does heaven have a waiting room...besides florida?

purgatory.

now, most of us at immersion have grown up in the protestant tradition of the christian faith.

therefore perhaps many of our knee jerk reactions were [are] to dismiss purgatory outright. not even consider it a viable option. of all the topics covered while we have been in hell this one is, perhaps, the most foreign. then again next week's topic [see sidebar] might be pretty new to people too.

back to the topic at hand: purgatory.

father hayes in his article "the purgatorial view" makes an excellent point that most christians [be they prot, cath or ortho] believe in some kind of interim period between when a person dies but before they reach their final, eternal destiny. what happened to the people who died before jesus came?

even the new testament writers seemed to communicate the idea that after we shuffle off this mortal coil we enter into a state of not-quite-thereness. paul calls it 'sleep' and mentions that those who are 'sleeping in the lord' will be the first to rise to meet christ in the sky and then the living faithful will join them afterwards.

sidenote: there are many people out there who think that this whole notion of flying corpses sounds more like clive barker than god. however, in the proper context, this idea of people meeting jesus in the sky makes perfect sense. in the ancient world when a king or diplomat for a king was approaching a city the people of that city would send out an envoy to meet them. it was a sign of honour and showed that they recognized the dignity of this person. so, when jesus-the King of kings-comes to earth would it not make sense in that culture that the people would come out to meet him? and he is not going to be riding on earth but coming from heaven so the natural conclusion is that we will meet him in the sky. now, minds today may scoff at this as ridiculous but let us be careful of being time-ists or too chronocentric and thinking that our point in time is superior to another point in time. they are communicating in ways that make sense and we reveal only our own ignorance and lack of understanding when we mock them. it is not paul or other people of that period that come off looking foolish, it is us.

once again, back to the topic at hand: purgatory.

so, many believe in an interim state between this time and the day of judgement. in fact, there is strong scriptural support for that position.

what about purgatory? well, that is different than the interim.

the idea of purgatory comes from wondering if god can still work on and with people during that interim state. thus, if you die short of attaining perfection in grace [which i think is a fate that we are all going to share in!] god keeps working on you in the interim until the day of judgement.

c.s. lewis explains it that if you show up at the gates of heaven and you are still covered in the filth of this world, wouldn't you want god to clean you up before you went into heaven...even if it hurt a little?

so, purgatory can be understood [somewhat tongue and cheek] as god turning the hose on you to wash all the guck of this world off before you enter his beautiful and pristine home.

make sense?

as father hayes puts it, his support of purgatory comes from a place of love for the many lost people in this world and for the massive amount of people who will die with unfinished business and for all of us who will die before fully realizing our christian identities.

he writes:

"As long as there was only heaven and hell, it was not suprising that hell would be heavily populated. But when the possibility of purification after death entered the scene, with it came the tendency to depopulate hell by placing many people in a sort of outer court of heaven until they were more fully prepared for entrance into the presence of God."

however, to caution against people using purgatory as an excuse for loose morality and thinking they can get away with anything in this life by simply making up for it in the next one, father hayes quotes augustine:

"[Augustine] argues that it is better to be cleansed in this life than the next, for the cleansing process in the next life will be far more severe than anything experienced in this life."

it is a tempting idea that there are more chances than just this life. clark pinnock writes that father hayes is the kind of priest protestants could learn from. his heart is good and his desire is for the lost and to see god as always capable of working with people. it is a wonderful idea and many at immersion last night were able to nod along to some of the different facets that purgatory teaches. even death cannot stop god's work in us.

the problem?

there is no scriptural support for the idea of purgatory. although a few places are quoted [notably: matthew 12:31-32 because it talks of the 'age to come'; and 1 corinthians 3:11-15 because paul talks about being purified in fire] but these are flimsy at best and open to many other interpretations.

also, what can god's 'hose' clean off that the death of christ could not? does god not see christ when he looks at us? are we not supposed to claim our eternal home in heaven as granted to us by christ and his death on the cross? many of us struggle with what that means but the simple fact seems to be that christ accomplished something so deep and profound on golgotha that there are no additions to be required. sadly, purgatory smacks of the ideology that paul dedicated so much of his life fighting against. we cannot add to jesus' sacrifice, we cannot do anything to bring about our own salvation. and to attempt that is to walk away from the grace of god and enter, once again, into the world of law and death.

it is tempting to think that there are chances for us [or, as we discovered last night, one of the driving principles behind our concern is for loved ones who do not know the lord] beyond this world. while there is no proof of purgatory and not even any good arguments for its existence it does teach us one very valuable thing: god works through us and with us to bring about our redemption.

god is always at work in us. that is clear. god is a god of grace and mercy. one of the threats about these kind of topics is that we can get bogged down in semantics which help no one [see the discussion between doug pagitt and todd friel on the video wall and you will see a philosophical discussion that did nothing to help our community understand the nature of hell better. it just made us all sad because neither man came off sounding good or willing to listen. however, it does sound like pagitt was blindsided] and communicate nothing of the grace that our lord put at the heart of his message.

true, jesus does talk about hell as a terrible place to avoid with every fiber of our being. but he showed people how beautiful the kingdom was with his healings and teachings on mercy and grace and even his parables were not designed to confuse but to invite people into the story of the kingdom. no, jesus was never about condemning the world but was all about saving the world. if we can remember that then we are better prepared to see hell for what it really is: a terrible place that is not part of the plan of god.

so...what is hell? we're still not sure. but the video at the end of this story shows us a pretty clear view of what hell on this earth looks like. but, more importantly, it also shows us the love of god on this planet as well.

see you next week.

a picture is worth a thousand screams

"if your right eye causes you to sin, poke it out and throw it away. it is better to lose one part of your body, than for your whole body to end up in hell." [matthew 5:29]

"see that hot girl/guy over there?"
"yeah."
"you just committed lust!"
"oh no! what can i do to stop this infernal [pun intended] lusting?"
"gouge out your eye."
"really?"
"sure, jesus told us to."
"and that will make me stop lusting."
"according to the bible."
"okay, well then i guess that is what i have to do....wait."
"what?"
"what about my imagination?"



does anyone really think that blind people don't lust?

does anyone really think that deaf people don't curse?

does anyone really think that cutting off a hand makes a thief less of a thief?

no, it just makes them a blind pervert, a deaf person with anger issues and a thief with a bit of a tougher time ahead.



so, why would jesus say this stuff, then?



because he is not smart? because the bible is outdated? because he was having a bad day? because the faith called christianity is full of crap?



or...and let's just really put our thinking caps on for this one...



could jesus have actually been using metaphor or hyperbole to explain something?



gasp!!



he would not!



the bible is literal and inerrant and to ascribe to jesus the linguistic art of metaphor would be akin to crucifying him a second time!



if you think that then you probably stopped reading this blog a long time ago.



last night we sat together, sang beautiful one, unfailing love, faithful one & imagine, watched some videos [we highly recommend rowan atkinson's 'a warm welcome'], and talked about hell as a metaphor.



following the persuasive essay by william crockett we explored the numerous ways in which word-pictures have been used throughout scripture [including by jesus himself!]



some of the passages we read were: luke 14:26; matthew 7:5; mark 6:23; and revelation 21



in these words we learned that people apparently walked around with large pieces of timber jutting from their faces [jesus told them to remove them, but not for medical reasons but so they could perform complex optical surgery on their friends...not such a great physician after all!], and anyone who believes in god can make any mountain range they choose do calisthenics [this one is exciting for me since i come from the rocky mountains...there is going to be some shocked people on my next trip home!], and had to be murderously enraged with their own family members before they could even begin to consider themselves worthy of being jesus' followers [that's not too good for business, eh dr. dobson?]



apologies for the sarcasm but not accepting the metaphorical usage in scripture makes the story of christ move from amazing into the absurd and irrelevant faster than anything else. it is necessary to see that seeing jesus as capable of using rabbinic hyperbole does nothing to negate the influence and truth of the scriptures.



so...can this be applied to the doctrine of hell?



dr. crockett thinks so:

"There is nothing wrong with using images to teach truth. After all, Jesus used the images of fire and darkness to warn the wicked of the consequences of sin. Difficulties arise only when we insist that the images reflect concrete reality."

"Unfortunately, some people confuse a high view of Scripture with taking every word of the Bible literally."

we can see the images jesus use to paint the picture of the afterlife [both heaven: a room with many mansions and hell: like the burning garbage dump outside a city] as earthly representations of spiritual truths. after all, jesus is using words and phrases that make sense to people trapped in time and on this planet during a certain stage of history. he must establish a frame of reference or else the words mean nothing to any of us. we are dealing with symbols to describe realities of which our minds and experiences cannot begin to grasp. to take these symbols literally is to miss the point entirely.

"[jesus' metaphors are] not to give the reader a literal picture of torment, but a symbolic one."

"fire in Jewish and early Christian writings is regularly used to create a mood of seriousness or reverence...When the writers use fire to describe judgment or hell, they use a convenient image that will demonstrate the burning wrath of God."

feel better? the next time we dine with our friends and they challenge us on the idea that a loving god could not send someone to burn for eternity we can counter with the argument that fire throughout the bible is often a metaphor and jesus frequently used earthly matters to explain deeper ideas. like when we say we've seen something 'a million times' or 'that apple didn't fall far from the tree' we all acknowledge that they can have literal meanings but most understand that they are being used metaphorically.



then your friend will become instantly relieved [maybe even offering to buy you lunch] and become a professed follower on the spot! and as soon as the excitement dies down they will ask



"so, if hell isn't all full of fire, what is it like then?"
[pause]
"i'll pay for lunch."



we are right back where we started! the only thing that changed was the mode in which the torture takes place...but the fact remains that this argument still sees god torturing those who turned from his offer of grace for eternity. the only difference is that the fire is simply a picture of something so far beyond our experience that we can't grasp it. great! so, in essence, we are talking about something so awful that the closest thing on earth we have to understand it is the image of being burned alive for eternity!



it might, very well, be worse.



anything to say on the topic dr. crockett?

"When it comes to the afterlife, only the dead know for sure."

great. thanks.



so, here is where we stand:

1. there are strong arguments to support the traditional view of hell as something constructed from images in our world to help us understand better and not literal teachings about the nature and appearance of hell


2. it is entirely possible that the world they are describing is vastly worse than anything we can imagine


3. god is sadistic and will torture people forever in some mysterious way that is worse than any conceivable system existant on earth today

i have not been this sad and confused since the end of the empire strikes back

• han is frozen


• luke is vader's son [and down one hand]


• lando is a traitor


• the rebellion's hope is fading fast

it is not fair to be left in the lurch like this



so, perhaps, we need to spend some time trying to define hell a little closer in ways that are both biblical and honest. not an easy task, to say the least. so let us roll up our sleeves and get down to business...



good thing we still have a couple more weeks in hell!

a response to H--E--Double Hockey Sticks

this is a quote from one of our members. really good stuff from one of our deep thinkers:

A couple things.

First... do you think Americans use the "double hockey sticks" expression?

Second, what I really got out of Wednesday night is the idea of eternal damnation. It's true that many people eagerly accept the idea of a timeless paradise, reaching on across the span of eternity in a rosy, glowing hue. Eternal damnation however, doesn't get the same treatment.What is it about 'eternity' that we don't accept? As humans, I think we have a hard enough time looking forward a generation - not to mention FOREVER.

I think most people think in terms of their lifespan: 'til death do us part, or 'until my last breath'. When we think of being happy for eternity, we assume that time passes in a way that we cannot grasp. Eternity is simply a moment that goes on forever. When you think in those terms, it's easier to understand the idea of eternal damnation. Stuck in the moment of rejection of God... forever. It's the fact that it's our choice that seems to scare people. Go towards the light, right? Does suspicion of God's omnipotence translate into rejection? Will we screw it up?

More next time, when I've warmed up with popcorn and Rowan Atkinson.

H---E---Double Hockey Sticks

so, the first week in hell is over! not too bad eh?

last night a large group of us gathered to begin our new series: 4 weeks in hell.

the topic was whether or not we believe in a hell that is a pit of fire where sinners and the lost spend eternity slow roasting for all their sins.

if you have spent any time at all talking to thoughtful people concerned with matters of the faith the topic of hell will most likely come to the surface at some point. the questions usually go something like this:

• how can a loving god send people to burn for eternity?


• isn't it arrogant to think that only christians are the only ones who won't burn?


