The Mind's Eye

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Posted by Bird @ 11:22 am CDT
Filed under: Theology, Books, C.S. Lewis

I've made it no secret around here that I question the common understanding of Hell being a literal, consuming fire that torments a conscious soul day and night without end. I do believe in Hell, and a "fire" of Hell, but I've found it curious that many believers accept a metaphorical representation of Heaven (e.g. streets of gold) as represented in Scripture, but reject a similar metaphorical representation of Hell.

In The Reason For God Tim Keller summarizes my current thinking on Hell:

In short, hell is simply one's freely chosen identity apart from God on a trajectory into infinity. We see this process "writ small" in addictions to drugs, alcohol, gambling, and pornography. First, there is a disintegration, because as time goes on you need more and more of the addictive substance to get an equal kick, which leads to less and less satisfaction. Second, there is an isolation, as increasingly you blame others and circumstances in order to justify your behavior. . . . When you lose all humility you are out of touch with reality. No one ever asks to leave hell. The very idea of heaven seems to them a sham.

The idea of Hell being something of a choice for the damned fits hand-in-glove with the idea represented by C. S. Lewis who said that the damned souls are in some sense successful rebels to the end, and, as Lewis' character George MacDonald says in The Great Divorce, "There are two types of people in the world. Those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, in the end, 'Thy will be done.'"

I believe Dallas Willard presents a similar picture of Hell in Renovation of the Heart.

I'll end with another Keller quotation from the aforementioned book:

All God does in the end with people is give them what they most want, including freedom from himself. What could be more fair than that?

no trackbacks 14 comments

Trackbacks:

Trackback URL: http://thinklings.org/members/minds-eye/bloo.trackback.php/5333.

Comments on ""No one ever asks to leave hell." ":

1. Crossbow - 03/31/2009 4:28 pm CDT

I guess I have never heard of the thought that stuff like "Streets of Gold" is metaphorical. What is that all about?

2. Bird - 03/31/2009 4:35 pm CDT

I actually don't think it's the streets that are gold, but, rather the city of New Jerusalem. So I would like to correct myself on that. Crossbow, do you see the city, then, as being made of literal gold?

3. Crossbow - 04/01/2009 6:24 pm CDT

Well, I think what John saw in his vision was a city made of literal gold. Now, was that metaphorical for God making everything new, or a revelation of actual future events? Beats me. Or, I guess I could say, that it is definitely at least metaphorical. It is in John's vision, and visions usually always had a metaphorical meaning. But sometimes they had a literal meaning, too. So, if New Jerusalem will be an actual, physical place someday, then, yes... it will be made of literal gold. I have no problem with that. As far as end times stuff goes, I'm with Joe Ewen's pan-millennium-ism. (it will all pan out just fine for Christians)

But even a strict metaphorical view of New Jerusalem still wouldn't necessitate a metaphorical view of hell, either... at least, I wouldn't think. A lot of the scriptures about hell are not written as a vision someone had.

Jesus spent a lot of time trying to correct the misconceptions that people had about God. If Hell was not a place of torment, I think he would have tried to correct people's thinking about it rather than saying the following:

"The rich man also died and was buried. In Hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side."

4. Bird - 04/01/2009 8:50 pm CDT

So, if New Jerusalem will be an actual, physical place someday, then, yes... it will be made of literal gold

I think it will be a literal place, and I believe he used gold to describe it because it's the most majestic, royal, precious thing our minds can generally comprehend. He needed something to compare it to.

Jesus spent a lot of time trying to correct the misconceptions that people had about God. If Hell was not a place of torment, I think he would have tried to correct people's thinking about it

I don't believe Jews had much of an understanding of hell before JESUS came on the scene. The idea wasn't something written about much (if any) in the OT.

I also think most of the time when "hell" was used in the NT, it was the word gehenna (or hades). One of my questions then is, what did that word, gehenna, mean to the first century Jews?

5. Crossbow - 04/02/2009 2:07 pm CDT

I've always been taught that the Jews had a very strong idea of what gehenna was. There is some disagreement to the exact nature of that understanding, but I had always thought that it was even in use back to the time of Joshua.

Two interesting articles:

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=115&letter=G

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/564381.html

I believe he used gold to describe it because it's the most majestic, royal, precious thing our minds can generally comprehend. He needed something to compare it to.

