How Hitler and Judas could end up in heaven

In certain schools of Christian thought, hell is not everlasting, but a more painful form of purgatory.

M any Christians presume that hell is a place where brutally painful punishments are inflicted on evildoers for an indefinite, and perhaps infinite, amount of time in the afterlife. Think of a medieval torture chamber with no exit — or fire extinguishers.

But this, as I argued in a recent column, makes no theological sense. If morality is good, then doing the right thing must be its own reward and doing the wrong thing must be its own punishment. To think that a sinner deserves extra, externally imposed suffering presumes that morality isn't good and that those who commit evil deeds benefit from their actions — which is another way of saying that those who do the right thing are fools.

The more theologically sound position is to hold that hell is a state of being, whether in this life or the next, in which we confront our own self-imposed alienation from what is truly good — from God, in other words. This educative punishment can be extremely painful, but the pain flows intrinsically from knowledge of our own immoral acts. It isn't inflicted on us by some external tormenter.

Let's just say that my readers weren't universally appreciative of it. A fair number of them apparently want very much to believe that a fairly large number of people are going to be made to suffer egregiously in hell for their bad behavior in life.

I suspect that these same readers, and perhaps many more, will be equally adamant that I'm wrong to follow the implications of my argument a few steps further — to assert that Christians have reason to believe that the punishments of hell, whatever they may be, are temporary for all.

That's right: I think it's likely that if there is an afterlife, everyone — even Judas, even Hitler — eventually ends up in heaven.

Now, I'm perfectly willing to concede that several Gospel passages seem to describe an eternity of damnation for at least some people in the afterlife (Matthew 7:13-14, 25:31-46; Mark 9:45-48; Luke 16:23; John 3:36). Though I'd also like to point out that only in one verse (Matthew 25:46) does Jesus speak of something that could plausibly be translated as "eternal punishment," and in words (aeonios kolasis) that could perhaps more accurately be rendered as "eternal correction."

Then there are those contrary passages that seem to imply that God wants everyone — and perhaps even all of creation — to enjoy salvation (Romans 5:18, 11:33-36; 1 Corinthians 15:22, 28; Philippians 2:10-11; Colossians 1:19-20; 2 Peter 3:9; Revelation 21:4).

This tension — not to say contradiction — has led some thinkers to dismiss or argue away the implications of the latter passages. Of all the church fathers, Tertullian may have gone furthest in this direction, writing at length and in gory detail about the endless sufferings inflicted on sinners in hell, and even suggesting that observing these torments is an important source of the bliss that accompanies salvation in heaven.

The problem with this position is that it seems to be a form of what Friedrich Nietzsche called "Christian malice": A psychological malady in which the stringent self-denial that Christianity demands of its adherents leads them to feel intense resentment for those who are insufficiently ascetic. Nietzsche delighted in showing how this dynamic can turn Christians from preachers of love into hateful fanatics out to inflict suffering on anyone who dares to enjoy life.

Not all Christians have confirmed Nietzsche's critique as perfectly as Tertullian. Others have been driven by theological reflection to move in the opposite direction — to speculate that all people might eventually enjoy salvation in heaven, no matter how awful their worldly sins may have been.

Origen in the 3rd century and Hans Urs von Balthasar in the 20th both affirmed versions of universal salvation. Yet I find the most compelling variation in the writings of the 4th-century theologian Gregory of Nyssa — a major figure in the history of Christianity, though one more widely revered today by the Eastern Orthodox than by the Western churches.

Gregory maintained that hell resembles something like what Catholics have traditionally called purgatory: A place of sometimes excruciatingly painful purgation of sins in preparation for heaven. The pain is not externally inflicted as punishment, but follows directly from the process of purification as the soul progresses toward a perhaps never fully realized union with divine perfection. Gregory describes this process as a "constant progression" or "stretching forth" (epektasis) of oneself toward an ever greater embrace of and merger with God in the fullness of eternity — a transmutation of what is sinful, fallen, and finite into the transcendent beauty of the infinite.

