snipped to save room
-CryptoLutheran
Allow me to supplement this excellent post by citing an article from one of my favorite thinkers, David Hemlock:
"Isa 33:14-15 describes God as a consuming fire that devours the wicked, but does not harm the righteous. The flames of hell have been described as God's love as experienced by those who hate Him and refuse His love obstinately until the end of eternity (G. Campbell Morgan). This is something different from the purposeful torture hell is often conceived to be. But still, why must anyone suffer eternally? Is the maker of heaven and earth who consigns some to eternal suffering still unjust, or even wicked, as some claim today?
Many Christians such as C. S. Lewis hold that no one will suffer eternity in hell that does not willfully and adamantly reject God and the goodness/love which flows from and is consonant with him (that is the official position of Eastern Orthodoxy, for example). This softens some, but not all of the serious objections which may be raised concerning the doctrine of hell.
Hell and/or judgment with infinite consequences (e.g. eternal annihilation) may both be described as instances of infinite and everlasting penalties for finite and temporal offenses. Who are the offenders? Individuals who did not choose to exist, born into an environment (genetic, cultural, familial, geographical) not of their choosing, and facing an eternal punishment the possibility of which they were (potentially) unaware. Today many argue a single death for crimes however heinous is immoral. What then may be said of endless agony, of the worm that never dies, a fire that is never quenched?
What if, in spite of all the endless weeping and gnashing of teeth, the inhabitants in hell might conceive their reality to be the better way with only God and the inhabitants of a better place knowing or believing differently? If some individuals would forever choose what harms over what is loving where these conflict (it is impossible to maximize two independent variables), it is not unreasonable to think there could be no heaven apart from harm without separation of some kind. Perhaps the hell of separation, agonizing as it is known to be to God, will be preferable to the inhabitants of hell itself or at least some of them- to non-existence or never-existence. In such a case it would be preferable in the eyes of the sufferers themselves for God to bring into existence beings who would suffer eternal agony. In such a situation annihilation would be the greater cruelty. Scripture suggests there are degrees of suffering in hell (more tolerable on the day of judgment Mt 11:21-24; cf. he who did not know in 12:47-4). This may clearly suggest degrees of amelioration of suffering by hells eternal Caretaker. Perhaps there are multiple possibilities rather than a singular fate for all who stand in opposition to love with annihilation vs. eternity as options rather than a forced either/or. Or perhaps God can truly know that even individuals who would choose annihilation for themselves are simply making a mistake, as illustrated in the song lyrics you dont know what youve got till its gone. God could know better. Perhaps the sufferings of hell are better than annihilation, as life in this beautiful, wonderful, miserable horrible world is generally better than the alternative (else a majority would choose suicide). Or perhaps the whole idea implies God is unjust, cruel, and/or incredible as Hitchens and others claim. It seems clear to me that the latter view can no more be stated without a perhaps than any of the others named above, though this is all too seldom recognized. Inductive/abductive trust/mistrust decides which perhaps we will lean towards, not facts, but all the options above have a degree of perhaps, not just the ones that make God look like something less than an Ogre. It must be stated unequivocally that the word perhaps pertains no less so to any presumption that a morally problematic situation pertains to the biblical hell. It simply cannot be established deductively or exegetically that hell is morally problematic. And nothing surrounding this issue, I think, firmly or finally rules out a good and merciful just and holy God who well might opt for eternal separation without contradicting attributes we would think of as adequately commendable. We are not easily content to say we simply do not know, and cannot expect to know, or that sources of certainty are unavailable to us. But God has left the details more open-ended than is often realized. He has told us enough to suspect there is a bridge out ahead, and that there is a real danger of taking a wrong road, but He has not painted the kind of picture Dante, the Greeks with their Tartarus, and others have which have so strongly influenced Western imagination. Consider the following descriptions of hell by Donald Bloesch (Heaven and Hell in Bloesch, Donald, Essentials of Evangelical Theology, Vol. 2, pp. 211-234):
While he saw hell as a necessary concomitant of the justice of God, Thomas Aquinas did not divorce Gods justice from his love. The divine love is related to hell for the purpose of mitigating the sufferings of the damned. In his view the purpose of hell is not exclusively retributive. Moreover, it serves as a deterrent to evil and as a basis for moral order in the universe
Man is in hell not because God is absent but because he is present, and therefore man is constantly reminded of his guilt and infamy. Hell is exclusion from communion with God, but not exclusion from the presence of God (we interpret 2 Thess 1:9 as referring to an exclusion from mans side but not from Gods side. Man shuts himself off from the salvation of the Lord and from the glory of his might, but he cannot escape from this glory (Phil 2:9-11). Cf. Revelation 14:10 which speaks of sinners in hell being tormented in the presence of the Lamb
The metaphor that most nearly describes hell is not a concentration camp presided over by the devil, but a sanitorium for sick souls who are ministered to by Jesus Christ
His light still shines even in the darkness of mans hell
We can rest assured that those in hell are in the hands of a God who is both righteous and merciful, and we can trust that his mercy as well as his justice will be manifest among them, though this does not mean final universal salvation.
Hell is not outside of the compass of Gods mercy nor the sphere of his kingdom, and in this sense we call it the last refuge of the sinner
only rejection of the grace of God keeps us in hell
the only sin that is unforgivable is the sin against the Holy Spirit, rejecting and refusing the offer of divine grace (cf. Mt 12:31, 32; Mk 3:28, 29; Heb 12:25).
