The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Why affirm belief in Hell?

Evangelical Universalism
#1

I’ve been watching a video on “Love Wins” (youtube.com/watch?v=NDf9NlB0D8Y) and enjoying it. It has spurred a question though concerning Universalist’s use of the word Hell. In short, in the video Rev. Bradley counters 7 Myths concerning Universalism, the first being that “Universalists do not believe in Hell”. He then proceeds to affirm that Universalists do believe in Hell, but that ultimately all shall be saved from Hell.

The problem with this that I have is that Hell is commonly understood to be “Endless Conscious Torment that a person is cast into after judgment by God.” What Bradley does though is Redifine Hell as something more like Purgatory.

Frankly, I’ve come to be forthright that I no longer believe in Hell because I find the concept of ECT to be neither Biblical nor Logical. Scripture does not once name Hell or warn of Hell (ECT). It does warn of judgment and punishment of sin, but not Hell. And judgment and punishment of sin is based on how we actually live our lives, not just what we profess to believe. And judgment is for believer and unbeliever alike. In fact, judgment begins with us believers, and to whom much is given much is required! Frankly, studying judgment scares the hell out of me! And scripture does not affirm that Jesus saves us from Hell, but from “this present evil age”, Gal.1.4.

Anyhow, what are your thoughts on affirming belief in Hell?

#2

Sherman,

You and I at least appear to be on the same page concerning Scripture and ‘hell,’ and I agree with each of your points! So it seems to me that while saying that we believe in Hell reinforces a mistaken impression of our view, the dilemma is that accepting our critics language that we don’t believe in ‘hell’ is perceived by most evangelicals as agreeing that we think everyone gets a pass on God’s judgment (perhaps as in ultra-Universalism). I think that’s why Parrry and others may prefer to say that we believe in hell, and then try to clarify their reinterpretation of what they mean by hell. It seems like affirming or denying ‘hell’ leaves us still stuck with a large need to explain what that doesn’t and does mean.

#3

Anyhow, what are your thoughts on affirming belief in Hell?

I think the word “hell” is used a little loosely by the CU to mean judgment of some kind. Judgment usually means a punishment/restoration process without any details. A lake of fire exists but is also is opaque. Is it God, is it a lake, is it spiritual, is it physical? There are some things mentioned at the end of Isaiah but it’s not clear if that matches up with the LOF. We have to trust God.

#4

I also think the term Hell is abused… Hell can mean":

A) Eternal Conscious Torture
B) Eternal Conscious Torment
C) Eternal Suffering
D) Eternal Sadness/Regret
E) Long Torturous Prison which ends in Death
G) Short Torture which ends in Death
H) Temporary Torturous Chastisement
I) Temporary Torment Chastisement
J) Temporary Suffering Chastisement
K) Temporary Sadness/Regret Chastisement

Sure, you could probably group some up together, maybe add a few more. But because Hell means so many different things to each person, it makes the word ambiguous in almost any context. I definitely believe in post mortem punishment. Whether it is done via regret once we know the truth, or done punitively, I am not sure. But I do not believe that God consigns anyone to suffer eternally, only as long as required to bring about the character desired.

#5

Actually, living in the culture that we do (I’m in America), I find it necessary to respond to questions like “Do you believe in God” or "What about Hell? or “Jesus said love is all we need” - anything like that, I ask: What do you mean by ‘god’/hell/Jesus??

Otherwise we are not talking about the ‘same thing’ 90% of the time.
(The real fun is when they ask if I believe in the Trinity - and I ask what do you mean by that? :wink: )

#6

It’s been my experience that most “universalists” DO indeed “believe in hell” as typically understood… and only vary on how that works out post-mortem in terms of length of time one endures “refinement” etc, either way it is STILL ultimately a salvation by one’s OWN efforts i.e., “coming to repentance” being the only chance of moving beyond it.

My position removes “hell” out of our arena and post-mortem understanding it purely as an historical pointer of all things related to the old covenant world, that being… hades / lake of fire = differing descriptives of Jerusalem’s AD70 end.

#7

I think it depends on the circumstances. I usually affirm a belief in Hell, because a denial is perceived as a denial of judgment and punishment against sin. Usually I try to turn the discussion to what the Bible actually says about “hell.”

Sonia

#8

Interesting question, Sherman. :smiley:

I suppose it depends on who I’m discussing it with. I certainly don’t believe in the traditional ETC “Hell” but as a purgatorial universalist, post-mortem “spiritual education” can serve the role of a finite “Hell” when discussing beliefs with a conservative Christian–it makes it easier for them to relate as they don’t have to totally drop the concept of Hell. I believe this is why George MacDonald acknowledges the reality of “Hell” and uses the Biblical images of refining fire, sulfur etc. Discussing this with an atheist, I would use different terminology and just talk about “spiritual education” and suffering the consequences of bad choices etc to rid us of our selfishnish and evil tendencies, I suppose. (Haven’t really discussed it with atheists that I remember, to be honest. This is a bit hypothetical for me. :wink: )

#9

I affirm it because it’s a likely reading of the Bible. I use the word hell to mean Lake Of Fire. Hell is a echo of the infinite worth of the glory of God. Those in hell stay evil forever and are therefore punished forever.

