PDA

View Full Version : God's Love in Hell


Sojourner
December 13th, 2003, 03:38 PM
With all the threads debating the question of eternal punishment in hell, I thought I would post some excerpts from the book "Beyond the Cosmos" by Hugh Ross, Ph.D. First he explains why people find the concept of eternal punishment in hell to be contradictory to the character of God (God is Love). Then he explains what exactly "toment" is in hell, and how God can show His love even while punishing unbelievers in hell. It's very interesting and may give you a lot to think about.


How can we comprehend how God's love is reflected in the Christian doctrine of hell?

Time and space, and physical and spiritual boundaries apply to evil and suffering. God promises that we will never face temptation beyond what we can bear, that He will always provide a "way of escape." But hell offers no escape. God also tells us the Holy Spirit acts as a restraining influence in the world right now, holding back the expression of evil. But hell offers none of the dimensional, physical, or spiritual boundaries we know. For God even to tolerate, let alone create, a place such as hell and consign multitudes of His creatures to it, seems unthinkable, a contradiction of His biblically claimed attributes of omnipotence and perfect love.

The doctrine of hell, or "the lake of fire," as a place of perpetual toment for those who reject God's offer of salvation has been part of Christian orthodoxy for centuries. Recently, however, especially in the last few decades, the perceived failure of theologians to reconcile eternal torment with an infinitely loving God has led to erosion of that doctrine.

The argument for the monstrous cruelty of God who would torment people eternally, is hard to sweep aside. In fact, this argument recently persuaded the Church of England to change its doctrinal position. After ten years of study, the church's doctrinal committee declared in 1996 that "a fiery eternal hell speaks of a cruel sadistic God" and, since the Bible clearly teachs that God is neither cruel nor sadistic, a correct interpretation of the Bible would lead to the conclusion that "if a person refuses God's offer of salvation, the consequence is ultimate non-being."

Eternal Rebellion

A temporary sentence to hell for sin might indeed be appropriate if the sinner were merely paying "for the misdeeds of a few short years on this earth." This line of reasoning minimizes the meaning of sin and ignores the eternality of human choice, given the eternality of the human spirit. An individual who knowingly refused to worship God during this earthly life will never change his or her mind. Heaven's price, worshipping God and God alone, this person will never willingly pay. This person does not want to be in God's presence and, thus, would find heaven repugnant. They may regret their eternal plight but not their rebellion.

Hell is a place people choose. While the people in hell will despise their torment, they have demonstrated their preference for it over eternal fellowship with God and with all who love the Light. For them, the experience of such fellowship would be far less tolerable than the torment of hell.

The lake of fire is a place where people and demons get what they want more than anything else: freedom from the will and rule of God. He yields to the desires of committed rebels by withdrawing forever the influence of the Holy Spirit from their beings.

God's Compassion Expressed in Hell

These words may sound strange, but in light of God's character and the character of those sentenced to hell, those who inhabit the lake of fire occupy the best possible realm for them. God expresses His love and compassion for hell's inhabitants by afflicting them with sufficient torment to prevent the place from being as bad as its inhabitants have the capacity to make it.

We can only begin to imagine what evil could be expressed by those from whom the restraining influence of God the Spirit has departed. The unleashing of individual's full potential for cruelty and all manner of evil could make hell vastly more horrible than God designed it to be. The worst thing about hell might be the company its inhabitants must keep. But God will keep in check the horrors these individuals could inflict on one another by immobilizing them, distracting them sufficiently with some kind of pain or discomfort.

The measure of pain and discomfort necessary to restrain each individual in hell will be different. Revelation speaks of differing levels or degrees of torment for those who are sent to hell, torment that is commensurate with each individuals' earthly expressions of sin and rebellion. The measure of wickedness a person practiced on earth is the measure of that individual's potential to make life more miserable than it already must be for others in hell. One interpretation suggests that God calibrates each person's torment to exactly the level necessary for restraint of his or her potential for evil.

A story might help to illustrate. If the public statements and writings of Adolf Hitler and Albert Schweitzer are indication of where each of them finished their lives spiritually, then both could be described appropriately as rebels against God's authority. Again, if their public lives offer any reliable indication, Hitler expressed more wickedness than Schweitzer. Since both appear to have rejected God's truth and His offer of life in heaven's kingdom, we would assume both will spend eternity in hell. But because Hitler would seem to possess the greater capacity to multiply suffering, we can imagine that he would require more torment to keep his capacity for evil at bay.