Hell will not be seen as an evil, but as the place where those who reject Christ are still cared for by Christ and not simply as Lord and Judge but as Savior and Healer
we should not forget that God placed upon Cain a sign for his protection, even though he was condemned to wander in a far country
God will punish our transgressions, but he will not remove from us his steadfast love or be false to his faithfulness (Ps 89:31-34) (Heaven and Hell in Bloesch, Donald, Essentials of Evangelical Theology, Vol. 2, pp. 211-234)
Thou grantest grace even to those who will forever experience the rigor of they justice Francois Fenelon
This viewpoint represents the most ancient trajectory of Christian theology and has long been a standard of the Christian East:
Christ is the judge; and yet, from another point of view, it is we who pronounce judgment upon ourselves. If anyone is in hell, it is not because God has imprisoned him there, but because that is where he himself has chosen to be. The lost in hell are self-condemned, self-enslaved; it has rightly been said that the doors of hell are locked from the inside. How can a God of love accept that even a single one of the creatures whom he has made should remain for ever in hell? There is a mystery here which, from our standpoint in this present life, we cannot hope to fathom. The best we can do is to hold in balance two truths, contrasting but not contradictory. First, God has given free will to man, and so to all eternity it lies in mans power to reject God. Secondly, love signifies compassion, involvement, and so, if there are any who remain eternally in hell, in some sense God is also there with them. It is written in the Psalms, If I go down to hell, thou art there also (139:7); and St. Isaac the Syrian says, It is wrong to imagine that sinners in hell are cut off from the love of God. Divine love is everywhere, and rejects no one. But we on our side are free to reject divine love; we cannot however, do so without inflicting pain on ourselves, and the more final our rejection the more final our suffering (Kallistos Ware, The Orthodox Way, pp. 135-136).
THE NECESSITY OF SEPARATION
The NT claims that God asks nothing of us that does not ultimately boil down to the requirement that we act according to the demands of love. Is this too much to ask?
Romans 13:8-11: Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. For this, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Love does no wrong to a neighbor; love therefore is the fulfillment of the law. And this do, knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed.
sin consists in mans choosing to go his own way rather than follow God. Throughout life, man says to God in effect, Leave me alone. Hell, the absence of God, [and the absence of love among the people one is with] is Gods simply giving man at last what he has always asked for. It is not God, but mans own choice that sends man to hell. (Erickson, Millard, Christian Theology, p. 432).
Holy wrath sounds like an oxymoron/contradiction to the contemporary mind, but it is an inseparable part of the biblical portrayal of Gods holiness. How should a holy God respond to evil? Complete indifference to evil by anyone amounts to moral bankruptcy, but this would be especially so for God. This is widely recognized even by atheists, agnostics, and philosophers who frequently ask Why does God allow it?! of evil. God's implacable opposition to every form of moral evil is disturbing and even offensive to so many, largely because this kind of opposition inevitably reaches the human heart that beats within. It reaches into you; it reaches into me. It seems that God cannot win the popularity game with us. If he does not resist evil, he is evil. If he resists evil, he resists us and we resent him for that. God's anger is not the uncontrollable and disreputable outburst of passion that human anger often is, but instead is a holy and blameless opposition to all that is destructive of selves, societies, and environments (i.e. sin). Yet God does not merely desire to oppose and chasten; he desires to heal us. Still, mercy must not be separate from opposition to evil, or God is indifferent to evil once again. Gods holiness is a holy wrath as equally as it is a holy love or it is bankrupt because it is impotent to eradicate evil. Traditional Christian eschatology sees this tension as having eternal consequences. It is hard to see how God could provide a heaven for anyone if it included those who eternally would refuse to turn to evil. It is hard to imagine a heaven with malevolent hatred, eternal strife, jealousy, child molestation, theft, etc. Even heaven cannot be without all such things unless all those who populate it are willing to at least approximate doing the will of God rather than their own while residing there. If Gods policy is merely to forgive and let everyone continue to live as sinfully as they wish throughout eternity, then everyone is going to hell! (or at the very least, heaven would be no better than the present world). Gods call, often ignored, doubted, partitioned, or otherwise explained away is repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, or ye will all likewise perish. C. S. Lewis claimed that in the final judgment there will be only two classes of people: those who say to God "Thy will be done" and those to whom God will say "thy will be done." I tend to imagine a river of tears flowing from Gods eyes in the latter case. Here yet again the holiness of God is often challenged. Especially here! Yet those who know God are more than reasonable to suspect that the judge of all the earth will judge rightly.
All of our sins send us to hell, but only rejection of the grace of God keeps us in hell
The only sin that is unforgivable is the sin against the Holy Spirit, rejecting and refusing the offer of divine grace
Donald Bloesch
It is salvation or perdition. Salvation lies ahead; perdition behind for everyone who turns back, whatever it is he sees (Soren Kierkegaard, Concluding Unscientific Postscript, trans. David F. Swenson (Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1944, p. 533).
CONCLUSION
To whom did Jesus address his gracious words of invitation and promise? To people who were obviously guilty dishonest tax collectors, prostitutes, political and social outcasts rejected by respectable people. And to whom did he address his sternest warning of hell-fire and eternal misery? He almost never mentioned hell except when he spoke to the scribes and Pharisees the very moral, very religious, complacent church-going people of his day -Guthrie, Shirley, Christian Doctrine, p. 398-399.
The NT also gives the additional warning that the wrath and condemnation of God will fall not only upon the outside world but even more upon the sons of the kingdom, those to whom the message of salvation is first delivered. Jesus says that it is the sons of the kingdom who will be cast into the outer darkness (Mat 8:12; 13:41, 42; 24:45-51). Even the servants who have been set over the household of the Lord will suffer condemnation (Matt 24:45-51). We can fall from grace through our negligence and stubbornness (2 Pet 1:9-11). -Bloesch, Donald, Heaven and Hell, in Essentials of Evangelical Theology, Vol. 2, p. 213.
For this reason we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it. For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? -Hebrews 2:1-3
ABBA'S FOOL,
