Do we deserve Hell?

[Not David]

Growing up Evangelical, I always heard that in sermons and Biblical studies. How does Orthodoxy view this statement?

 

[☦Marius☦]

Yes we all deserve hell. Going to hell is a result of failure to unify with the trinity and the natural result. Unlike evangelicals we believe there is a chance after death for salvation. Also the circumstances of hell are very different. Rather then just a simple burning pit, it is the foreign holiness of God that is burning those unfortunate enough to not be in communion. Completely cut off from all live they are scorched by God's perfection. As for why we deserve it, we all fall short of being Christ like, with the exception of very few. We all choose to sin, we all choose to rebel.

 

[Not David]

Yes we all deserve hell. Going to hell is a result of failure to unify with the trinity and the natural result. Unlike evangelicals we believe there is a chance after death for salvation. Also the circumstances of hell are very different. Rather then just a simple burning pit, it is the foreign holiness of God that is burning those unfortunate enough to not be in communion. Completely cut off from all live they are scorched by God's perfection. As for why we deserve it, we all fall short of being Christ like, with the exception of very few. We all choose to sin, we all choose to rebel.

Interesting, though the Orthodox Church does not focus a lot on the "We deserve hell" idea.

 

[Hieronymus]

Death.
We deserve death, for the wages of sin is death.

Growing up Evangelical, I always heard that in sermons and Biblical studies. How does Orthodoxy view this statement?

 

[Monk Brendan]

Growing up Evangelical, I always heard that in sermons and Biblical studies. How does Orthodoxy view this statement?

Growing up Evangelical, I always heard that in sermons and Biblical studies. How does Orthodoxy view this statement?

Read THE RIVER OF FIRE by Dr. Alexandre Kalimiros.

As the Fathers say, the love of God will be intense torment in the next life for those who have not obtained it in this one.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I think it's basically the wrong question to ask from an Orthodox point of view.

Maybe it is more true that unregenerate lives make us "fitting for hell" - at least that's the logical opposite that being regenerated and cooperating with the grace of God makes us fitted for being in communion with Him in eternity.

What we "deserve" smacks of legality.

We can and did do nothing to "deserve heaven" though.

But we are by our very existence made in the image of God, and that is enough that He desires to save us.

That's as close as I can get to answering that question from what I've learned in Orthodoxy. Again, probably simply not the right question to ask.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Growing up Evangelical, I always heard that in sermons and Biblical studies. How does Orthodoxy view this statement?

The line you mention is much more of a Calvinist, Augustinian one. (While there are scriptures that support the idea, the way it is used in casual conversation comes from the former mentioned tradition). The thread I posted a few days ago explains it. Augustine, Manichaeism and the Good


Lee writes: “But since, according to Augustine, God is good and he is the only ground of existence, then how can something evil come out of the good God? In the affirmation of a Trinitarian monism, Augustine is faced with the challenge of explaining the total goodness of the universe despite the presence of evil in it. To put it in Manichaean terms, Augustine must show that the universe is wholly beautiful.” (p.154)


Is the origin of evil, one’s voluntary defection from God? Or, is the origin of evil, God’s pre-determination that evil is a creation of God that is to be manifested, in order for God to display the sum total of His various attributes?

Lee writes: “In the preceding discussion, we have shown the first part of Manichaean influence on Augustine’s doctrine of predestination by demonstrating that the doctrine assumes a two-tiered framework of cosmic order, which is his response to the Manichaean view of the universe. While the Manichees believe that the universe is an admixture of both good and evil, Augustine thinks that it is good, therefore beautiful, as a whole.” (p.163)

So what should we say, it’s all good, because it comes from God?

Lee writes: “[Augustine] draws on the Manichees for insights of experience of personal evil, borrowing from them the double notion of ‘wickedness’ and ‘mortality,’ although he has substantially transformed these simplistic ideas into an elaborate theory that eventually does away with dualism.” (p.169)

Lee writes: “It is recognized that in Contra Fortunatum (392) Augustine, due to Fortunatus’ invocation of Pualine support for the notion of the inevitability of evil, is forced to focus on Paul’s notion of the flesh as an intrinsic principle rebellious to what is instituted by God.” (p.172)

 

[ArmyMatt]

we deserve hell in that by our sins, we choose it.

