Canticles of the Unhomed
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
To Hell With This...
So Jayson and I spent some time in Saskatoon a couple of weeks ago (okay, so it was a few months now) fighting (not debating, or discussing, or dialoguing) about hell. He asked me to blog about it. Check out his thoughts here.
So, I am preparing a defense of the more... classical understanding of the doctrine of eternal punishment. I would like to point anyone who is interested to probably the most definitive work on the subject, "Death and the Afterlife" by Dr. Robert Morey, Bethany House Publishers, ISBN: 076422686X.
I am choosing not to get involved in the philosophic or ethical issues around the doctrine of hell. I know that is precisely what Jayson is interested in, but I think a more Scripture-centric exploration would be more informative, and less distracted by more present-day cultural interpretations. For the purposes of this blog, I will limit myself to an examination of Matthew 25:31-46 and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10.
My thesis is that eternal punishment is actual, conscious, and everlasting, based upon a literal reading of the two passages. More to the point, this thesis is supported in a general sense of the references to the doctrine of eternal punishment throughout the New Testament. Of course, I am dealing with New Testament passages here, and reflect a New Testament sensibility. The truth is that the Old Testament is vague to the point of incoherency about the nature of the afterlife, punitive or otherwise, and the New Testament is several orders of magnitude more explicit, though still not adequately explicit for some. Personally, I am not comfortable with this thesis. More on that later.
A note on my approach to Scripture. To me, the words of the Scriptures are absolute. I don't necessarily follow with all this post-modern "culturally layered meta-narrative story evolution" bull-shyte. I believe that God intended for the Scriptures to be understood simply and clearly. The original writers had an intention that they were trying to share, and it is my job as exegete to uncover that intention. The Scriptures are the result of an oral tradition and were originally intended for a simple, though culturally estranged from us, audience. That tells me that the Scriptures do not need an overly complicated or sophisticated interpretive model. If some barely literate pastor in some third world country can hold the new testament, newly translated into his own language, and derive comfort and instruction for his community without "appreciating the subtle nuances of culture and historical interpretation," then I should be able to as well.
MATTHEW 25:31-46 -- This is the apocalyptic chapter of Matthew in which Jesus is talking about final things. In chapter 24 he talked about the end of days, "one will be taken, the other left," what some call the Rapture. He then moves on and tells two parables. One, about the talents, suggesting that we need take care with which we fill our days, for when the Master returns, there will be an accounting; a clear reference to judgement, specifically of works. Then he tells the parable of the wise and foolish virgins. The wise virgins brought extra oil, while the foolish ones only took what they immediately needed. Thus, when they ran out, the foolish virgins had to go back, and miss the rendezvous with the Bridegroom. Again, there is a connotation of impending judgement, and the need to be prepared, for the judgement will be swift, unblinking and final. The next section is what some call the parable of the sheep and the goats. Though I am no textual scholar, it seems to me that the language in this section is sufficiently different to suggest that this is not a parable like the others. The first two parables both dealt with the subject of judgement in an earthly sense; first as an accounting of earthly deeds, and then in reference to preparation for some mysterious future event. The language in both these is particularly figurative, while in the third story, suddenly the language becomes much more definite. There are certain things that are interesting to note in this story. First is the use of more classical apocalyptic language. One of the textbook definitions of apocalyptic language is the use of vivid descriptive language. Jesus describes the throne, and those gathered before it. Jesus uses the pastoral metaphor of separating sheep from goats as a shepherd would; an image well known to his rustic listeners, but there is never the sense that Jesus is implying that actual sheep and goats were being divided. He says that the people were being divided AS a shepherd would separate goats from among his flock of sheep. Also, interestingly, Jesus identifies himself here, in referencing "the Son of Man," a title that Jesus frequently used to describe himself. Again, the judgement here was in reference to earthly deeds, specifically the treatment of the poor, displaced, oppressed or the disenfranchised. This is a departure from classical parable language. Also, the fate of the righteous and the wicked are described with almost poetic clarity: "Come, you who have been blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world," "Get away from me, you who are accursed, into the eternal fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels!" "These people will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous will go into eternal life." The interesting thing in this passage is the juxtaposition, in verse 46, of eternal punishment and eternal life. This kind of almost poetic contrast is common in Hebrew poetry, though this is not poetry. The Greek in this passage is "kolaysin aionion," which literally means, "punishment/torment/painful disquietude of infinite duration." The Greek word "kolaysin" refers to the physical torture, pain or torment one receives as punishment for wrongdoing. The original readers would have understood this as a physical pain, not mental or spiritual anguish. The Greek word "aionion" is generally translated "eternal," though it refers to DURATION rather than nature. The original readers would have understood this to be referring to an unending span of time.
