When Christians are first introduced to the doctrine of Universal Reconciliation (UR), they are usually caught off guard. Since it challenges part of the foundation of the Atonement, as they know it, many are defensive of the Christianity that they have come to know. Since Scripture states that the wages of sin is death and that the second death is the Lake of Fire, many believe that Jesus came to save us from an all too real lake of burning sulfur; one, in which, people are tormented day and night — forever and ever. Therefore, when someone denies the doctrine of Endless Conscious Torment (ECT), Christians tend to either ignore the naysayers or they valiantly defend their doctrinal convictions.
When I started to doubt this doctrine, I was approached by several Christians, on many occasions, who felt like they were being led by the Spirit to tell me that I was stepping onto a very slippery slope and to warn me that I was in danger of backsliding. At first, I felt alarmed. Was I sliding down a frictionless slope toward heresy? It surely felt like it, at the time. I kept telling myself that I couldn’t accept CU regardless of how much it comforted my soul. It was heresy and I would not become a heretic.
However, as time went on, I realized that I needed to look into what actually makes heresy heretical. Did CU deny some essential truth of the Christian faith? Did it deny the exclusivity of Jesus? It must have—since it denied the reality of that from which Christ came to save us. He did come to save us from ECT, right? Is that not the death about which Scripture so frequently speaks? . . . Is it?
At the time, I was questioning so much of what I was brought up to believe. How far back had I slid? Had I crossed the threshold of no return? Could I escape this slippery slope of death? Just how close was I to the fiery pit that I was questioning?
Eventually, I began to realize that I was not backsliding at all, but following biblical instruction. Scripture commands us to “test all things” and to “hold onto what is good and true.” Was I following and trusting in a carnal, earthly kind of reasoning? Is there even such a thing? On the contrary, I decided to accept God’s invitation: to come and reason with him; rather than to blindly trust in what I was told is good and true.
Growing up, I was often reminded to beware of false teachers and to avoid strange theology, which sounds like great advice. Even though I was instructed to avoid false teachers, I was never taught how to identify them or their teachings. The company with which I surrounded myself identified strange doctrine as that which is unfamiliar or “unorthodox”; they assumed that one of the first steps onto a slippery slope included a willingness to entertain unorthodox ideas.
Backsliding definitely sounds like something we all should avoid, but what exactly is it that constitutes backsliding? Is questioning orthodoxy one of the criteria? Is it spiritually unhealthy to question the purpose of hell or any other particular concept? Does possessing great hope in the ultimate reconciliation of all things, which is a biblical concept, make one backslidden? Consider what Jeremiah had to say about this subject:
“’Your own wickedness will correct you, And your backslidings will rebuke you. Know therefore and see that it is an evil and bitter thing—that you have forsaken the LORD your God. And the fear of Me is not in you,’ Says the Lord GOD of hosts.” —Jeremiah 2:19
Firstly, where is the wickedness in questioning orthodoxy? Where is it in the doctrine of UR? I am not referring to the supposed wickedness in denying what many see as the “clear” teaching of Scripture. When the Bible speaks of wickedness, it always pertains to moral misdeeds, which leads to spiritual error. Questioning the validity of orthodoxy is anything but spiritual error because Scripture calls us to test such things.
Secondly, how are those who question orthodoxy forsaking the LORD? It seems to me that church authorities are the ones who feel forsaken. They are the ones fighting opposition, refusing to allow there be be diversity among their lambs. We who are committed to testing all things are not forsaking the LORD. If anything, we are trying to escape religious oppression so that we may walk toward a less distorted image of Christ.
Finally, is the fear of the LORD necessarily in anyone who believes in a particular doctrine of postmortem judgement? What is the fear of the LORD, exactly? We know that it is the beginning of wisdom; but what is a fear of the LORD that gives birth to wisdom? Does it spring up from a fear of ECT — if not for ourselves, then for the uncommitted?
Why do so many Christians believe that God desires so many broken souls to be enslaved and manipulated by such a fear? I cannot believe that it is so, not any longer. I have come to believe that the fear of the LORD is not a trepidation of postmortem possibilities, but a holy reverence toward he who formed our delicate souls. We who possess this great hope in UR are no more void of a fear of the LORD than are those who believe in ECT or Conditional Immortality.