Hell, in this view, would be the state of agonizing struggle to break free from sin, to renounce our moral mistakes, to habituate ourselves to the good, to become ever more like God. Eastern Orthodox theologians (and, interestingly, Mormons, who hold similar views) call it a process of divination or sanctification (theosis) that follows directly from the doctrine of God's incarnation in Jesus Christ. It is a formula found in the writings of Clement of Alexandria, Athanasius, and other ancient theologians: God became a human being so that human beings might become like God.

One imagines that this would be a long, painful process — rendered longer and more painful for those who have fallen furthest from God during their lives. They are the ones for whom the afterlife is truly hellish — like a climb up a peak far, far higher than Mount Everest with little prior preparation or training, no expensive gear, and no Sherpas to help carry the load. But there would eventually be progress toward God, even for the climber who starts out in the worst possible shape, and from the lowest possible point in the valley below.

And at least there would be no dungeon pointlessly presided over by satanic, whip-wielding sadists.

Since you are arguing that punishment is not eternal, how can we glean it from THIS particular teaching?

We can’t. The argument that is being made is that this teaching is not about the eternal fate of the lost or the saved.

Those that use it as a literal story about our eternal condition are missing the point of the parable. That’s the point. That is not what the parable is about, whether the rich man in the story is there a year, an eternity, or just during superbowl weekend.

RE: We can’t. The argument that is being made is that this teaching is not about the eternal fate of the lost or the saved.

My argument in bringing it up though is to show that there IS conscious punishment.

Now regarding whether or not punishment is eternal, let’s talk about a separate verse.

Matthew 25:41-46:

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

I find no Scripture to support salvation working differently for different people;

You may have to explain your reasoning to me, on that one. Salvation (which is offered to all--cf. Titus 2:11, 1 Timothy 2:4, etc.) certainly worked differently for Judas Iscariot than it worked for the good thief on the cross!

I was unclear, we're talking about two different things. When I used the phrase "salvation working" I was referring to God's Law Word setting forth who is saved and who is not, i.e., how God's Law "works" or how God's Law describes his salvific plan. When you commented on my use of the phrase "salvation working", your response treated the phrase to mean how individual people's salvation or damnation "works out" for people in history on an individual basis.

I'm making a very simple point about God's justice. Perhaps an imperfect but simple analogy:

We have laws in New Jersey. We have judges and courts. That is the legal system.

We have people in NJ. They all have their own stories of their lives. Some found themselves participating in our legal system as defendants.

Do our NJ judges treat every defendant the same UNDER THE LAW, or do our NJ judges favor some defendants over others based on who the defendant is, i.e., an uncle, a nephew, a friend, etc. ? That is the question of justice respecting persons.

God's Law Word reveals the God's salvific plan to us. The judicial fundamentals of the plan: everyone falls short of the glory of God, thus everyone merits damnation. Everyone therefore must rely solely on the merits of Christ's atoning sacrifice on the cross for salvation.

In the Bible, there is simply no verse that says some relative or friend gets into heaven without appealing to Christ's sacrifice on the cross. There are no payoffs, so special side deals, no winks, no nods. There are no excuses, no "see what I did here", or "but I always did this". Nothing can be traded or offered in exchange for salvation. All those worldly rewards will be utterly useless when one faces judgement.

Yet those who are saved, the true believers in Christ, who appeal only to Christ's atoning sacrifice - the Bible tells us they belong to Christ, they are his, and they will have lived accordingly, no surprise. Yet even so they will NOT insult Christ to make reference to anything but his shed blood and their belief in him as their Lord and Savior as the only hope of their salvation.

It is crystal clear: God does NOT JUDICIALLY favor one person over another in terms of what merits a man his salvation. Simply put, no man merits salvation.

If God showed favoritism judicially his justice would be imperfect, God forbid. No, his law is perfect.