#10

In the “Authorized Version”, there are three words translated as “hell”

ἁδης (hadās) or “hades”. This word means “the place of the dead” and usually means “grave”, but the Greeks, and later Hebrews thought of it as a place where all “souls” go after death. Jesus used this common belief in his parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Actually “hell” is a good translation of this, since the original meaning of the English word “hell” was “a hidden place”. Older English texts spoke of lovers seeking a hell. Some people when losing a book, ask, “Where in the hell is my book?” which means “Where in the hidden place is my book?” Today people speak of “hilling potatoes”, but originally it was “helling potatoes”, that is hiding them by heaping ground around the plant so that the potatoes themselves wouldn’t be exposed to sunlight and turn green with chlorophyl. Clearly this is not the “hell” where the lost go, for everyone goes there.

ταρταροω (tartaroō) or “tartarus”. In the NT, this word is found only in 2 Peter 2:4 . According the author, the sinning angels were sent there and kept until the judgment. This also, is not the hell where the lost go.

γεενα (ge-ena) or “gehenna”. Jesus strongly warned his listeners about gehenna:

“You serpents, you brood of vipers, how will you escape the judgment of gehenna?” (Mt 23:33)

In my opinion, only gehenna corresponds to the modern concept of hell, in that in the resurrection of the unrighteous, those whose names are not in the Lamb’s book of life, will be sent there to be corrected. I say “there”, but I’m not sure whether gehenna is a place or a condition. I tend toward the latter. If “the lake of fire” is gehenna, then that indicates the purifying “fires” of God’s judgment will be applied there.

Some point out that gehenna is a garbage dump south of Jerusalem, and suggest that Jesus was warning people against having their bodies dumped in that dump rather than having a decent burial. Personally, I think that idea is quite a stretch.

#11

What is your experience of God? How does His Spirit affect you? When you read the scriptures who is this Jesus that you meet? An old mentor of mine used to speak of a scripture reading competition where many entered and where the required reading was Ps 23. Some complained when the prize went to a rather rough uneducated guy who actually stumbled as he read. The judges later explained that in their view the winner seemed to actually know the Shepherd of whom he was reading. What does this little tale have to do with the point of this thread? Just this, that when Jesus warned of Hell and judgment he was generally speaking to Jewish believers who were steeped in law. Hence " unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees you will not even see the Kingdom of Heaven" he says. Was his objective to shock them out of their faith in “the law” and into learning to trust in the God of their father David? it seems to me we can fear the judgment of God, and perhaps we should in one sense, but personally I look forward to embracing it in the beloved who will save me utterly from this body of sin. Chris

#12

I always affirm a belief in hell – first because I do believe in it, and second because if I don’t bring that up, people think that I think that Idi Amin will be sitting around in “heaven” feasting on roast baby. Which is ridiculous.

The thing is, ALL of us believe that the bondage to evil that causes people to DO evil to one another MUST be gotten rid of in some way. We just differ on the means, and what that will look like. For me, Jesus set us free, but until we fully enter into that freedom, we still continue to do evil – to obey our old master, sin. Paul said that if he continued to do what he hated (evil) then it was no longer he who did it, but sin that dwelt in him, and that only through Christ could he become free. But what about people who LIKE doing evil, who don’t WANT to be set free from it? God will not rip that thing they love out of their being, but He may burn it out by allowing His presence to be experienced by His rebellious, hateful children in the natural way it WOULD be experienced by those who (as Jason says) choose, because they WANT to so choose, to fondle their sins. They must pay (as GMac says) the uttermost farthing – which is to say, they must tender the forgiveness of their brethren that is owed, the repentance and sorrow for sin that is owed, etc. Otherwise they do stay in prison with the tormenters. (their guilt? their hate? their own filthiness?) At last resort, if they still refuse to let go that nasty pet they’ve been stroking, they must even suffer the outer darkness. God will remove Himself from them to the extent that He can do so without causing their existence to cease. As Tom Talbot points out so well, no sane person of free will (and the child must be sane and informed to have freedom) could possibly choose ultimate horror over ultimate delight throughout the unending ages.

This, along with the things many of us experience in this life, IS the meaning of hell to me. I make it a point to explain to people (if I’m given that much of a hearing) that we will all experience “fire” to the extent we need it. I no longer think (and I always thought it strange) that we are somehow “sealed in righteousness” at death. Where do we find this in the scriptures? IMO the only way to be sealed in righteousness is to be of the same opinion as God – to HATE sin so much that it is impossible we should ever be willing or coerced to engage in it.

Matthew 7:21 never enter heaven?
Matthew 7:21 never enter heaven?
Matthew 7:21 never enter heaven?
When did "eternal" change from "ethereal" to "endless"?
URist Preterist & Pantelist response to anti UR "proof texts"
SDA Annihilationist says Universalism's God is unloving
JRP's Exegetical Compilation: Hebrews 6
#13

I suppose I’m tired of trying to make UR palatable for believers and prefer to attack Infernalism, the doctrine of Hell (ECT), head-on. Frankly, Hell (ECT) is neither scriptural, logical, nor does it line up with the character of God. Frankly, imo it is a doctrine of demons. This tradition nullifies the power of the word of God, devalues people, and distorts the character of God! It is evil through and through, filling people with fear. It terribly hinders evangelism; I mean, who likes to be the bearer of Bad News. It creates an “Us vs. Them” mentality. etc. etc. etc.