A note here as to the Greek word "aionion." This is the word that we derive our word "eon" from, meaning an indefinite span of time, nonetheless with a beginning and an end. There are some scholars that ascribe this connotation to the meaning of the word, and their evidence is legion. It is the application of this theory that produces purgatory theology such as that of the Roman Catholic Church. However, the Patristics were unanimous in their belief in an unending lucid afterlife, both positive and negative. However, to be fair, the belief in purgatory can be found in the Patristics as well. As well, it should be noted that the translators of the major bible translations, such as the NASB, NIV, NRSV, and the NKJV do not render the word in this manner, and rather tend to prefer the "everlasting" connotation. Now, alternatively, the Greek phrase "zoayne aionion," literally means, "living existence/life/opposite of death of infinite duration." Most people have no problem with the idea of an eternal heaven where the righteous enjoy God's presence and are rewarded for their faithfulness for eternity. However, in this same passage, using the same language, even in the same sentence Jesus, through the written words of the Apostle Matthew, speaks of never-ending torment for those cast away from God's presence.
The clear indication from this passage is that the idea that the author (Matthew) was trying convey was that the speaker (Christ) was intimating a final positive and negative consequence for the way we choose to live our lives. That negative consequence, hell, is portrayed as of infinite duration; punitive in nature, away from God's presence, and that the victims of this consequence are entirely lucid.
2 THESSALONIANS 1:6-10 -- In 2 Thessalonians Paul was writing to an influential Greek church on the main roman road east, the Via Egnatia. In his previous letter, he commended them for the faith and set to correcting some of their beliefs about the end times. The correction did not seem to be sufficient, since almost the entirety of the second letter is given over to eschatological explanation. The large idea in this book is suffering. This is common throughout the New Testament. NT writers often waxed eschatological in order to comfort the Christians they were writing to. This is the intent of the entire book of Revelation. It seemed to be the aim of the NT writers to bring persecuted Christians comfort by placing their hope in the future, where everything will be sorted out, the wicked will get what's coming to them, and the righteous will be rewarded for their faith, and God's sovereignty will ultimately be exercised. The Thessalonian Christians were still under considerable persecution, and Paul was writing to them to encourage them. Coming to 1:6-10 specifically, Paul is encouraging the believers as to the fate of those that persecute them. The passage refers to God repaying with affliction those that had caused affliction on the believers. Paul comforts the Thessalonian Christians by essentially saying, "Don't worry, those bastards that made you suffer will get their comeuppance. God will destroy them for what they have done." The retributionary nature of this punishment is a key idea. In this case Paul was referring to the Romans, of course, and the unfolding vilification of the Roman Empire is a recurring theme in New Testament writings. The NIV says, "... This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God (the Romans) and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. (The unbelievers, and by extension, the Romans) They (those that don't know God and/or have rejected the gospel) will be punished with everlasting destruction (olethron aionion) and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power..." In the same passage, the NKJV says that Christ will come "... in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God..." The interesting Greek phrase "olethron aionion" is used here. This should be juxtaposed with "kolaysin aionion," which we examined in the last passage. The construction is similar. In this passage, "olethron" is rendered "destruction," although there is a connotation of an ongoing destruction. Matthew Henry, the great Puritan scholar, says about this passage, "This destruction will be everlasting. They shall be always dying, and yet never die. Their misery will run parallel with the line of eternity. The chains of darkness are everlasting chains, and the fire is everlasting fire. It must needs be so, since the punishment is inflicted by an eternal God, fastening upon an immortal soul, set out of the reach of divine mercy and grace." Olethron does not connate annihilation. It does not suggest that something is completely obliterated, but rather ruined, corrupted, wrecked, damaged beyond repair; sort of the way that we would say that a car that had been totaled in an accident has been "destroyed." So, these poor wretches will suffer the agony of being wrecked, ruined, or damaged beyond repair for all of eternity; of always dying, but never being dead. This should not be confused with the judgement of God in this world. God deals out punishment and destruction in this life, but it is always through instruments; such as his use of Nebuchadnezzar to destroy the nation of Israel, etc. But, in this case, the punishment will come directly from the hand of God himself. As I see it, the implication is clear. Again, we see a punitive afterlife based upon the actions of those involved. That afterlife is actual, ongoing, everlasting and lucid.