Psalm 19:7 "The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple."

Wow, I started out trying to just get agreement on a simple point and wound up preaching. Pardon me. I know this takes so much time and we have such a wide gap between us, even so, at least we're civil.

Some people teach that after death, God will destroy or annihilate the souls of those who don’t believe and that they will never experience eternal torment.

I think it’s just a rationalization they use to comfort themselves that if they don’t believe, they will not suffer torment for eternity.

I’m one of those people but no, it is not a rationalization and as Christ’s I’m not worried about it. Rather, I studied the issue and this is the position I’ve come to accept. I used to believe it was eternal torment simply because I was a new Christian and it is what “more knowledgable” Christians told me. The more I learned of the personality of God from reading His word, the more problems I had with it. And then when I actually studied the subject I changed my opinion.

Strongly.

In fact, I think the turn or burn message harms a LOT of people. It is not a benign false teaching (as if there were such a thing).

Some people teach that after death, God will destroy or annihilate the souls of those who don’t believe and that they will never experience eternal torment.

I think it’s just a rationalization they use to comfort themselves that if they don’t believe, they will not suffer torment for eternity.

If you believe that God will put those who are not his into a position of being eternal torment, this describes your god (from this site - http://jeremyandchristine.com/articles/eternal.php):

Suppose for a moment that a wonderful man—Mr. Right, if you will—offers a marriage proposal to the woman he loves. “Marry me,” he says, “and I will give you a life like you’ve never dreamed of before. You will be loved with the greatest commitment and passion that any woman has ever known. I will give you the finest house with all of the wonderful things you’ve ever wanted, and you will be happy for the rest of your days!”

Now suppose the woman is very flattered by the proposal, but is uncertain about whether or not she is ready for such a commitment. Asking for a few more days to think it over, Mr. Right answers, “You are welcome to take more time, but it’s only fair that I warn you what will happen if you decline my generous offer. Your only option, other than spending paradise with me, is to be thrown into my underground dungeon, have your eyes gouged from their sockets, and be subjected to unimaginable pain every hour, on the hour, for the rest of your long, miserable life.”

What do you suppose would be going through the young woman’s mind at a time like this? I imagine that would change the way she feels about the man considerably. She might have previously accepted Mr. Right’s proposal because of her love for him, but is there much chance of that now? Surely not. If she takes him seriously, she’ll undoubtedly marry him, but not as much for love as out of genuine terror at the alternative.

Is this God’s way of doing things? Does God want His people to turn to Him out of fear that they will be tortured otherwise? Where is the love in that? If everyone really believed in this doctrine, wouldn’t that properly tarnish their concept of the Savior? I would imagine some might even have a hard time calling Him “Savior” at all. How merciful can it be to create a never-ending torture pit for everyone and then save only a few from it?

RE: Hmmmm. This punishment is, apparently, NOT life. I wonder what it could be. ;-)

Here seems to be a hint:

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” ( Matthew 25:41)

Next question, what happens to the devil and his angels in that fire...

“10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.” (Revelations 20:10)

Now, it can be argued that Revelations 20 did not mentioned HUMAN BEINGS, but they were mentioned in Matthew 25 and that they will be thrown into the same “fire” as the Devil and his angels.

Not sure if humans are meant for annihilation and only the devil and his angels are to be tormented, but I see no reason for optimism here.

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” ( Matthew 25:41)

Next question, what happens to the devil and his angels in that fire...

Several things. First, as you mentioned, human beings are not the Devil and his angels. This means that though they may be thrown into the eternal fire, that particular scripture doesn’t talk about torture but, rather, is mentioned in a context where the hearer (and reader that has not already been indoctrinated) would interpret that they would be burned up in the eternal fire (the fire may be eternal, and the fate of those thrown in it may be eternal - they are consumed by the fire - but the conscious suffering is not eternal. Second, there have already been a number of posts that really get into the controversy of the actual meaning of words that are translated into english as “eternal” or “forever and ever” and their true meaning within the context of the pasage. Third, the “lake of fire” in revelation is to the second death what lampstands are to the seven churches. Forth, though there are scriptures that can, to some degree, be interpretted to mean people will suffer “for ever and ever”, depending on your translation of some words, the lion’s share of scripture that deals with the subject juxtaposes the saved vs the lost as having eternal life vs death, destruction, perish, etc.