 

[Not David]

The line you mention is much more of a Calvinist, Augustinian one. (While there are scriptures that support the idea, the way it is used in casual conversation comes from the former mentioned tradition). The thread I posted a few days ago explains it. Augustine, Manichaeism and the Good


Lee writes: “But since, according to Augustine, God is good and he is the only ground of existence, then how can something evil come out of the good God? In the affirmation of a Trinitarian monism, Augustine is faced with the challenge of explaining the total goodness of the universe despite the presence of evil in it. To put it in Manichaean terms, Augustine must show that the universe is wholly beautiful.” (p.154)


Is the origin of evil, one’s voluntary defection from God? Or, is the origin of evil, God’s pre-determination that evil is a creation of God that is to be manifested, in order for God to display the sum total of His various attributes?

Lee writes: “In the preceding discussion, we have shown the first part of Manichaean influence on Augustine’s doctrine of predestination by demonstrating that the doctrine assumes a two-tiered framework of cosmic order, which is his response to the Manichaean view of the universe. While the Manichees believe that the universe is an admixture of both good and evil, Augustine thinks that it is good, therefore beautiful, as a whole.” (p.163)

So what should we say, it’s all good, because it comes from God?

Lee writes: “[Augustine] draws on the Manichees for insights of experience of personal evil, borrowing from them the double notion of ‘wickedness’ and ‘mortality,’ although he has substantially transformed these simplistic ideas into an elaborate theory that eventually does away with dualism.” (p.169)

Lee writes: “It is recognized that in Contra Fortunatum (392) Augustine, due to Fortunatus’ invocation of Pualine support for the notion of the inevitability of evil, is forced to focus on Paul’s notion of the flesh as an intrinsic principle rebellious to what is instituted by God.” (p.172)

What do you feel this statement could be considered a Calvinist one?

 

[Pavel Mosko]

What do you feel this statement could be considered a Calvinist one?

I guess I would have to get into some compare and contrast. Like the Father mentioned we are evil etc. worthy of hell etc. by choosing out sins.


But this phrase tend to get used with the notion that people are evil by definition, basically original sin etc. Especially when it comes to issues of theodicy etc. That basically is where I see it as being Calvinist / Augustinian. The Goodness of God ends up being because of "divine cosmic ordering" aka predestination and God exercising His Sovereignty. It ends up being like "the other Golden rule". (The person with the gold (power) makes the rules). Concerning issues like theodicy, when it comes to suffering etc. in the world it is easy when trying to deal with these things to inadvertently argue for Maltheism. Basically even though God by definition is good, God basically comes across in an unsympathetic way much like the Gnostic Demiurge.

 

[prodromos]

None of us deserve God's love, but that is what we are going to be immersed in on the last day. If we don't love God then that is going to be hell for us.

 

[trulytheone]

As far as I understand Eastern Orthodox belief, all sins deserve eternal physical death: separation between the body & the soul with the nous. But because of Christ's Resurrection, eternal physical death is no longer an option; now you have an option of either following Him to glory or disobeying Him to your eternal detriment.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Orthodoxy has changed how I view the Lord, and how I see His relationship with us.

Do we “deserve” hell? I will echo Anastasia’s response, which was beautifully stated. “Deserve” isn’t an Orthodox angle. That language is very Western along with “valid” and “satisfaction” and other terms we pretty much don’t use.

God created us all lovingly. He wants us to grow in love and become more like Him. Theosis was and is our destiny, but the Evil One created a sad detour. He created a road block, attempted a trap. But God ransomed is from Satans stupidity and hubris.

Saying humans “deserve” hell is like saying a person deserves to be in a car accident when they set out on the road or people deserve to get eaten by mountain lions when they go camping, or deserve to get shark-bites swimming in the ocean. Humans, without God, can’t find heaven just like a person will drown if not shown to swim, will crash without guidance in drivers training, will get lost in the woods with no navigation or map. It’s not so much about deserving punishment as it is NEEDING God. He is our spiritual navigation, teacher, guide, protector, and ultimately our final destination. Fact is, a ton of people ARE going to hell....not out of this preloaded destiny of Arthur Brown-like Fire, not because of a default planned punishment, but because they WILLFULLY don’t want to be taught, want to fly blind, turn inward, follow the WORLD, and reject the final destination.

Drowning happens when you go into the ocean alone diving off a gorge hating your swim teacher. You don’t deserve to drown, but you likely will.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Orthodoxy has changed how I view the Lord, and how I see His relationship with us.

