone once told me that hell wasn't a place you were sentenced to go and be tortured as punishment, but that hell was simply the complete absence of God. I think that in this definition, hell certainly can exist on this side of death. I also think that hell isn't a place you are sent to as punishment, it is a place you go to voluntarily by rejection. I just don't believe any more in a God who is mainly concerned with dishing out divine retribution. And the scary part is, you start to get people rejoicing that God will carry out his judgment on the evil, rather than doing everything we can to bring people to a genuine relationship with God. We rejoice and praise the notion that a man like Pol Pot went to hell than we are remorseful that we couldn't change his heart in this lifetime.I'm currently leading our cell through a book called "Jesus the Son of Man" by Kahlil Gibran, a series of vignettes from the perspective of various people who interacted with Jesus. There's a passage about a man named Levi who invites Jesus to dinner, and some pharisees are also present. The Pharisees begin questioning Jesus, trying to confound him, but he doesn't get trapped by their verbal karate. Then one asks him if it's true he associates with the whores of Jerusalem:"Then in the face of Jesus I saw, as it were, the rocky heights of Lebanon, and He said, 'It is true.'On the day of reckoning these women shall rise before the throne of my Father, and they shall be made pure by their own tears. But you shall be held down by the chains of your own judgment.'Babylon was not put to waste by her prostitutes; Babylon fell to ashes that the eyes of her hypocrites might no longer see the light of day.'"THAT is a God I can believe in. Not one concerned with meting out punishment, but one with a heart of compassion for the wayward.
March 3, 2011 at 12:41 am
>I would say that only "some" have dramatically overemphasized hell. Not everyone who teaches or preaches about it emphasizes what we are saved "FROM" (which is important) over what (or Who) we are saved "TO" (which is just as important but is much more motivating).As Sam correctly implies, it is regrettable that some people rejoice that God will carry out His judgement on "the evil." People that do so haven't been solemnly sobered up by grace. However, I do long for the moment when God completes His final phase in the destruction of evil and its effects. Sometimes I visualize my own sin that has been forgiven and taken from me, as being tossed into hell itself. In a wierd sort of way, it brings me comfort.Ezekiel 33:11 says that God "takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked" and yet Rev. 19:1-3 tells of a great multitude rejoicing in the condemnation of Babylon. Perhaps this is not a rejoicing in the death of people, but in the destruction of systems, mindsets, worldviews, or political and religious institutions. As far as hell being defined as the absense of God, what does one do with the passage of Rev. 14:10 where those who receive the mark will be tormented in the presence of Jesus and his angels? Or is this just a hypothetical situation used as a threat? "IF anyone worships…."BTW, I am NOT AT ALL a Left Behind/Thief-in-the-night/ Jack Van Impe/Revelation literalist. I do understand that Revelation is full of symbolism and imagery and HAS to be read with an attitude of wonder and interpreted with painstaking care (what you smart guys call hermeneutics, I do believe..:).I do see that Peter talks a couple of times in his second letter about punishment and destruction of the ungodly and unrighteous (2 Pet 2:9-10, 3:1-7). I don't think we can ignore or misconstrue passages that make us angry, confused, or uncomfortable. Nor can we use one single verse or set of verses to settle complex matters as Bo made reference to in his earlier post regarding Heb 9:27.However, I think we can still believe in a God whose exact and precise (albeit severe) judgement is overshadowed by His intense and overwhelming heart of compassion for the wayward.
March 3, 2011 at 4:32 am
>Sam – GOOD POST ! and ya know what? I was thinking It is really important to state two things that I had planned on saying and then didn’t, but your post reminded me.1) this is not an exercise in pick-and-choose Bible quoting. This is not ‘avoid the verses that make you uncomfortable’ stuff. I am simply saying (in your words) that is has been over emphasized. 2) I am not saying that hell doesn’t exist. I’m just saying that it may not be what people think it is.
