MAKING SOME SENSE OUT OF HELL

We are embarrassed by the doctrine of hell. To our Western sensibilities, this doctrine is entirely unacceptable. The skeptic reasons that if God is love, He has absolutely no reason to condemn His creations to endless torture simply because they cannot believe in such a God. Atheist Robert Ingersoll (1833-99) described hell in this manner:

·       “Eternal punishment must be eternal cruelty…and I do not see how any man, unless he has the brain of an idiot, or the heart of a wild beast, can believe in eternal punishment.”

Such attacks make us Christians wonder how we can believe in such a “cruel” doctrine.

Besides this, the skeptic regards the teaching about deathbed conversions as totally unjust, since it makes Hitler as eligible for entry into heaven as Socrates.

Despite these attacks, we shy away from defending this critical doctrine. Why? For one thing, we don’t fully understand the doctrine of hell. Besides, pastors seldom preach on heaven and hell. Furthermore, expecting a comprehensive explanation from God on this subject is as unrealistic as a first grader expecting his teacher to give him a complete overview of mathematics before he will accept addition and subtraction. Therefore, we feel defenseless and vulnerable.

While the Scriptures assure us that God will judge justly, we are left wondering how this could be in the face of the challenges. Meanwhile, let’s take a look at what we do know. Scripture clearly teaches us that it is not a matter of the skeptic’s inability to believe but their unwillingness to believe:

•       And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they KNOW God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. (Romans 1:28-32 ESV)

According to the Scriptures, the skeptic knows the truth but is unwilling to connect the dots. The more that science uncovers, the more it becomes apparent that everything is designed. Even the smallest atom reveals profound elements of design. However, the skeptic is content to rest on the faith that eventually naturalism will provide an explanation for all the appearances of design. NYU Professor of Philosophy and avowed atheist, Thomas Nagel, has taught for more than 50 years. He has admitted that atheism is a choice rather than a lack of evidence for God:

• For a long time I have found the materialist account [that the world consists of nothing more than molecules in motion] of how we and our fellow organisms came to exist hard to believe, including the standard version of how evolutionary process works. The more details we learn about the chemical basis of life and the intricacy of the genetic code, the more unbelievable the standard historical account becomes…The current orthodoxy about the cosmic order is the product of governing assumptions that are unsupported, and that it flies in the face of common sense. (Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False, 5)

Skeptics are often aware of the inconsistencies embedded in their naturalistic faith. For example, they propose that life has intrinsic meaning even within a meaningless, purposeless universe. This is just a boldfaced contradiction and an attempt to avoid the obvious – God.

Sometimes, the skeptic is more honest about his dilemma. He will claim that we do not have freewill, but, instead, we are left with no choice but to live as if we do. Why does he have this dilemma? Rejecting God is like removing the bottom button on his shirt. No matter how many times he tries to button it, his buttons will always be out-of-place.

This can be seen in many ways. The skeptic rejects objective moral absolutes in favor of moral and cultural relativism. However, he finds that he is unable to live his life without making objective moral judgments. Whenever he says, “This is not right,” he contradicts his own skepticism. This is because he knows God but refuses to acknowledge Him. As Scripture charges, he is “without excuse” (Romans 1:18-32; 2:14-16):

·       For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. (Romans 1:20)

Underlying the skeptics’ condemnation of the idea of hell and death bed conversions is the common assumption that some are good and deserving of eternal life, if such a thing exists. We are either unwilling or unable to see through God’s holy eyes and instead see superficially through Western eyes. We therefore regard some as worthy and others as unworthy. Of course, our inflated egos place us among the “worthy.”

Instead, we all fall far short of God’s righteous standards (Romans 3:10-16, 23;) and deserve death (Romans 6:23). Consequently, nothing will bridge the impassable divide between hell and heaven apart from the mercy of God. In addition to this, the rejection of God is morally culpable, and through this rejection, we condemn ourselves and cut ourselves off from the mercy of God:

·       And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. (Hebrews 11:6)

Nevertheless, some atheists have been refreshingly honest about their rejection of God. They have been willing to admit that they are atheists because they want there not to be a God.  The atheist and author of the Brave New World, Aldous Huxley, explained his rejection of the Christian faith:

·       I had motives for not wanting the world to have a meaning [and moral absolutes]; consequently assumed that it had none…We don’t know because we don’t want to know. It is our will that decides how and upon what subjects we shall use our intelligence. Those who detect no meaning in the world generally do so because, for one reason or another, it suits their books that the world should be meaningless. (Ends and Mean)

Huxley is not alone. Thomas Nagel made a similar disclosure:

• I confess to an ungrounded assumption of my own, in not finding it possible to regard the design alternative as a real option. I lack the sensus divinitatis that enables – indeed compels – so many people to see in the world the expression of divine purpose… (Nagel,12)

Returning to eternal judgment: How are we to make sense of hell? More specifically, how can we both believe that God is love and is just, and yet still believe in an eternal judgment?