Is Torment the Right Word?

Many who reject the reality of hell do so because they equate the word "torment" with "sadistic cruelty." The concept of a necessarily painful restraining effect seems to have been overlooked.

While the Greek word for torment in the early New Testament manuscripts can denote torture, it is also used for "grievous pains" or "distress." New Testament writers used the same word to refer to the pains of childbirth.

A good friend of mine once stumbled into a real-life lesson on the consistency of God's love and His restraint of evil-doers in hell. Through the simple error of misreading a map, he was arrested for selling fim on the wrong side of the street in the vicinity of Pasaden's Rose Bowl.

Under normal circumstances he would have been driven to the courthouse, cautioned by a judge, and released. But because so many revelers had been arrested the night before, the court system was jammed. All the Pasaden jail cells were full, as were those in the neighboring communities. My friend, who had never even been sent to the principal's office during his school years, was sent to Los Angeles County Jail not just for a few hours, but for a whole day and night.

He was placed in a cell with eight other men. While Los Angeles police do their best to separate the violent felons from the rest of the inmate population, their efforts are limited. My friend glanced around to meet eight pairs of eyes staring at this obvious first-timer, each more fearsome than any he had encountered in his life, including his travels to foreign lands. Eight men watched, waiting for him to fall asleep. He spent that day and night awake and praying, his back glued to the cell wall.

No physical harm came to him during those agonizing hours, but he does remember wishing that an officer would come to handcuff and leg cuff the others so that he could get a moment's rest. Those cuffs would have brought torment, or course, but certainly no more than the torment my friend endured. From his perspective, the most loving thing the police could have done was to restrain his cell mates with cuffs. But what if some of them didn't really need cuffs? The most loving scenario for the total group would have been for the police to provide the greatest restraint to the most dangerous inmate, lesser restraint for those less dangerous, and no restraint for those who would do no harm to the others. Unfortunately, neither the police nor anyone else can see that clearly into people's hearts. But God can. And since God does see, He would know precisely how dangerous each of hell's inhabitants can be. With this knowledge, He would be able to determine precisely what degree of restraint to apply to each individual. And that could be considered an act of love.

blessedone
December 13th, 2003, 04:15 PM
As seems to be the case with everyone else, this question has gnawed at me too. Thank you for the very interesting article.

Resident Kook
December 13th, 2003, 04:29 PM
Very very interesting,

A friend and I were discussing the torments of an eternal hell just the other day and we basically agreed the if GOD was ok with eternal torment for the lost, when we get to heaven as see the WHOLE picture, we would be too.

But this concept has never entered my mind before!!!!!

This person does not want to be in God's presence and, thus, would find heaven repugnant. They may regret their eternal plight but not their rebellion.

It AMAZES me to think this even possible!!!

Even being eternally confined to the dentists chair would be millions of times better:nod

Larry

kgreen20
December 14th, 2003, 12:02 AM
The agony in Hell is indeed torture--absolutely excruciating torture. It never ends, but continues on and on for all eternity. There is no concept of mercy or love for the people sentenced to spend eternity there. They are totally separated from God's love there.



Kathy G.

Lonewolf7
December 14th, 2003, 01:12 AM
God expresses His love and compassion for hell's inhabitants by afflicting them with sufficient torment to prevent the place from being as bad as its inhabitants have the capacity to make it. :eek :freaked


That is deeeeeeeep

Jiggy37
December 14th, 2003, 02:40 AM
Originally posted by Sojourner
For God even to tolerate, let alone create, a place such as hell and consign multitudes of His creatures to it, seems unthinkable, a contradiction of His biblically claimed attributes of omnipotence and perfect love.
I'm not so sure about that. We can't comprehend perfect love, so to say that something seems to be contradicting it could be in error because of our finite minds.