The fear of the LORD may affect our understanding of postmortem judgement, but it does not constitute it. Given the criteria Jeremiah provided for being backslidden, one cannot say that questioning orthodoxy has anything to do with it. If anything, our desire to test theology, whether it is strange or not, reinforces our reverence toward God. As a Christian who believes so strongly in the cross, I cannot imagine a scenario beyond one in which Jesus succeeds in drawing everyone to himself. He is a God who keeps his promises, after all.
At the end of the day, if believing in UR places me on a slippery slope, I am sure that I will enjoy the ride! Christian Universalism is anything but heretical because it is built on a solid foundation — the unfailing love of God. The fear of the LORD may be the beginning of wisdom, but love is undoubtedly its end.
What do you think about “slippery slopes”? What does it mean to be backsliden? Share your thoughts below.
Thanks for the wonderful write up, Mr. Charles.
Hope for the non-Christians in the context of Post-Mortem Salvation as described below.
Title: Is there Hope for non-Christians & fallen believers to be Saved beyond this life?
A Good exhortation on Love is found in the Beatitudes in the Gospel.
It’s natural thus for atheists and non-Christians to ponder whether such a Love includes them beyond this life or within this temporal life only?
Please consider – Is there Hope for non-Christians beyond this life?
Heart is Absent & the Art of Reason
“For as he thinks within himself, so he is. He says to you, “Eat and drink!” But his heart is not with you.” (Proverbs 23:7, NASB)
Example of a quote from a philosopher agreeing to the Verse above:
“I think therefore I am” (“Cogito, ergo sum”) – René Descartes
Conclusion
“but in every nation the man who fears Him (God) and does what is right is welcome to Him.” – apostle Peter (Acts 10:35, NASB)
1) Authority in Doctrine – St. Justin Martyr hints regarding this HOPE
Example: St. Justin Martyr himself mentions this regarding say Socrates (an example):
“… Christ is the first-born of God, and we have declared above that He is the Word of whom every race of men were partakers; and those who lived reasonably are Christians, even though they have been thought atheists; as, among the Greeks, Socrates …” – Justin Martyr (First Apology)
The popular error is to claim that Justin only referred to such a hope toward those before Christ which is untrue as he himself continues just after quoting the passage above (Context: Within this same Dialogue or Discussion):
“… an intelligent man will be able to comprehend from what has been already so largely said. And we, since the proof of this subject is less needful now, will pass for the present to the proof of those things which are urgent.” Justin Martyr (First Apology)
Source:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html
I wonder what wisdom we might have missed as Justin Martyr didn’t go ‘all out to explain this topic of hope’.
This may thus be seen from the ‘higher’ writings such as Shepherd of Hermas that this “Gospel being Preached to Sheepfold2” (as 1 Peter 4:6 reveals) is not just a one time occurence as the First Preaching was Done by Christ Himself (1 Peter 3:18 – 20) while the latter ones by the ‘forty stones’ (or the 40 belonging among the apostles + teachers who have died), to quote:
2) Second only to New Testament Writing as Scripture – Shepherd of Hermas Writing
Shepherd of Hermas quotes afterlife preaching of the Gospel to the dead in Hell and repentance there too (toward whomever God grants Mercy)
To quote:
“One more example will illustrate the righteous spirits’ taking the gospel to the wicked spirits and will also provide a transition to the topic of vicarious work for the dead. The Shepherd of Hermas (first century) was, according to the fourth-century Church historian Eusebius, considered by some valuable for instruction in the Church and was quoted by some of the most ancient writers.
Hermas saw in a vision that the Apostles took the gospel into the spirit world so that the dead might receive the seal of baptism:
These apostles and teachers, who preached the name of the Son of God, having fallen asleep in the power and faith of the Son of God, preached also to those who had fallen asleep before them, and themselves gave to them the seal of the preaching [baptism]. They went down therefore with them into the water and came up again, but the latter went down alive and came up alive, while the former who had fallen asleep before, went down dead but came up alive. (Sim. 9.16.5)
Clement of Alexandria also cited this passage, commenting “that it was necessary for the apostles to be imitators of their Master on the other side as well as here, that they might convert the gentile dead as he did the Hebrew.”
Source: https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/sperry-symposium-classics/visions-christ-spirit-world-and-dead-redeemed
3) Empirical Evidence – Spiritual Visions
Do we have any reliable witness or an Empirical Evidence of this?
A more recent testimony to this rarely known Mystery of the Gospel by Sadhu Sundar Singh, to quote:
Afterlife evangelism is also witnessed Sadhu Sundar Singh in his visions of heaven and hell agreeing to all this (e. g. ‘hindu saints’ accepting the Lord as their Saviour in the afterlife).
