A Fundamentalist View of Hell

[Donb123]

(04-17-2012 07:13 PM)TurningIntoDavid Wrote:  Cool Yeah, I kinda have to agree with you on that. I have an intuition that God, at the end of time, will do what's right. In fact, I'm confident of it. I think that that means nobody will be suffering in hell forever. But even if it doesn't mean that, I don't think I'll be disappointed because I will understand all things, including why some people end up in hell. But until God explains that, and in light of the universalist passages and the mistranslations and jury-rigging of verses about hell, I think it's not the case.

Since you're new around here I'll show my cards- I think what you're saying here is one of the reasons why I dislike most Protestant theology anymore. In fact I find myself agreeing with the JW's in this one regard (I'm not JW) and that's that if you give a person a Bible and tell them to have at it they come away with anything and then believe it despite it being contrary to the entirety of Church history.

Quote:[*]Hades (where the rich man is and cannot escape from) is tossed into the lake of fire, so the no-escape clause from the story of the rich man and Lazarus doesn't apply,

Somehow I don't think being in a hades that gets tossed into a lake of fire means you escape.

Quote:Hi Presbygirl! Welcome back!

So my question with that is, what happened to the people who didn't accept Christ or do whatever it takes to be saved from hell prior to NT time? Did they simply not go to hell, or get a second chance after they died, or did they all go to heaven? If any of these are true, it'd suck more to be born after Jesus came than before!

I hope you don't mind me answering here... since I'm already replying.

Old School extreme dispensationalists believe they were saved by law keeping.

The covenantal tradition believes that OT saints were saved by grace thru faith although their faith was admittedly different than ours in so far as they trusted God and had faith he'd ultimately redeem them somehow.

The Orthodox Church believes that when the Apostles Creed says "he descended to hell" that Jesus went into Hades and preached the gospel to those who would hear it and led those who were justified out.

[oneflewoutofthecuckcoosnest]

What do you think - is the best justice ultimately punitive or restorative?

[TurningIntoDavid]

(04-17-2012 07:55 PM)Donb123 Wrote:  

(04-17-2012 07:13 PM)TurningIntoDavid Wrote:  Cool Yeah, I kinda have to agree with you on that. I have an intuition that God, at the end of time, will do what's right. In fact, I'm confident of it. I think that that means nobody will be suffering in hell forever. But even if it doesn't mean that, I don't think I'll be disappointed because I will understand all things, including why some people end up in hell. But until God explains that, and in light of the universalist passages and the mistranslations and jury-rigging of verses about hell, I think it's not the case.

Since you're new around here I'll show my cards- I think what you're saying here is one of the reasons why I dislike most Protestant theology anymore. In fact I find myself agreeing with the JW's in this one regard (I'm not JW) and that's that if you give a person a Bible and tell them to have at it they come away with anything and then believe it despite it being contrary to the entirety of Church history.

Quote:[*]Hades (where the rich man is and cannot escape from) is tossed into the lake of fire, so the no-escape clause from the story of the rich man and Lazarus doesn't apply,

Somehow I don't think being in a hades that gets tossed into a lake of fire means you escape.

Touché.

(04-17-2012 07:55 PM)Donb123 Wrote:  

Quote:Hi Presbygirl! Welcome back!

So my question with that is, what happened to the people who didn't accept Christ or do whatever it takes to be saved from hell prior to NT time? Did they simply not go to hell, or get a second chance after they died, or did they all go to heaven? If any of these are true, it'd suck more to be born after Jesus came than before!

I hope you don't mind me answering here... since I'm already replying.

Old School extreme dispensationalists believe they were saved by law keeping.

The covenantal tradition believes that OT saints were saved by grace thru faith although their faith was admittedly different than ours in so far as they trusted God and had faith he'd ultimately redeem them somehow.

The Orthodox Church believes that when the Apostles Creed says "he descended to hell" that Jesus went into Hades and preached the gospel to those who would hear it and led those who were justified out.

Thanks for the reply! I'm not finding a whole lot to disagree with you on here. Thanks for the card-showing, too. I've still got a ton of questions... and I'm still not 100% convinced of UR in spite of all my arguing for it.

Honestly,
some days I wonder if God exists at all.
And if He does,
if He's loving.
And if He's loving, how He could be so
without saving
everyone.

So I have to set my understanding of hell
out on the porch
somehow
make it not matter
and try to build a relationship with someone
who has hell
on the porch.

Hi.
My name is David,
and I'm loud
and obnoxious
because deep down
i'm scared.

Scared that God will
in the end
turn out to be mean.

Scared
that in the end
God might not save everybody
and if he doesn't
that he won't save me.

I know the pat answers
the reasons
the responses
and i'd be an atheist
if it weren't for trees
and love
and those little things
that I can't explain away
with natural selection.

Rob Bell,
the orthodoxy reject,
is the reason i still believe in God.
Maybe not exactly the same way i did
as a child
but either God is very,
very
good

Or He isn't.
Or he doesn't exist.

So I pray to God that God exists
that He is very
very
good
and I wish you peace
and grace
and love
i need your prayers
so that i too
can get the fundyland out of the boy
and live a life
of peace
and grace
and love.