Usually, in the Bible, when they needed something to compare something else to, you see it translated with the word "like" - so, the language would be more like "and the city like pure gold" (see Rev. 9:7). But translators choose to use the term "and the city of pure gold" in Revelation 21. It could just be how they chose to translate it... I wouldn't know. But the language used in Rev. 21 is pretty definite, especially when there are other places in the same book where you can tell for sure that John is struggling to find words to describe what he is seeing.

6. Bird - 04/02/2009 9:30 pm CDT

I'm not scholar on this stuff, but I believe the concept of hell in that region originated with the Greeks. I'm not so certain that a Jew back in the day in the OT had nearly the same concept of the after life, or eternal judgment, as modern day Christians (or Jews for that matter).

While I agree that NT writers (John especially) used "like" quite a bit, they also didn't use it quite a bit (cross reference Rev. 19:12).

7. Crossbow - 04/03/2009 5:05 pm CDT

In the NIV, the word 'like' is in Rev 19:12: "His eyes are like blazing fire."

According to Wikipedia, the concept of Hell being a place of torment was from the Egyptians as far back as 2040 BC. Jews believed in Sheol, a place for all of the dead, but believed the righteous and wicked would be in separate areas by the second century BC. It was about that time that they also first started writing about Gehenna, but I can't find if they thought that was part of Sheol or not.

It is pretty clear that Jesus did speak of wicked people dying and being tormented. Whatever Jews thought of that, it was what Jesus taught. I don't think there is much room around that one. Lazarus wanted to leave his torment, but the beggar seemed to indicate that there was a "fixed" chasm between them. I think once you are in torment, you are stuck.

8. Bird - 04/04/2009 9:14 am CDT

In the NIV, the word 'like' is in Rev 19:12: "His eyes are like blazing fire."

I should have elaborated. My point in bringing up that verse was that it shows a "like" comparison right alongside a non-like one. That is, His eyes are "like a blazing fire" and then it says "on His head were many crowns." To me, I see that whole description as, well, descriptive but not as literally descriptive.

9. Bird - 04/04/2009 9:38 am CDT

It is pretty clear that Jesus did speak of wicked people dying and being tormented. Whatever Jews thought of that, it was what Jesus taught. I don't think there is much room around that one.

I don't deny that hell is torment, or that it exists. I will say, though, that with passages like the rich man and Lazarus, if you interpret every minute detail literally, you end up with a slew of confusing problems. Furthermore, JESUS used the word, Hades, from Greek mythology. His 1st Century listeners, I believe, would have had something very specific in mind when they heard that word.

10. Crossbow - 04/04/2009 10:23 am CDT

When I was a kid, We used to take all the crowns we could find around the house (Burger King crowns and stuff like that) and put them all on our heads at once. If you arranged it correctly, it looked pretty cool. So, I guess I never thought about that part about that crowns could be anything but literal because of that.

I guess, reading trough the story of Lazarus, and thinking about every part being literal... I have no problems with any of it being strictly literal. Of course, I also read it withe mindset that this was before Jesus rose from the dead, and so it was told to people that still had to atone for their sins with sacrifice. After Jesus paid for our sins, there would be a different mindset to apply to that story.

Which brings up another question - if the ancient Jews didn't believe in Hell, afterlife, eternal reward or suffering... why care about sin? Why go through all of the sacrifices and rituals to atone for yourself? If you are all going to die, and that is just it, or you all go to the same place... what should it matter what you do up here? Even your own scriptures speak of how some sinners prosper when they shouldn't, so what is the reward for being righteous? I don't have an answer... it is just question to ponder.

I agree that people would have had a specific thing in mind when Jesus said that, and I think that the story is the answer to what that is. The point of the story was Lazarus and the beggar, with Hades as the backdrop. Jesus didn't spend much time dwelling on what Hades was, but he did describe it some what. Some people have said that he created a radical new concept of Hell with that story. I don't quite buy that - if he was doing that, I think He would have focused more on that, or at least did one of His "You say that Hell is like this, but I say that it is..." and then gone into the story as an illustration. Or, maybe he would have.