Proof of his visions from his ‘first and original’ biographies, please consider (images in links below, examples):
a) anonymouschristian.org/blog/secrets-beyond-hell-sadhu-sundar-singh/
b) http://www.anonymouschristian.org/blog/sadhu-sundar-singh-a-christian-universalist/
Please note that Emmanuel Swedenborg’s Hell & Heaven Visions also Testify to this Rarely known Biblical Truth. But isn’t Swedenborhg a heretic who taught strange things?
Swedenborg also taught eternal hell amongst other errors but in some aspects ‘he interpreted his visions rightly’ as explained in link below:
https://www.anonymouschristian.org/blog/swedenborg-vs-sadhu-sundar-singh-visions-of-hell-and-heaven/
4) AFTERLIFE HOPE for Christians who have back-slidden from the Shepherd of Hermas Book
Christians who backslide from the Truth – the Rejected Stones
Bible Verses:
“So then, you will know them by their fruits. “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’ – Lord Jesus Christ (Matthew 7:20 – 23, NASB)
“For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES” (Hebrews 10:26 – 27, NASB)
“For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.” (Hebrews 6:4 – 6, NASB)
26[103]:6 “And this I say not in reference to these days, that a man after denying should receive repentance; for it is impossible for him to be saved who shall now deny his Lord; but for those who denied Him long ago repentance seemeth to be possible. If a man therefore will repent, let him do so speedily before the tower is completed; but if not, he shall be destroyed by the women and put to death.” (Shepherd of Hermas)
What is meant by “no repentance is possible after death” for ‘such Christians’ described in Verses above?
To quote from the Shepherd of Hermas (‘not’ my opinion – please take note):
7[15]:3 But the others, which are near the waters and yet cannot roll into the water, wouldest thou know who are they? These are they that heard the word, and would be baptized unto the name of the Lord. Then, when they call to their remembrance the purity of the truth, they change their minds, and go back again after their evil desires.”
7[15]:4 So she finished the explanation of the tower.
7[15]:5 Still importunate, I asked her further, whether for all these stones that were rejected and would not fit into the building of the tower that was repentance, and they had a place in this tower. “They can repent,” she said, “but they cannot be fitted into this tower.
7[15]:6 Yet they shall be fitted into another place much more humble, but not until they have undergone torments, and have fulfilled the days of their sins. And they shall be changed for this reason, because they participated in the Righteous Word; and then shall it befall them to be relieved from their torments, if the evil deeds, that they have done, come into their heart; but if these come not into their heart, they are not saved by reason of the hardness of their hearts.”
The Shepherd of Hermas clearly reveals that “no repentance is possible” links to them NOT being part of the ‘tower of repentance’ which describes the HIGHER INHERITANCE LOT which is ‘only for believers in faith who obey His Commands’ (1 John 2:4, John 14:15).
The Shepherd of Hermas also describes that ‘these fallen believers of faith’ —> “Yet they shall be fitted into another place much more humble, but not until they have undergone torments, and have fulfilled the days of their sins.”
The Duration of their afterlife Judgment or Punishment is ’till the last penny only and NOT forever’, comparison phrases:
“And they shall be changed for this reason, because they participated in the Righteous Word; and then shall it befall them to be relieved from their torments, if the evil deeds, that they have done, come into their heart; but if these come not into their heart, they are not saved by reason of the hardness of their hearts.” [7[15]:6, Shepherd of Hermas] = “the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces, and assign him a place with the unbelievers. “And why do you not even on your own initiative judge what is right? “For while you are going with your opponent to appear before the magistrate, on your way there make an effort to settle with him, so that he may not drag you before the judge, and the judge turn you over to the officer, and the officer throw you into prison. “I say to you, you will not get out of there until you have paid the very last cent.” (Lord Jesus Christ in Luke 12:46, 57 – 59, NASB)
Can you see how Merciful and Just our God Really is?
Repentance now is Chiefly Around INHERITING HIS GLORIOUS KINGDOM beyond entering it only eventually (Matthew 5:19) —> to find ‘your place according to your works’ (reward vs punishment accordingly, Revelation 22:12, 2 Corinthians 5:10):
9[17]:5 Look ye to the judgment that cometh. Ye then that have more than enough, seek out them that are hungry, while the tower is still unfinished; for after the tower is finished, ye will desire to do good, and will find no place for it.