• i am a good person, why should i spend all eternity burning? i never hurt anyone, i'm no murderer! i love my family and friends...that hardly sounds fair!

most of the people at immersion last night admitted that those are fairly compelling reasons to avoid the whole topic all together.

however, we cannot truly avoid it because it is in the bible. and let us not forget that jesus does spend quite a bit of time talking about it.

so, what is the thoughtful and compassionate believer to do?

well, come to immersion for starters!! [we kid...is funny, no?]

we read and talk about it in a community interested in discovering the truth.

so, last night we read john f. walvoord's defense of the literal interpretation of hell as a place of fire & the eternality of the suffering of the dammed.

here are some segments from his article:

"If one accepts the authority of Scripture as being inerrant and accurate, it is clear that Christ taught the doctrine of everlasting punishment."

"While on the one hand [God] bestows infinite grace on those who trust him, he must, on the other hand, inflict eternal punishment on those who spurn his grace."

"Eternal punishment is an unrelenting doctrine that faces every human being as the alternative to grace and salvation in Jesus Christ. As such, it is a spur to preaching the gospel, to witnessing for Christ, to praying for the unsaved, and to showing compassion on those who need to be snatched as brands from the burning."

while these are only segments they do communicate the basic thrust of dr. walvoord's argument.

this, needless to say, made many people in the community uncomfortable and somewhat upset. but who are we to judge the ways of god? if god deems eternal punishment necessary can we, as mere mortals, really object?

after all walvoord puts scripture after scripture in his essay to compliment and support his argument. some examples from last night [click on the verses to read them]:

isaiah 33:12-14; isaiah 66:22-24; matthew 5:21-30; matthew 13:24-30; matthew 25:14-46

so, what do we do with this?

well, as we looked further into the various texts we began to notice that while some verses talked about hell being full of fire others talked about it being a place of darkness. some mentioned there were worms there that would never stop eating people yet those people were being burned too. how are these opposite images to be reconciled?

we talked about gehenna and jesus' use of that word in the new testament. gehenna was a place where garbage was burned on the outside of the city and jesus uses this place to help explain the netherworld to his disciples.

we began to see that although there are numerous pictures in the bible about hell being a place of fire the traditional view may not be as clear cut as we first thought.

clark pinnock wrote a rebuttal to walvoord [the two are friends, well, until walvoord passed away] and he wrote the following:

"[Walvoord] actually asks us to believe that the God who wills the salvation of the world plans to torture people endlessly in physical fire if they decline his offer of salvation...Who would want to accept salvation from a God like that? Has Walvoord visited the burn unit in his local hospital recently? Is he not conscious of the sadism he is attributing to God's actions? [this view of God] makes him out to be morally worse than Hitler."

although this excerpt is more personal than theological [although theologians who use personal experience in their work do tend to be more convincing] the arguments pinnock puts forth are convincing.

the scriptures quoted by walvoord often appear to uphold his argument on the surface. but only a slightly deeper look begins to show cracks in the armour. many of the passages quoted are metaphorical [and some even poetic] in nature are do not appear to have been designed to be interepreted literally. others are stories.

an example is the use of jesus' parable of the rich man and lazarus in luke 16 when the rich man goes to hell and asks laarus-who is in heaven-for some water to cool him in the flames. walvoord uses this as proof of hell's fiery reality. however, hell is not what this tale is about. it looks to have been a popular morality lesson circulating in the day when jesus walked the earth. jesus uses the story to illustrate his point, which is summed up at the end of the lesson:

He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, 28for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'
"Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.'
" 'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'
"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "

the point of this story is not that hell is full of fire but that the law and the prophets all point to the divinity of jesus. that those who refuse to believe will never believe...even if a man should come back from the dead! this story was told to the readers so that they would understand better how so many could reject christ! to use this tale to defend the traditional view of hell misses the point entirely [after all, why does lazarus go to heaven? there is no mention that he was a believer or any mention about his piety or faithfulness at all...because this is not about the afterlife but is a clever story about the actions of people in this life!]

this is only part 1 so we will leave it at this: the idea of hell as a pit of fire burning forever is not as easy to prove as some would lead us to believe. the words sheol, gehenna, tartaros, hades which are all, at one point or another, translated as hell in the english bible have varied [and sometime contradictory] meanings. it appears that the traditional pit of fire depictions of hell are not necessarily the most biblical...even though the proponents for this position argue that they are! therefore, we are forced to resign ourselves to the fact that we do not have an answer yet, but we seem to be getting closer.

good thing we have 3 more weeks in hell.