So, what is the option to believe about Hell, if it is torment, but not a literal fire that is doing the tormenting? What is the torment then? How is being apart from God going to be a torment for someone that never believed in God in the first place? Or, if does end some day, when is that time? I guess I can't find where you have made it clear that you are questioning that it is forever or that it is a fire that torments. It might be in some post on the Thinklings, but I am lazy and don't feel like searching :)

BTW - since I was an art/science education major, I did study a bit of religious views as expressed in the arts. Many famous artists also didn't believe in a literal fire in Hell, but still represented it that way in paintings because that is way it was represented in the Bible. They even struggled with that because the Bible also describes it as being utterly dark, and a big painting of black is, well... boring :)

11. Bird - 04/04/2009 12:46 pm CDT

if the ancient Jews didn't believe in Hell, afterlife, eternal reward or suffering... why care about sin?

I think it was more of a caring about the community of Jews as a whole as projected through history than about caring to save their individual souls. Of course, since I'm pretty naive on ancient Jewish beliefs, my thoughts are purely speculative. I think there was a sense of belief in the afterlife as explained in the OT ("I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever," etc.), but it wasn't nearly as crystal clear as it is in the NT. In fact, I think an argument can be made that the ancient Jews had no true concept of an afterlife -- at least not as we see it -- until closer to the time of JESUS, when, I believe, the Pharisees picked up on the Greco-Roman idea of hell (of course, by comparison, you had groups like the Saducees who rejected all of that after life business, hell and all), and there was a real hodge-podge of belief within Jewish culture as to the nature of the afterlife.

The point of the story was Lazarus and the beggar, with Hades as the backdrop.

I think a strong argument can be made for the point of the story being about the Jews and the Gentiles (with the rich man representing the Jews), and, of course, Hades is the back drop. Either way, it's probably a multi-layered story anyway.

if it is torment, but not a literal fire that is doing the tormenting? What is the torment then?

Here I think we get to the crux of the matter. I believe in the same way that the NT writers say that Heaven is so good that they compare it to streets of gold, I believe they say the same thing about Hell by comparing it to a place with fire, blackness, non-dying worms, etc. (How can you have fire and blackness at the same time?) I think the reality of hell is that it's so bad, those are the types of similes and metaphors you'd use to describe it.

How is being apart from God going to be a torment for someone that never believed in God in the first place?

I'd say that just because there are atheists in the world today doesn't mean that they are, in the ultimate and truest sense of the word, eternally separated from God and his common grace.

12. Bird - 04/04/2009 6:08 pm CDT

I wanted to clarify my last statement. I believe atheists, right now, are not eternally separated from God and His common grace. That's where the torment comes in. If the afterlife, in hell, they certainly would be separated, and that's where the real torment begins. Even the hardest unbeliever has no idea about how God blesses them from day to day.

One thing that's good with your hermeneutic, Crossbow, is that it's consistent. To you the fires of hell are literal and the gold of heaven is literal. I'm glad you're consistent! :-)

13. Crossbow - 04/05/2009 8:36 am CDT

Well, to be honest with you, I probably don't care either way... is the flame literal, or is it a torment that is so bad that it can be compared to a fire? Doesn't really seem to matter a hill of beans either way. Either way it still torment, and doesn't change anything in my theology. How can there be fire and darkness? God created fire, and if he wanted to make it dark in hell, then he could do it. God also created gold, so if He wanted to create enough to build a city out of it, He could snap His fingers and make it so. Or He could have made the city out of something so awesome that John could only use gold to describe it. Don't really see how it matters either way. Now, I do know that some people will make a big stink out of the difference, and claim that you are being a heretic for not taking stuff like that literally, but I just don't see how the details matter as long as you get the big picture.... heaven (new jerusalem, etc) is awesome, hell is torment.

But I think one would still need to realize that it is torment, and not just anguish over being separated from God. C.S. Lewis has an interesting description of Hell at the beginning of The Great Divorce, but there is nothing there that I think describes a torment that compares with fire and worms. I can't find our copy of that for some reason now (so I have been re-reading The Space Triology instead), so I might have just forgotten what all he said.

Even the hardest unbeliever has no idea about how God blesses them from day to day.

That would be a great quote for the jacket of a book, if you ever choose to write one :)

14. Jeff - 04/24/2009 10:29 pm CDT

Bird,
Check out this read on Hell. http://gospelthemes.com/hell.htm by Sam Dawson I support that Hell is not what most Christians think and have been taught. I have read a few of Sam's books and find his thoughts refreshing and align with much of what I was thinking but couldn't just put into words.

Name:
URL:	(optional)
Email:	(optional - will not be published)