The skeptic enjoys portraying the doctrine of hell in the worst possible light. They describe a God who gleefully stokes the fires of hell for all eternity. However, the Biblical teaching on the subject fails to sustain such a picture of God. For one thing, much of the language describing hell should not be taken literally. For example, hell is described variously as both “outer-darkness” and a “furnace of fire,” according to Jesus:

• “and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 13:42)

• Matthew 22:13 “Then the king said to the servants, 'Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'”

Evidently, these descriptions should not be taken literally. We also wrongly assume that “weeping…and gnashing of teeth” is the result of God stoking fires. However, Jesus equated this torment with eternally missing out on the “benefits”:

• "There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. (Luke 13:28)

This suggests that the torments of eternal punishment might not be proactively brought about by God. Instead, it seems that the condemned might even prefer torment to an eternity in the presence of God. In the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man who finds himself in a place of torment once he dies. This man doesn’t confess his sins in order to be with God but merely requests that his torment might be mitigated (Luke 16:19-31). Likewise, in their discussion with the Lord following their transgression, Adam and Eve never confess their sin or ask for another chance to remain in the intimate presence of God (Genesis 3). There are also many Biblical accounts of people fleeing the presence of God, even preferring the mountains to fall upon them (Revelation 6:15-16; 20:11; Isaiah 2:20-22; Psalm 1:5; Malachi 3:2; Luke 21:36; Deuteronomy 5:25).

This leads us to consider the likelihood that hell is primarily self-chosen. It makes sense that if we hated the Light in this life, we will certainly hate and flee from it in the next, thereby condemning ourselves:

•       “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. This is the verdict [“Judgment”]: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.” (John 3:17-19; Isaiah 33:14-15; John 12:47)

This suggests that God gives us exactly what we want. If we want to be with Him for all eternity, we got it. If we don’t, we got that too!

Also, there are indications that God does not judge superficially as we do. Instead, according to Jesus, we will be judged according to our deeds and the condition of our heart:

•       "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say to you, it will be MORE TOLERABLE for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you.” (Matthew 11:21-22)

•        “And that servant who knew his master’s will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating. But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.” (Luke 12:47-48; Jeremiah 17:10)

It is worthy of note that those who have been given the most are most inclined to reject and vilify God. According to these teachings, they will be judged severely. There is also the possibility of annihilation:

•       "Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to DESTROY BOTH SOUL AND BODY in hell. (Matthew 10:28 NASB)

If the condemned cease to exist, God cannot be blamed. He had granted them life for a limited time. There is therefore nothing unjust about terminating this gift of life.

All of this doesn’t suggest that I can provide a comprehensive portrait of hell and heaven. I can’t. I just wish to show that there are many possible ways to reconcile eternal judgment with God’s attributes. There is also a slim possibility of a second chance:

·       For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water…For this is why the gospel was preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does. (1 Peter 3:18-20; 4:6)

Admittedly, these considerations will not impress skeptic. However, I hope that these possibilities might put our minds at rest. Nor is there anything amiss with our faith because many questions remain unanswered (Deuteronomy 29:29). Similarly, we do not reject science because it does not answer even the most basic questions like, “What is light, matter, space, or time?”

I fear that we regard our own understanding more highly than we ought (Proverbs 3:5-6). Job did and, from his limited perspective, brought charges of “injustice” against God. However, God humbled him by asking Job a series of questions, none of which could Job answer. However, he got the point. If he was unable to answer the basics, how could he suppose that he had enough knowledge to indict God? Job therefore repented and was forgiven.

I have come to a place of peace regarding the doctrine of eternal judgment. Admittedly, I do not have all the questions answered, but I am satisfied that I know the One in whom I have believed.