[TurningIntoDavid]

OneFlewOut: I pray that justice is restorative. I think God's version of justice is restorative. At least,

I hope so.

[Presbygirl]

Yes, I believe OT saints were saved by believing in a Saviour to come.

And to the Apostles Creed section where it says "he ascended into heaven, he descended into hell", I've been in two churches in my life in the PCA and one included the phrase "descended into hell" and one didn't.

[Number_6]

I thought Fundy Hell wasn't literally at the center of the planet, but rather in some spirit plane that was just nasty. Conversly, Fundy Heaven was the spirit plane next door to the Hell zone.

I guess I was reading too many books on the occult.

[exOBCstudent]

(04-17-2012 06:25 PM)Tooktheredpill Wrote:  I've posted these before in another thread, but I think it would be appropriate to post them again here. These are the strongest verses in support of universalism, IMO.

Quote:John 12:32: And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

Acts 3:21: Heaven must receive him until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets.

Romans 5:18: Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.

Romans 11:32: For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

1 Cor 15:22-28: 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28 When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.

2 Cor 5:19: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

Phil 2:9-11: 9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

1 Tim 2:4: who [God] wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

Titus 2:11: For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.

Heb 2:9: But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

1 John 2:2: He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

2 Peter 3:9: The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

I've been studying lots of those same verses as I analyze this new (to me) concept presented here. I find that much of the Bible seems more apt to support the "universalist" viewpoint of eternity than what the IFB teaches. I guess I'm kind of in the same stance as TID on this one...until I see proof otherwise, the doctrine of eternal punishment seems indeed false.

[dramaturge]

(04-16-2012 12:44 PM)Presbygirl Wrote:  

(04-16-2012 10:49 AM)dramaturge Wrote:  What if Christ's death is indeed the basis for even a universal salvation whether we understand the means or not? Justice would still be served whether we grasp why or how. I think it's just as reasonable to propose that Christ's death accomplished justice for all in a way that God understands and applies as it is to propose that Christ's death only accomplishes applied justice for an individual who accepts it.

p.s. I'm not trying to be belligerent, mostly just using some Socratic method to understand your position and to better understand mine. :-)

So, you assume, that everyone wants heaven? See this is where the rubber meets the road. We are all rebels against God. Chuck total depravity out the window and any combination of redemption is possible. If Love Wins, why not now, instead of later. Why aren't we all loving others now and doing good till Christ comes? I've seen enough examples here on earth, to show that people don't choose to love even their own offspring. Now tell me, how does that work?

P.S. You're fabulous. I get good discussion!

I don't know that I assume everyone wants heaven actively in their life. I do believe that sin and depravity is a Thing, which is why we are called to love but don't always succeed. I think that as I'm wrestling through an instinct that leans to being an inclusivist, I'm beginning to wonder if God doesn't meet us somewhere along the way, even between this life and the next, with Love and Mercy and Renewal. I suppose that I'm beginning to see a bit of a dichotomy in the idea that Christ's death was the victory over death, but not if I don't hear the gospel and believe it. That doesn't seem much like a victory over death. I get the struggle to deal with redemption when we look at the hurt and cruelty and evil around us. But to say, “I guess it’s ok now, God’s got it” when a cruel, evil, or hurtful person “gets saved” seems narrow to me. I’m starting to see that scripture would seem to indicate that God’s got it regardless, that perhaps death → judgment isn’t the two-step phase we’ve constructed or imagined it to be.

Currently, it seems to me that “why not now” is still answered by “Christ is molding us and using us to show Himself and His love to others.” I suspect the way we are used in the next age will relate to how we’ve shown Love in this one; and perhaps the way that God reaches each person in their life or somewhere in that death → next stage is directly related to how they’ve given and received Love.

RE: the absence of “hell” in the OT: I’ve heard the explanation that those who died pre-Christ were “in holding,” so to speak until Christ was revealed in time, thus no hell for all practical purposes. Now, I don’t think that’s really the case. I don’t think God’s method of handling the afterlife shifted upon the revelation of Christ in time. Which necessarily leads me to conclude that “hell” isn’t in the OT because it doesn’t exist the way we imagine Hell to exist. I am no biblical scholar, though, and this is a journey I am still walking through. I suppose that I have always been influenced by Aslan telling that Calormene soldier the he was always truly serving Aslan all along.

Another thing that has influenced my questioning of the “traditional” idea of Hell over time has been my firm belief that God is Logic. And I find little logic in His ordaining such a narrow path to Him that for thousands of years, millions of people were completely unaware of it.

Now, I’m finally becoming brave enough to begin studying through what all that really means, and where, biblically, the historical positions and diversions on Hell have been supported (or not, as the case may be). I am currently reading through Love Wins, and have found little flaw in Bell’s logic. I have not had the chance yet to examine his support.

In my life, I have found that most people derive and defend their idea of Hell from Revelations rather than the rest of the Bible (except maybe for that one story of Lazarus and the rich man). Now that I’m more convinced that ever that the view of how Revelations presents the End Times with which I grew up is not all that secure and well-defended, I feel it necessary to follow-through and examine whether or not the view of Hell gathered from there is worth retaining.