3[24]:2 “Listen,” said she; “the black is this world in which ye dwell;
3[24]:3 and the fire and blood color showeth that this world must perish by blood and fire;
3[24]:4 and the golden part are ye that has escaped from this world. For as the gold is tested by the fire and is made useful, so ye also [that dwell in it] are being tested in yourselves. Ye then that abide and pass through the fire will be purified by it. For as the old loses its dross. so Ye also shall cast away all sorrow and tribulation, and shall be purified, and shall be useful for the building of the tower.
3[24]:5 But the white portion is the coming age, in which the elect of God shall dwell; because the elect of God shall be without spot and pure unto life eternal.
3[24]:6 Wherefore cease not thou to speak in the ears of the saints. Ye have now the symbolism also of the tribulation which is coming in power. But if ye be willing, it shall be nought. Remember ye the things that are written beforehand.”
Non Christians before the Time of Christ – is there Hope for an afterlife repentance for them?
3[31]:4 To those then that were called before these days the Lord has appointed repentance. For the Lord, being a discerner of hearts and foreknowing all things, perceived the weakness of men and the manifold wiles of the devil, how that he will be doing some mischief to the servants of God, and will deal wickedly with them.
3[31]:5 The Lord then, being very compassionate, had pity on His handiwork, and appointed this (opportunity of) repentance, and to me was given the authority over this repentance.
5) Who are the Sheepfold2?
Example, to quote (regarding afterlife Judgment and Repentance – Mystery of the Gospel being Preached to the Dead, 1 Peter 3:18 – 19, 1 Peter 4:5 – 6):
15[92]:2 “It was necessary for them,” saith he, “to rise up through water, that they might be made alive; for otherwise they could not enter into the kingdom of God, except they had put aside the deadness of their [former] life.
15[92]:3 So these likewise that had fallen asleep received the seal of the Son of God and entered into the kingdom of God. For before a man,” saith he, “has borne the name of [the Son of] God, he is dead; but when he has received the seal, he layeth aside his deadness, and resumeth life.
15[92]:4 The seal then is the water: so they go down into the water dead, and they come up alive. “thus to them also this seal was preached, and they availed themselves of it that they might enter into the kingdom of God.”
15[92]:5 “Wherefore, Sir,” say I, “did the forty stones also come up with them from the deep, though they had already received the seal?” “Because,” saith he, “these, the apostles and the teachers who preached the name of the Son of God, after they had fallen asleep in the power and faith of the Son of God, preached also to them that had fallen asleep before them, and themselves gave unto them the seal of the preaching.
15[92]:6 Therefore they went down with them into the water, and came up again. But these went down alive [and again came up alive]; whereas the others that had fallen asleep before them went down dead and came up alive.
15[92]:7 So by their means they were quickened into life, and came to the full knowledge of the name of the Son of God. For this cause also they came up with them, and were fitted with them into the building of the tower and were builded with them, without being shaped; for they fell asleep in righteousness and in great purity. Only they had not this seal. Thou hast then the interpretation of these things also.” “I have, Sir,” say I.
Source: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/shepherd-lightfoot.html
Comment:
The phrase “for they fell asleep in righteousness and in great purity. Only they had not this seal” together with the phrase “came to the full knowledge of the name of the Son of God” with the phrase “others that had fallen asleep before them went down dead and came up alive” ——> with the phrase “to rise up through water, that they might be made alive; for otherwise they could not enter into the kingdom of God, except they had put aside the deadness of their [former] life” —> seem to point 🤔 to “the Sheepfold2” (John 10:16) which refers to the “righteous in good works (e. g. John 5:28 – 29, Daniel 12:2) who died without believing in Christ” but believed in Him ‘after seeing Him, John 6:40 (in the afterlife too, implied in John 3:14 – 15)’.
a) Sheep and Goats – FAQ
http://www.anonymouschristian.org/blog/faq-sheep-vs-goats-first-and-second-resurrection-millennial-reign-judgment-day/
6) How Reliable is the Shepherd of Hermas Book?
To quote:
“The Shepherd was very popular amongst Christians in the 2nd and 3rd centuries.”
How about the Eastern Orthodox Church?
“It is part of the Codex Sinaiticus, and it is listed between the Acts of the Apostles and the Acts of Paul in the stichometrical list of the Codex Claromontanus.”
How about the ‘early Roman Catholic Church’?