Do we “deserve” hell? I will echo Anastasia’s response, which was beautifully stated. “Deserve” isn’t an Orthodox angle. That language is very Western along with “valid” and “satisfaction” and other terms we pretty much don’t use.

God created us all lovingly. He wants us to grow in love and become more like Him. Theosis was and is our destiny, but the Evil One created a sad detour. He created a road block, attempted a trap. But God ransomed is from Satans stupidity and hubris.

Saying humans “deserve” hell is like saying a person deserves to be in a car accident when they set out on the road or people deserve to get eaten by mountain lions when they go camping, or deserve to get shark-bites swimming in the ocean. Humans, without God, can’t find heaven just like a person will drown if not shown to swim, will crash without guidance in drivers training, will get lost in the woods with no navigation or map. It’s not so much about deserving punishment as it is NEEDING God. He is our spiritual navigation, teacher, guide, protector, and ultimately our final destination. Fact is, a ton of people ARE going to hell....not out of this preloaded destiny of Arthur Brown-like Fire, not because of a default planned punishment, but because they WILLFULLY don’t want to be taught, want to fly blind, turn inward, follow the WORLD, and reject the final destination.

Drowning happens when you go into the ocean alone diving off a gorge hating your swim teacher. You don’t deserve to drown, but you likely will.

Thank you. I know you said you agreed with me, but I think you stated this so much more clearly. Even now after several years, I'm still in awe when I reflect on how differently I see God and our relationship with Him. But the old "we all 'deserve' hell" is part of a different mindset, and one I've left behind - that was only concerned with God measuring us as judge. I know we WILL BE judged, but that is not the primary light in which our relationship with Him exists. Thank God!

 

[“Paisios”]

Growing up Evangelical, I always heard that in sermons and Biblical studies. How does Orthodoxy view this statement?

I am sure that I do. I wouldn’t want to speak for others.

 

[trulytheone]

Could an Eastern Orthodox state that the judicial view is simply an analogy of how God relates to us; but in reality the correct view was the Christus Victor?

 

[Andrei D]

Could an Eastern Orthodox state that the judicial view is simply an analogy of how God relates to us; but in reality the correct view was the Christus Victor?

No. We as Orthodox see things as a complete "package" and don't really like two word "zingers" because they simplify and mislead. We state this exactly as it is and every aspect is important: "You spoke to us through Your Son Himself, through whom You created the ages. He, being the splendor of Your glory and the image of Your being, upholding all things by the word of His power, thought it not robbery to be equal with You, God and Father. But, being God before all ages, He appeared on earth and lived with humankind. Becoming incarnate from a holy Virgin, He emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, conforming to the body of our lowliness, that He might change us in the likeness of the image of His glory. For, since through man sin came into the world and through sin death, it pleased Your only begotten Son, who is in Your bosom, God and Father, born of a woman, the holy Theotokos and ever virgin Mary; born under the law, to condemn sin in His flesh, so that those who died in Adam may be brought to life in Him, Your Christ. He lived in this world, and gave us precepts of salvation. Releasing us from the delusions of idolatry, He guided us to the sure knowledge of You, the true God and Father. He acquired us for Himself, as His chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation. Having cleansed us by water and sanctified us with the Holy Spirit, He gave Himself as ransom to death in which we were held captive, sold under sin. Descending into Hades through the cross, that He might fill all things with Himself, He loosed the bonds of death. He rose on the third day, having opened a path for all flesh to the resurrection from the dead, since it was not possible that the Author of life would be dominated by corruption. So He became the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep, the first born of the dead, that He might be Himself the first in all things. Ascending into heaven, He sat at the right hand of Your majesty on high and He will come to render to each according to his works. " +++ (Liturgy of St. Basil the Great)

 

[ArmyMatt]

Could an Eastern Orthodox state that the judicial view is simply an analogy of how God relates to us; but in reality the correct view was the Christus Victor?

we would say they are both correct. Christus Victor IS the juridical view which IS the invitation to the Bridal Feast which IS the holistic healing view, etc.

 

[Not David]

I believe there is also the Ramson theory of atonement and Recapitulation theory.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

The atonement is so spiritually deep and the single most significant Event in the history of the universe. It cannot be reduced to one descriptor or category. Father Matt is correct. It is so multi-faceted! It is a ransom, a mouse trap, Christus Victor, an atonement, and so much more. Our 3-pound brains can’t fathom it.