I realize that my answers at this point are largely based in personally reasoned trains of thought and intuition, but that’s where I am. I certainly understand the struggle with the presence of evil and evil men, and the need to balance justice with mercy. I do wonder if, as humans, we don’t assign our view of justice to God, and if what we label justice isn’t more often the need for retributive closure. We need a sense that “that guy got what was coming to him.” What I see in Christ, though, are actions that left many questioning, “Why didn’t he give that guy what he had coming?” I suppose that, above all, undermines my certainty that a retributive Hell is a Thing.

I hope that added to the conversation rather than just rambled along. :-D We’re in testing week and yesterday was…interesting and exhausting, so my brain may not be communicating as clearly as I’d like. haha

[exOBCstudent]

(04-18-2012 11:30 AM)dramaturge Wrote:  I don't know that I assume everyone wants heaven actively in their life. I do believe that sin and depravity is a Thing, which is why we are called to love but don't always succeed. I think that as I'm wrestling through an instinct that leans to being an inclusivist, I'm beginning to wonder if God doesn't meet us somewhere along the way, even between this life and the next, with Love and Mercy and Renewal. I suppose that I'm beginning to see a bit of a dichotomy in the idea that Christ's death was the victory over death, but not if I don't hear the gospel and believe it. That doesn't seem much like a victory over death. I get the struggle to deal with redemption when we look at the hurt and cruelty and evil around us. But to say, “I guess it’s ok now, God’s got it” when a cruel, evil, or hurtful person “gets saved” seems narrow to me. I’m starting to see that scripture would seem to indicate that God’s got it regardless, that perhaps death → judgment isn’t the two-step phase we’ve constructed or imagined it to be.

Currently, it seems to me that “why not now” is still answered by “Christ is molding us and using us to show Himself and His love to others.” I suspect the way we are used in the next age will relate to how we’ve shown Love in this one; and perhaps the way that God reaches each person in their life or somewhere in that death → next stage is directly related to how they’ve given and received Love.

RE: the absence of “hell” in the OT: I’ve heard the explanation that those who died pre-Christ were “in holding,” so to speak until Christ was revealed in time, thus no hell for all practical purposes. Now, I don’t think that’s really the case. I don’t think God’s method of handling the afterlife shifted upon the revelation of Christ in time. Which necessarily leads me to conclude that “hell” isn’t in the OT because it doesn’t exist the way we imagine Hell to exist. I am no biblical scholar, though, and this is a journey I am still walking through. I suppose that I have always been influenced by Aslan telling that Calormene soldier the he was always truly serving Aslan all along.

Another thing that has influenced my questioning of the “traditional” idea of Hell over time has been my firm belief that God is Logic. And I find little logic in His ordaining such a narrow path to Him that for thousands of years, millions of people were completely unaware of it.

Now, I’m finally becoming brave enough to begin studying through what all that really means, and where, biblically, the historical positions and diversions on Hell have been supported (or not, as the case may be). I am currently reading through Love Wins, and have found little flaw in Bell’s logic. I have not had the chance yet to examine his support.

In my life, I have found that most people derive and defend their idea of Hell from Revelations rather than the rest of the Bible (except maybe for that one story of Lazarus and the rich man). Now that I’m more convinced that ever that the view of how Revelations presents the End Times with which I grew up is not all that secure and well-defended, I feel it necessary to follow-through and examine whether or not the view of Hell gathered from there is worth retaining.

I realize that my answers at this point are largely based in personally reasoned trains of thought and intuition, but that’s where I am. I certainly understand the struggle with the presence of evil and evil men, and the need to balance justice with mercy. I do wonder if, as humans, we don’t assign our view of justice to God, and if what we label justice isn’t more often the need for retributive closure. We need a sense that “that guy got what was coming to him.” What I see in Christ, though, are actions that left many questioning, “Why didn’t he give that guy what he had coming?” I suppose that, above all, undermines my certainty that a retributive Hell is a Thing.

I hope that added to the conversation rather than just rambled along. :-D We’re in testing week and yesterday was…interesting and exhausting, so my brain may not be communicating as clearly as I’d like. haha

You put it MUCH more eloquently than I did.

[Donb123]

I've had this theory that Arminianism ultimately leads to universalism to those who were intellectually honest to not just believe everything their church teaches. I think the ex-fundies here are adding weight to that theory.

If we get a ticket to heaven based on a decision and not getting the opportunity sends you to hell then that's a pretty sorry doctrine, imho. Some people see this and go to universalism because it's much more palatable and defends the doctrine of "God's is love" and some become Calvinists.

I'm not disputing that some people hold to non-Calvinistic positions honestly nor am I saying they just believe what they were told to believe per se. I think some do. I think those who have really considered it and don't progress on to universalism live with a really horrible tension and I don't know how they do it. I don't know how you could sleep at night knowing all these souls were resting in the balance of one decision and they just need a chance to make the right choice. If that was all there was I'd be a universalist also.