How do we respond to this? What does this tell us about the nature of the God that we serve, that we call Master? The truth is I cannot defend the ethicality of a God that would inflict such horrible punishment on someone in an entirely retributionary sense. In the biblical witness concerning hell, there is no discussion of reconciliation or rehabilitation. Personally, that flies in the face of what I know about God. As far as I see from the biblical record, hell, or the lake of fire, or whatever you want to call it is an END. You go to hell, and that is IT. I am not comfortable with this at all. Yet I believe it. I must.
And yet... I do not judge the Scriptures from my experience, rather the reverse. I am required to say that I must conclude I am missing something about the nature of God. I would prefer a gentler God, but it is not my place to judge my Master. Maybe, just maybe, God is not the God of North American Evangelicalism. Perhaps we are guilty of anthropomorphizing God just a bit too much. God is not like us. We are created in his image, but he is nonetheless alien to us. He says in Isaiah 55:8,9: "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts." If he was so much like us, then the incarnation would not have been necessary. Perhaps we are no better off than some South American tribe that has heard of Christ, but has had no explicit teaching. Perhaps the past five hundred years of Protestantism and the preceding thousand years of institutional Christianity has served to do nothing more than insulate and isolate us from the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. What is it that the Gospel of Thomas says... "... do not look for me in a house of stone, but split a piece of wood and I am there, turn a stone and I am there..." I am reminded that one of the things that God does best is obliterate our preconceptions, presumptions and paradigms. At the end, I would have to say that while I am not comfortable with the idea of the punitive afterlife as rendered by these Scriptures, I don't have to be. God hasn't come to me and asked me to sign off on these things before he puts them out. God is the landlord of this house. If he wants to paint it hot pink with green and blue polka dots, then that is his right. It’s up to me to find a way to integrate it. I guess its part of being a grown up. Sometimes, when you're a kid, if you don't like something you can throw a tantrum, and hold your breath until the associated authority figure gives in. Now though, we are better at those tantrums, and they tend to be more sophisticated than simply holding our breath and stamping our foot. But, as an adult, we are sometimes confronted with things that we may not like, but are powerless to change. Maybe this is like that.
:: written by Matt Thompson, 1:15 AM
12 Comments:
OK is this coincidence or did my comment about Robert Morey's book in the 110 comment thread trigger your memory?
Anyway, it's good to see you still have the preaching gene. I wholeheartedly agree with your conclusion. I don't see any other possibility in scripture. I also share your dismay over having to believe this particular doctrine as it does go against all contemporary sensibilities. (Of course cultural sensibilities are usually shaped by sin, not truth)
This is the sort of post that goes well with a shot of bourbon. I think the dirk hit the nail on the head - our cultural sensibilities are too often shaped by sin.