“Tertullian implies that Pope Callixtus I had quoted it as an authority (though evidently not as one of the books of the Bible), for he replies: “I would admit your argument, if the writing of The Shepherd had deserved to be included in the Divine Instrument, and if it were not judged by every council of the Churches, even of your own Churches, among the apocryphal and false.”
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas
The ONLY reason the Shepherd of Hermas was not popular among some early Christians is because they were “uncomfortable” (with the “Visions” – because ‘they lacked faith that God can grant Visions’), to quote from that same Wikipedia Source again:
“Though Clement of Alexandria constantly quotes with reverence a work that seems to him to be very useful, and inspired; yet he repeatedly apologizes, when he has occasion to quote it, on the ground that “many people despise it”. Two controversies divided the mid-century Roman Christian communities. One was Montanism, the ecstatic inspired outpourings of continuing pentecostal revelations, such as the visions recorded in the Shepherd may have appeared to encourage.”
Hasn’t God Promised such “Visions” (Joel 2:28, Acts 2:17) in the “last Days”?
P/S: Other Wise Quotes
“I don’t know why we are here, but I’m pretty sure it is not in order to enjoy ourselves” – Ludwig Wittgenstein
“A little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion” – Sir Francis Bacon
“The brave man is he who overcomes not only his enemies but his pleasures” – Democritus
“The function of prayer is not to influence God, but rather to change the nature of the one who prays” – Søren Kierkegaard
“It is one thing to show a man that he is in error, and another to put him in possession of truth” – John Locke
“The greatest happiness of the greatest number is the foundation of morals and legislation” – Jeremy Bentham
“Morality is not the doctrine of how we may make ourselves happy, but of how we may make ourselves worthy of happiness” – Immanuel Kant
“Whatever is reasonable is true, and whatever is true is reasonable” – G. W. F. Hegel
“The greater the difficulty, the more glory in surmounting it” – Epicurus
“Even while they teach, men learn” – Seneca the Younger
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance” – Socrates
LikeLike
Nice article but it’s visually hard to read the text on a black background.
LikeLike
Good stuff Charles. One thing I’ve found is that most arrive at a type of universalism because of a revelation of the true nature of God revealed through Jesus.
LikeLike
I’m all for revelation, as long as it is not self-contradictory, and carries with it some sort of objective authority. Someone’s “personal” revelation would not qualify. For those who accept the inspiration of scripture, it alone is sufficient for revealing to us all that is necessary for faith and our walk with God. Why anyone would so eagerly grasp at any lone individuals “new and better” (more appealing i fear to be the case) revelation in contrast or contradiction to the Bible indicates something far more sinister. Whether intentionally or not, many people are busy making a god after their own image. In other words, they want a god constrained and limited by their concepts and desires. If this god seems to be “unfair” (o’ the arrogance), then redefine him in order to make him (or her) more attractive to the mind of the flesh. When i often point out that God is beyond our understanding i get the typical response “oh, you guys always fall back to that verse”!! They don’t seem aware of how arrogant they are, and with what hubris they exercise. They actually seem offended by the suggestion that there are things about God that we humans just don’t grasp, don’t understand. In other words, they won’t accept a god who doesn’t “fit” with their concept of what a good or fair god would be like. They seem unwilling to exercise a little faith and believe that, God being just and righteous by nature, He couldn’t possibly think or do something “wrong”, “unfair” (by His definition), or “unright”. If He decides that those who reject Him are deserving of eternal torment, this can’t possibly be an example of being unfair, God being incapable or such actions.
However, because we can’t wrap our minds around a loving God doing such a thing, we begin the process of ignoring vast droves of scriptures relating to His nature. Or, we begin to redefine the meanings of words, or we make up new doctrines to match up with our own personal preferences.
As i have stated previously, i have no axe to grind on this issue. If God decides to save everyone, so be it. He is, after all, is He not, God? Whatever He decides is good. It is righteous, It is just. WHATEVER He decides, however unattractive such decisions may appear to us. He doesn’t need our help. He doesn’t need our opinions. He does not seek such things.