If there was a Hell (ECT) it seems to me that Moses, Jesus, and/or Paul would have at least named it at least once, but they don’t! And sadly, English translations by in large have not completely corrected this error in translation. Sheol and Hades should be translated as “grave, realm of the dead”. And Gehenna should be translated “Hinnom Valley”.

The more I interact with people on this issue, the more I believe it is best to go ahead and fess-up, be straight-forward that I no longer believe in Hell, instead of trying to redifine Hell as something less than ECT. But then for me, the reason I came to believe in UR was because in studying scripture, I found Hell to not be supported there. It not being named even once in scripture as a warning was/is a big thing to me.

#14

Yes, people make many wrong assumptions concerning UR. It is an extremely different systematic theology from either Arminianism or Calvinism, for both of them are equally founded upon belief in Hell, and minimize Judgment teaching that judgment is about separating saved and unsaved. I’ve actually come to have a much greater respect/fear of judgment because of realizing that judgment is based not on what we believe but on how we actually live, what we do with talents/blessings/authority, the life that we’ve been given.

For example, the parable/story/fable of the rich man and Lazarus scares the hell out of me! I’ve been so blessed and do not help the poor nearly as much as I could. And the parable of the talents scares me too; well, it actually saddens me terribly. I identify much more with the wicked lazy servant than with the diligent ones. Woe is me! No Joke!

By misinterpreting these passages to be about separating the saved and unsaved, they completely loose their power to call anyone to repentance. The saved say “I’m good to go; they don’t apply to me because I’m saved.” And the unsaved don’t care what they say. It’s strange, but infernalism has actually removed the fear of judgment from the only people who care about judgment - believers. But we should be the ones who most benefit from the passages on judgment.

UR is such a vastly different perspective from Calvinism and Arminianism that it takes a complete rethinking of scripture. And I don’t think that this is helped by muddying the water redefining Hell. I think it is much more helpful to be forthright, let people know I don’t believe in Hell and why, and then work through all the various assumptions/questions that arise concerning UR.

#15

And Gehenna should be translated “Hinnom Valley”.

I think in Robin Parry’s book he used Mark 9 which uses the word “gehenna” and quoted “and so everyone will be salted with fire” as an allusion to UR.

#16

Unfortunately THAT is exactly what the machinations of “religion” did all those years ago and it stuck. But you are right… the terms in use should have been left as “grave/Hinnom” both of which in Jesus’ day would have been understood in terms of the history that subsequently and prophetically played out.

#17

I agree. However, I also think that people always act in accordance with their belief system, and, what we believe can be known by how we actually live. So, I can see how, in a sense, judgment can be based (for lack of a better word) on what we believe.

#18

I think Sonia is right on when she says that

More likely than not, insolent Christians will force us to read the verses and expect some conviction based on the ‘plain’ words of the Bible on Hell. Many people who believe in hell will not really listen to us but scrutinize us for possible personal reasons for our “heresy”. To be honest, I don’t think there is a real Biblical, quick response to send exegetical opponents fleeing away in embarrassment. I would just use the term “Hell” and get on with it. Most Christians don’t really care about terminology. If someone obsesses about hell and is on a witch hunt against “Love Wins” supporters, I would probably question their intentions. To me, “hell” has become a political term to knock people out of the church and a bylaw of “Orthodox Christianity”.

Although, it would be hilarious to go all Jonathan Edwards over other people and scare the living daylights out of them with “fire and brimstone and eternal worms” :smiling_imp: and then immediately explain the symbolism and how God’s judgement is one of reconciliation. Tee hee hee. :laughing: Sorry. Ignore my dark humor. :blush:

Anyways, like davo said, religion has sold us out into a church that has lost its first love. Religion drives many away from a relationship with Jesus. It is sad that the most secretly controversial word out there is “Hell.” There should be more dialogue about it in churches but I wouldn’t expect that to happen anytime soon until the Holy Spirit is poured out on all of the world in the “early rain.”

#19

I don’t know where I stand in terms of UR, but I was sitting here pondering the topic, and it seems to me, that if I were to discuss “Hell” with someone else, I would affirm it. In my experience, both the holding on and letting go of sin, brings some degree of “conscious torment.” Whether it is the external suffering, death, and misery that sin against another human being brings, or, the internal torment that guilt, shame, filth, etc that comes with being in bondage to sin brings: hell exists and is a present reality, not just a future phenomenon.

I think many people miss this: that such agony and torment is not merely something we are trying to avoid in the future, but, something humanity is experiencing now, and needs to be rescued from, now. I suppose the real question is whether God would leave some of humanity in this state for all of eternity, or if He will succeed in rescuing us all from it.

#20

Good points, CH – as always. :slight_smile: