Post by Josh on Jan 30, 2017 16:40:16 GMT -8
Growing up, I took the default position on the subject, known by some as the "Eternal, Conscious Torment" view. The worst excesses of this were mitigated by insights from C.S. Lewis on the nature of free will and his assertion that the "gate of hell" is only locked from the "inside"- hell is freely chosen, in other words. Lewis himself flirts with the idea that it is possible for someone to unchoose hell (see his excellent novel "The Great Divorce", which apart from one's views of the afterlife or even one's views on Christianity, is a piercing and insightful analysis of human nature), but was never too dogmatic on the subject.
I was aware of other views on the subject, such as Annihilationism, which holds that those in hell eventually cease to exist, or Universalism, which holds that eventually all those in hell will come to a point of reconciliation with God through Jesus.
My big hangup was that I thought my view was the "biblical one" and the others were mere wishful thinking. It has always and still does mean a lot to me that a theological stance has rational and exegetical support based on Scripture.
In the process of trying to debunk the Annihilationist view years ago I was surprised to see how the biblical texts that discuss hell can just as easily be argued to be pointing to an eventual extinction. Indeed, there are some passages, focusing on the theme of "destruction" in hell, which seem to overtly teach this. See here for a reasonable defense of the view: reknew.org/2008/01/the-case-for-annihilationism/
After my investigation, I became open to the possibility of Annihiliationism, but was pretty staunchly against the Universalist view, which seemed to remain so contradictory to my understanding of Scripture.
But then I encountered some folks I respect who held the view and set out to give it a fresh analysis. I was surprised to find that far from simply being the most satisfying view from an emotional or logical perspective (the idea that all will eventually reconciled to God and that God, as a good parent, would never punish except in a remedial way), universalism has strong biblical merit. Not only that, but all three views, including Universalism have a long pedigree in church history (something else I was unaware of growing up). It's interesting to note how passages in Scripture which from an attempted unbiased perspective seem to teach Universalism were conveniently explained away when seen from the perspective of assumed "Eternal, Conscious Torment". A book that was particularly insightful along all these lines (theological/ philosophical/ exegetical) was The Inescapable Love of God by Thomas Talbott.
So, now, at the very least I think all three views deserve to be given respect. I think it's quite possible that God may have intentionally left the matter a tad unclear, so as to help us avoid the extremes of morbid dread on the one hand and casual disregard for the gospel here and now. But, as I hold that all three views are plausible, it seems I'm free to follow my heart, which is that, in the end God will redeem everything in the universe through the passion of his Son's death and resurrection.
1 Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
Another great resource that summarizes it all is by my friend and mentor Steve Gregg:
All You Want to Know About Hell: Three Christian Views of God's Final Solution to the Problem of Sin
www.amazon.com/All-Want-Know-About-Hell/dp/1401678300