And most importantly, when one reads the word of God and their perception of his personality matures with prayer and study, the eternal suffering meme becomes less and less plausible. Yes, he is just, and as a just God, he casts out those that are not his. They are cast out of an eternity in his presence. They are gone, never to be seen or heard from again, virtually erased from existence.

Not sure if humans are meant for annihilation and only the devil and his angels are to be tormented, but I see no reason for optimism here.

I don’t know what you mean by “optimism”. There is nothing optimistic about the fate of the lost.

On a side note, I believe that the reason many lost people refuse to believe the gospel is they just can’t wrap their head around a “loving” God that would condemn most of humanity to unending unimaginable torture. So they refuse to believe it, along with the entire message. But when there is only salvation and annihilation, they choose their path freely, whichever it is. They are literally more likely to believe the message and choose their path sincerely, out of love - or out of narcissism - depending on the choice.

I’ve actually met non-Christians (that are strongly anti-Christianity) that HATE the annihilation message because it takes away their excuse for hating God and making fun of Christians. It makes it more plausible to their human mind and suddenly more believable, making their position less confident. They actually desperately NEED us to believe and preach it.

To suggest that the fallen angels would be treated with what you see as such “unspeakable cruelty” that you would doubt the existence of a God Who would allow that, after God Himself created them...

Hang on there. That is not what I suggested. It is what you inferred. And it is definitely now my position. The only fate I’m discussing here is the fate of those for whom Christ died that do not accept the free gift. Anything not human is outside the scope of my argument regarding the fate of that thing.

Now = Not

Sorry, but this is precisely within the scope of your argument. You said:

“Is this God’s way of doing things? Does God want His people to turn to Him out of fear that they will be tortured otherwise? Where is the love in that? If everyone really believed in this doctrine, wouldn’t that properly tarnish their concept of the Savior? I would imagine some might even have a hard time calling Him “Savior” at all. How merciful can it be to create a never-ending torture pit for everyone and then save only a few from it?”

Now... God created the angels; correct? And He created them out of love, and out of nothingness (i.e. He willed them into being, and He maintains their existence at every moment). God meant for them to share communion with Him for all eternity; right?

So... why is it so scandalously wrong for God to, in your view (which is badly mistaken, by the way), “torture those humans who disagree, for all eternity”, but you somehow think it’s NOT scandalously wrong for God to (again, in your mistaken view) “torture those ANGELS who disagree, for all eternity”? Why is the first idea so horrifying to you that you say (paraphrasing) “a God of love would never do that, and such a teaching causes great harm!”, but you don’t extend the same courtesy to the angels who are (as you say) being tortured for ever and ever?

RE: that particular scripture doesn’t talk about torture but, rather, is mentioned in a context where the hearer (and reader that has not already been indoctrinated) would interpret that they would be burned up in the eternal fire (the fire may be eternal, and the fate of those thrown in it may be eternal - they are consumed by the fire - but the conscious suffering is not eternal.

_____________________________________________

I did not use the word — Torture. I used ( because the Bible uses it ) the word Torment.

Now is torment conscious? How you can torment an unconscious or a non-existent being?

“If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.” (Revelations 14:9-11).

So, the torment is CONSCIOUS. There will be no rest day and night, and it goes on forever. That’s how I understand the verse.

The most straightforward understanding of the above verses is Unsaved men spend eternity in the same place as the Devil and his angels: Rev 20:15 And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire, where he will be tormented without rest day and night forever.

I wish I could get around that, but I can’t without stretching the meaning of words.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.