March 3, 2011 at 4:46 am
>Rod – thank you for the thoughtful post. I really liked many of the points you make.Over the last couple of weeks (in this "read the Bible better" series) I have been putting forward two ideas. The first seems to get the most attention – but I think that the second is JUST as important. A) we would benefit to know more about the 1st centuryB) we need to know how to read each genre of scripture in the way that it was written. I am not picking on you (I like many of your points) but I have had 3 phone conversations in the past week where the same sort of thing happened – quoting Ezekiel, Revelation and 2 Peter as if they were all written in the same genre, or that they are all saying the same thing… is not gunna work. We need to be careful with that stuff. all that being said – I appreciate your note. I am just thinking through some stuff about HOW we do this.
March 4, 2011 at 4:00 pm
>We can pick and choose scripture all we want, and find verses that will support almost any conception of hell. For me though, in order to make sense of it, I rely on what little I understand of God's character and personality that has been revealed in life and in the Bible. There are two things about God that seem apparent to me: First, God has no tolerance of evil. Second, God is genuinely concerned with the restoration and reconciliation of people. Not Humanity as a meta, as the totality of human life, but people, as individuals. There are a few ideas of hell I want to throw out there that feel consistent with these aspects of God's character:1) When we die, we appear before God and give account for our lives and our sins. We are given one last opportunity to reconcile ourselves to God, that Christ and the Holy Spirit may speak up on our behalf, and we avoid the eternal torment of hell. This concept is okay with me, because it doesn't rely on your station for all of eternity being decided on information gathered on Earth during your lifetime (which frankly, as evidenced by this discussion is NOT clear or conclusive).2) This is an idea borrowed from Islam. Hell exists as a place of torment and suffering, but you only go there long enough to atone for and be punished for your sins during your lifetime. Once you have been cleansed of your sins, you are granted the opportunity to reconcile with God.3) Hell is a place that exists now in this lifetime. It is made up of broken systems and structures and is a place of misery and pain (the burning trash heap outside of Jerusalem). Christ invites us to escape this reality NOW.4) Hell is where our sinful natures are cast to be consumed by fire, leaving behind our True Selves, as were meant to be, in perfect sync with Christ. This is similar to number 2.I just can't see the God of the cross and the resurrection being content and satisfied to sentence huge swaths of people to eternal suffering. Could God do it? Certainly. He has the power and authority to do so, and vengeance is His and His alone, after all. BUT it doesn't really jive with the picture I have of God doing whatever it takes, even dying a horrible death to reconcile us to Him. I cannot imagine a scenario where we would placed somewhere for a limited span of time, not given all the information, given conflicting information, and no one is in consensus, and then be asked to make a decision which will dictate your existence for all of eternity. I'm not picking and choosing verses based on what I am comfortable with, I'm relying on what I know about God, and one thing I know is that God is far more concerned with reconciling us to Him than he is with getting eternal justice. Isn't that what the cross was all about? But let's say for a minute that the fire and brimstone vision of hell as a place of eternal torment and suffering IS true, how does that help us? How does that help us reach out to others in a Christ-like way? Jesus doesn't rely on that imagery to bully people into believing in Him, He had something more to offer than an escape from hell. So what do we do with it?
March 13, 2011 at 6:37 pm
>I've been all over the map on this one. For a while now, my informal, set in wet concrete belief has more or less contained these facets:1) Jesus talked about some sort of hell. It's not a happy place.2) Jesus talked about some sort of heaven. It's THE happy place.3) Jesus never mentioned harps in heaven or accordions in hell (thank you, Gary Larson).4) God is not willing that any should perish, but wants all to have eternal life.5) Jesus came to save us all.6) Judas, from what I can find in the NT, was not saved.7) God didn't make us puppets. That doesn't jive with making everyone live in his presence, when some have absolutely rejected him.The closes I can come to a theological summary of this topic would be the ending of C. S. Lewis's _The Last Battle_.Ultimately, it no longer really matters to me. What matters is who God is, who I am and my relationship with God, and that others need to know who they are and know His love.