If you think that heaven will eventually be a place where Hitler will teach sunday school lessons to messianic Jews, or that Ted Bundy will teach cooking classes to his many victims, well, enjoy your dreams. So please get my point. WHATEVER GOD DECIDES TO DO IS RIGHT. If you think eternal torment is an unfair or improper decision, may i politely inform you that the real problem here is YOU, not God. You trust God only so far, only as long as He adheres to YOUR concepts of fairness and justice. This is not the true God, just a man-made construct. An idol. Or as Paul would say, a demon. May i invite you to join the ranks of those who trust Him absolutely, without questioning His motives or decisions. Join those who accept what scripture reveals about Him. I’m sure you would say you do, but you accomplish this by redefining His nature, sub-dividing His qualities or nature in order to achieve your goal of constructing a more attractive or appealing deity. Think of the arrogance in the statement “well, if God is actually like such and such, then that’s not a God i can embrace, nor worship.” REALLY? R-e-a-l-l-y??
I appreciate your compassion and desire for everyone to find eternal bliss, or at least annihilation rather than eternal torment. Just don’t mistake your mind and wisdom for God’s mind and wisdom. He asks us to trust Him, not restrict Him. To love Him with all our being, not to hedge our bets by adding to or subtracting what we desire or find emotionally objectionable.
LikeLike
[…] follows is in response to a lengthy comment I received on a previous blog post from someone who goes by the alias of Chuck. I will respond briefly to certain portions of […]
LikeLike
Your thoughts, though no doubt sincerely expressed, are nothing new. Your point of view has been extrapolated throughout the history of the church by various theologians and scholars, from both “orthodoxy” and obvious heresy. Your statement that everything must be “built upon”, so to speak, the “love of God”, sounds great, but has no scriptural basis. Granted, God’s love is spoken of often, but so is God’s righteousness and coming judgement. There is no scripture that says that everything about God MUST be understood through the lens of His love. To do so would be do ignore voluminous scriptures that speak of His holiness, righteousness, anger, judgement etc. Christ speaks of hell directly more than any biblical individual. Strange emphasis from one building His teaching (which He says is His Father’s teaching) supposedly on love.
I certainly understand the difficulty. No one wants to believe someone has to suffer eternally, even the most evil. Then again, try as we might, we have little to no understanding of what is meant by God’s holiness and His hatred of sin, or what violations of His Law actually mean or their seriousness. We might say we do, but really, we don’t. Everything we think we know is clouded by sin and is imperfect at best. I would suggest that the truer nature of the slippery slope you speak of is our sudden belief that we know impeccably what God would or would not do, even beyond what little scripture teaches. Usually those who question God’s will and motives in scripture find themselves speechless (Job, for example) and under discipline. I find that the safest (considering my sinful nature) conclusions to reach are those that accord with scripture. If hell was only temporary, there appears to be an utter dearth of any scriptures telling us so. Eternal usually means eternal. Arguing from love is just playing one aspect of God’s nature against the others. Nor are there scriptures that clearly and literally teach us that hell is really just annihilation. There are contrasts, however, between what the believer and non-believer experience, i.e., just as the believer experiences eternal life so the non-believer experiences eternal separation from God. If this separation is not eternal, then logically eternal life with God is not eternal.
There is much in scripture i do not fully grasp. To try to understand it, however, through my comprehension, emotions, judgement, etc. will invariably lead to heresy, unintentional though it may be. And this, from my 40+ years of experience and study, is the very basis of heresy: people trying to conform God to their own ability to understand or to their comfort level with said teachings. What you and i think and whether we approve of teachings about God is irrelevant. As you seem to imply, does it conform to scripture is the real question. And in all my studies of this specific topic, those who have and do agree with your reasoning do a barely adequate job of exegeting God’s love and a terrible job of expounding on His righteousness and judgement.
You may end up being right. If you are, you and the few in orthodox christianity who agree with you have managed to perform a miracle. You have gone against the consensus of 2000 years of the church, which claims also to be based on scripture, and have managed to see what so few have seen (though many who claim such enlightenment have done so only in the last few decades). Again, not impossible, but always unlikely. Trust me, if you are right, i won’t be disappointed at all. God can do whatever He wants without our permission and without our understanding. His ways are not ours, nor are His thoughts. Blessings
LikeLike
Chuck, You state Gods love is spoken of often, but so is His righteousness and coming Judgement, also that we don’t have any reason to think everything about God need be viewed through the lens of His Love.
I think we do error when we view God’s love as somehow opposed or separate from His righteousness, His judgements, anger etc. A little thought will reveal Love to be all encompassing; the other attributes being subordinate or perhaps better expressed are as a result of His love and fulfill the same purposes. God is Love, not merely loving at times. For eg He may be angry at times but this is because of His love, you would not expect to say God is always angry and sometimes He may be loving; it makes no sense.