A temporary sentence to hell for sin might indeed be appropriate if the sinner were merely paying "for the misdeeds of a few short years on this earth." This line of reasoning minimizes the meaning of sin and ignores the eternality of human choice, given the eternality of the human spirit.
Indeed so. That's the strongest argument for eternal torment I can think of, and one that I've personally used before when I was attempting to explain a justification of a necessity for hell in its traditional form--and, for that matter, if I ever get around to doing a brief commentary about eternal torment vs. annihilation like I want to, that'll be the argument I present for eternal torment.

An individual who knowingly refused to worship God during this earthly life will never change his or her mind.
However, I just can't agree with that. Paul knowingly refused to worship God for years and slaughtered Christians only to turn around and become arguably the most prominent writer of the New Testament.

Heaven's price, worshipping God and God alone, this person will never willingly pay. This person does not want to be in God's presence and, thus, would find heaven repugnant. They may regret their eternal plight but not their rebellion.

Hell is a place people choose. While the people in hell will despise their torment, they have demonstrated their preference for it over eternal fellowship with God and with all who love the Light. For them, the experience of such fellowship would be far less tolerable than the torment of hell.
This is seriously treading the line into making the lake of fire look like some sort of good thing for the unbelievers, which it's not. Assuming that the traditional view of it is correct, there is nothing that believers will enjoy about hell, including the fact that they're not with God.

These words may sound strange, but in light of God's character and the character of those sentenced to hell, those who inhabit the lake of fire occupy the best possible realm for them. God expresses His love and compassion for hell's inhabitants by afflicting them with sufficient torment to prevent the place from being as bad as its inhabitants have the capacity to make it.
That would be incredibly profound if the lake of fire were only filled with God-hating, violent extremists, but it's not. There will be seemingly "good" people who will not make it into heaven--frankly, I'd say the majority of those who are thrown into the lake of fire (whether for annihilation or eternal torment) will be "good" people. Doesn't sound too terrible to me.

Sojourner
December 15th, 2003, 11:12 AM
Posted by Jiggy37
I'm not so sure about that. We can't comprehend perfect love, so to say that something seems to be contradicting it could be in error because of our finite minds.
While I agree with you, the point the author was trying to make was that many people do have trouble reconciling the love of God with the idea of eternal torment in hell. It is this dilemma that has caused many to interpret Scripture in a way which gives them a solution to the dilemma. Instead of eternal torment in hell unbelievers are annihilated--that reconciles the seeming contradiction in a way that people can accept by their finite minds.

Posted by Jiggy37
However, I just can't agree with that. Paul knowingly refused to worship God for years and slaughtered Christians only to turn around and become arguably the most prominent writer of the New Testament.
Yes, but why did Paul change in the first place? God called Paul and Paul responded to that call. Unbelievers who did not respond to the call of God while on this earth will no get the opportunity to do so in hell. The Holy Spirit convicts us of our sin, if there is no conviction there is also no stimulus for change.

Posted by Jiggy37
That would be incredibly profound if the lake of fire were only filled with God-hating, violent extremists, but it's not. There will be seemingly "good" people who will not make it into heaven--frankly, I'd say the majority of those who are thrown into the lake of fire (whether for annihilation or eternal torment) will be "good" people. Doesn't sound too terrible to me.
I have been thinking about your statement all weekend, trying to grasp how, in fact, a hell filled with "good" people (the vast majority) would be all that terrible. Here are some of my thoughts.

The Holy Spirit is present in this world and He convicts the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (John 16:8-11). Every man has the law written on his heart, and they have a conscience which gives them the knowledge of right and wrong (Romans 2:14-15). When unbelievers are in hell, the presence of God is removed. The Holy Spirit will no longer convict them of their sin. People left to their own sinful flesh, and no influence from the goodness of God, will no longer be good. Romans 3:12 says, "There is none who does good, no not one." Paul says in Rom. 7:18 "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells." God alone is good (Matt. 19:17). It is only because of God's influence that anyone has any "good" in them.

Even those people who here are earth are "good" according to human standards and perceptions, will cease to be good when they are separated from the influence of God. They will grow more and more corrupt (Eph. 4:22). God will give them over to their flesh, they will be given over to uncleanness, vile passions, and a debased mind (Romans 1:24-32). The heart of man is described as being full of evil, deperately wicked, rebellious, deceitful, carnal, perverse, etc. (the list goes on). Imagine what the heart of those in hell will be like when the law of God is removed from it?