we're outta hell

it is official...we are out of hell

it was quite the journey through fire [both real and metaphorical] and darkness [also, both real and metahporical] and have emerged, somewhat unscathed on the other side.

all euphimisms aside, it was an engaging series full of new discoveries and fascinating discussions.

last night we concluded the series talking about the conditional view of salvation. are all humans destined for immortality or is eternal life conditional on acceptance of christ and following in the footsteps of god?

this view is also known as annihilationism because those who refuse to spend eternity with god are, literally, annihilated and cease to exist.

the reasoning is that god honours all decisions of the human species, even those who do not choose him. clark pinnock words it like this:

"He will not save [people] if they do not want to be saved. God wills the salvation of all people (2 Peter 3:9) but will fail to save some of them on account of their human freedom...Sinners do not have to be saved and will not be forced to go to heaven. They have a moral 'right' to hell...In the end he will allow us to become what we have chosen."

god has no obligation to keep everyone alive. only god is truly immortal and bestows immortality upon those who are the children of god.

is not everyone the child of god?

no. according to christ in john 8:38-40 some of the people were the children of the devil!

the idea that everyone is a full-blooded child of god is not biblical and that must be taken seriously.

we must also take the teachings of the bible seriously on the matter of hell. it is an uncomfortable topic but that is precisely why we chose it as a topic. every sensitive christian should, at least once, question how we can reconcile a loving god [as we see in jesus] with a god who allows people to burn for eternity for sins they committed while trapped in time. that is a legitimate grievance. we can dislike the idea of hell all we want [and many people at the immersion services throughout the weeks have expressed that] but this is not about what we like or dislike. it is about trying to understand and be faithful to One who we are called to serve...not the other way around.

back to the topic at hand.

pinnock argues that the bible never teaches the immortality of the soul but that this idea has crept in from greek philosophy. in fact, the bible teaches that those whom god declares as wicked are not kept alive forever to suffer inexpressible torments but are actually destined for destruction.

'hell' is not eternal suffering but is, in fact, the great nothing of nonexistence. a complete negation of the gift of life offered by god. a dark place, the outer ring where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. the wicked are burned up, consumed and exist no more. in the end days all that will exist will be the kingdom of god [as it says, god will be 'all in all' 1 corinthians 15:28] and those who have chosen not to exist there will not be in some dark corner of heaven just hanging out and burning. no, life will no longer be theirs to possess and so they will no longer be alive. they will be swallowed up by the second death that is described in rev. 20:5. thus, hell is still an inexpressibly horrible fate, but is not the inexplicably cruel fate described by those who support the traditional hypothesis. thus, we retain the fear of hell as jesus described it because that is a terrible fate. but we do not have the moral gymnastics to do in order to explain how a loving god can see the justice of building an eternal 'auschwitz' that does not even offer people the reprise of death.

however, is this scriptural?

pinnock [and myself] would argue that it is. here are some verses that clearly speak of the impending destruction [and not eternal torment] of the wicked:

• 2 thessalonians 1:9 everlasting destruction


• matthew 13:30; 42; 49-50 weeds burned up and destroyed


• galatians 6:8 god will destroy the wicked


• 1 corinthians 3:17


• philippians 1:28 both of these spoke about the fate of the wicked being death


• romans 1:32 the wicked deserve death


• romans 6:23 the wages of sin is death


• philippians 3:19 their destiny is death


• 2 peter 3:7 destruction of ungodly men


• 2 peter 2:1,3 swift destruction


• 2 peter 2:6 the evil will be like sodom and gomorrah which were utterly destroyed by god


• jude 7 cites sodom as the city that underwent 'the punishment of eternal fire'

it seems pretty clear that death and destruction is all that await the rebellious ones. while those who are humble and serve can expect eternal life in the kingdom of god as their reward.

even the verses that speak of 'everlasting destruction' can be countered by other verses using the same language but referring to places that are not still burning to this day but were utterly destroyed [like sodom].

even jesus' use of the word gehenna can combat the idea of eternal suffering. the idea of the worm that does not die does not mean that people are eaten by worms forever but is a reference to isaiah 66:24 when there were so many dead that the worms were able to feast on. the smoke that rises is not to indicate eternal, conscious torment but imagery to indicate total destruction and consumption.

listen, this is not designed to give anyone warm fuzzies but that is because the topic of hell must be seen as a very real threat written about numerous times throughout the scriptures. we cannot and should not ever become comfortable with hell as a destiny for anyone we know. jesus was not comfortable with this prospect and went to the cross to make sure that it would not be the fate of humanity.

however, god's love for humanity is so deep and profound that a place like hell must exist because our Lord does not force his love onto anyone who does not want it.

the world is full of clues about god and god's love but, as cam pointed out last night, he seems to purposefully withdraw his full glory so that we are forced to rely on faith.

seeing god in all the splendour of the Creator would eliminate the need for faith. but it might also eliminate real love. and that is one thing that god is all about: love.

so, in conclusion, whether or not you like the traditional, metaphorical, purgatorial, or conditional view of hell is not the point. we should not 'like' any of it. we should dig through scripture in prayer to find an answer to this question that can be supported.

but, as we talk with our friends over a coffee or pint or whatever we should ask them what they think about hell and offer our guidance. we can talk about the use of symbolism and metaphor and feel utterly confident to agree that the idea of eternal suffering does not coinside with the loving picture we get of god in the new testament [and in the old testament as well].

we must remember, first and foremost, that the god we serve is the god of john 3:16; is the god of the oppressed and downtrodden; is the god of mercy, love and compassion. we must look at the doctrine of hell in the same way we are called to look at everything: through the lens of christ.

what does christ teach us?

what was he like?

was he tolerant of sin? no. but neither was he vicious and sadistic to sinners.

if we can begin our discussions about hell [and discussions is what they should always be since none of us know exactly what hell looks like we should all be willing to entertain suggestions and not assert our conjectures dogmatically. remember the suggestions tell us more about the person saying them than about actual hell and if we are trying to understand someone listening to what they think about something is the easiest way to see them a little clearer.] with christ in mind then our opinions will be tempered with love and compassion and, who knows, we might actually help some people learn more about god because we talked to them about hell!

stranger things have happened.

now, here's a song about god....

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.