Jesus may have spoken often of hell and that study alone can be revealing but He also very frequently spoke of His Father. To suggest a dichotomy of God’s character introduces some type of schizophrenic Father who one time is offering His mercy, another is withdrawing it in anger, another time demanding righteousness and at a turn offering His own righteousness etc. An earthly father who behaved in this manner we would consider to need psychological help.
LikeLike
Thanks for your comments. I believe you make a common error here, a category error or mistake. Analogies can be helpful in illustrating truth, but we go to far when we assume an earthly father-son relationship can accurately and fully explain the heavenly Father-Son relationship. That God would need psychological help is obviously neither true nor possible, thus your conclusion is rendered nonsensical. It begs for a better analogy or perhaps even better, none at all. Again i see the myopic focus on God’s love, as if this one quality, if you will, must predominate any and all others. We are also told that God is Spirit. Should we then insist that this quality must predominate all others? There is no scriptural reason for this insistence that “love” must rule. We are told that God is many things…love, Spirit, righteous, wrathful….etc. Who decides which, if any, predominate. Love, i fear, only does so because we humans find it “attractive, comforting, etc.”, or perhaps we focus on it because we fear it not being predominate.
There will be no way, in this life, that we will be able to comprehend the fullness of God. Anyone who isolates an individual quality or essence of God for the purpose of dominance over all others is illustrating little more than personal preference.
Certainly we see God “being” many different qualities at many different times. This does not necessarily indicate that any of those qualities are dominant over all the others. It merely points out our inability to comprehend God in all His fullness. The schizophrenia is in our understanding, NOT God’s behavior. Trying to restrain God from being more than we can understand, or approve of, is indicative of our pride, our unwillingness to accept the inevitable; we do not and cannot understand God in His fullness. What seems contradictory to us is often spoken of God, sometimes within the same verse or passage, i.e. love, compassion, mercy, etc. contrasted with wrath, judgment. Obviously the inspired writers saw no inherent problem with this, or if they did, they didn’t write about it.
One thing Jesus spoke of more than any other person in the bible story was hell. If one will just allow the words to speak for themselves, it becomes, however painful or hard to accept, that hell is real, and it is eternal. All the hand wringing and textual gymnastics in the world do not change this fact. And those words are coming from the ONE who embodies God’s love in the flesh, among other qualities.
Personally, the only reason i believe hell is eternal is because the Word says so. However much i may wish it were different, it isn’t. Now if it turns out God actually does annihilate those who reject Him, fine. Hopefully, i have no dog in that hunt. It’s not like i look forward to sitting in a viewing booth, watching people suffer. I wonder, however, if those who virtually “demand” that God do so, or perhaps save everyone eventually, have given serious thought to what sin is, what it infects, and it’s consequences throughout history. Even more so, have they given any thought, any prolonged meditation on what the quality of “holiness” is, and God’s refusal to “look upon sin”? As mysterious as that may seem (I mean, doesn’t God “see” everything?), it’s just one of so many things about God beyond our ability to understand. And the main reason for that is that we are not God. Not even remotely close. Not even an “atom” in the universe of His being, so to speak. If however, God does save everyone eventually (after, as some suggest, torturing unbelievers with His love until they “give up” and accept it), then why did Christ die? And who for? Not everyone, despite the attempts to isolate words such as “all” or “the world” while ignoring both context and the full teaching of biblical atonement.
As i have stated before, if the “eternal” in eternal torment doesn’t really mean eternal (as in for all time), then perhaps the “eternal” in eternal life doesn’t mean forever either. Right? On what basis you would reject the one and accept the other? Certainly not according to the definition of the word. Certainly not scripture, for achieving correct biblical understanding is not a mathematical formula, as in 5 “loves” are more than 2 “wraths”. Scripture does not contradict itself (our understanding certainly does), when properly understood. Nor does God. May i suggest to you and others reading this that your focus be more on understanding, or accepting that you can’t understand, God in His fullness, and less on finding a God that you, intellectually and emotionally, can “live with”, a god that tickles the ears and eases the conscience. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. May i suggest that where there is no fear (awe, humility), there is either no wisdom, real wisdom, or that whatever wisdom one might think they have is built on a false foundation, cracking bricks mortared with pride. Thanks for sharing.
LikeLike
I will respond in a blog post soon.
LikeLike
My latest blog is in response to your comment.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on New Horizons.
LikeLiked by 1 person