I once mused (nothing deep) that it's heaven being in a room with someone you love, hell to be stuck in the same room with someone you hate. If there are those who "hate" God, who definitively say "no" to Him and all that He is, even if they were invited into the kingdom of heaven, would they enjoy it?
I once mused (nothing deep) that it's heaven being in a room with someone you love, hell to be stuck in the same room with someone you hate. If there are those who "hate" God, who definitively say "no" to Him and all that He is, even if they were invited into the kingdom of heaven, would they enjoy it?
Sounds like the eastern Christian view of the afterlife - Hell is being with God, and not being able to stand it. I think those Anglicans are more Orthodox than they might admit to.
Very interesting post, Matt. I enjoyed reading it. It also made me curious about what kind of physical punishment the biblical authors were talking about.
Side note: does this mean that God will put together the decomposed bodies of the damned for the exclusive purpose of physical torment?
Side note: does this mean that God will put together the decomposed bodies of the damned for the exclusive purpose of physical torment?
Hi Matt,
Thanks for the post. You have a gift for writing I think. Look forward to getting together and continuing our discussions in person.
Carlos
Thanks for the post. You have a gift for writing I think. Look forward to getting together and continuing our discussions in person.
Carlos
Writtine by Kevin Beck over at http://www.presence.tv
Jesus and the End
Jesus as a Second Temple Jew was steeped in the Law and the prophets. Jesus knew both Moses and Daniel, and Jesus employed their ‘end’ language by applying it to his own day.
Shortly before the crucifixion, Jesus’ disciples admired the Jerusalem temple. Jesus warned them that the temple would eventually be torn down. Curious, the disciples asked Jesus when this would happen as they linked this event to “the end of the age.” This is the same age-ending time that Moses and Daniel looked toward.
Jesus instructed his disciples that they would hear of all sorts of wars, yet the end was not yet. Persecution would increase and so would Law breaking. Yet those who persevered until the end would receive their reward. At the same time, the kingdom message would spread amongst the gentiles permitting them to be blessed too (just as Moses predicted). At this point, the end will come.
Jesus specifically quoted Daniel (in 24:15) to alert his original audience to the arrival of the end. As the ancient Judeans observed certain events, they were to head for the hills—literally. Jesus pronounced to his original audience that they would be the ones witnessing the end, “Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place (fulfilled, ended)” (24:34).
From there, Jesus again echoed Daniel. He told the disciples on the Mount of Olives that the end would be similar to what Noah experienced. Daniel used this language when discussing the demolition of the city and the sanctuary, “Its end shall come with a flood” (Daniel 9:26).
To summarize, Jesus anticipated an end that would come within the lifetime of his original disciples. It included the fall of Jerusalem and the flattening of the temple. To escape the devastation that would accompany the end, those living in the environs of Jerusalem were to hide in the nearby mountains. This end, therefore, is not the end of time. It was the end of the Old Covenant arrangement that was housed in the Jerusalem temple. This end reached its acme in the Roman-Jewish War.
Jesus and the End
Jesus as a Second Temple Jew was steeped in the Law and the prophets. Jesus knew both Moses and Daniel, and Jesus employed their ‘end’ language by applying it to his own day.
Shortly before the crucifixion, Jesus’ disciples admired the Jerusalem temple. Jesus warned them that the temple would eventually be torn down. Curious, the disciples asked Jesus when this would happen as they linked this event to “the end of the age.” This is the same age-ending time that Moses and Daniel looked toward.
Jesus instructed his disciples that they would hear of all sorts of wars, yet the end was not yet. Persecution would increase and so would Law breaking. Yet those who persevered until the end would receive their reward. At the same time, the kingdom message would spread amongst the gentiles permitting them to be blessed too (just as Moses predicted). At this point, the end will come.
Jesus specifically quoted Daniel (in 24:15) to alert his original audience to the arrival of the end. As the ancient Judeans observed certain events, they were to head for the hills—literally. Jesus pronounced to his original audience that they would be the ones witnessing the end, “Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place (fulfilled, ended)” (24:34).
From there, Jesus again echoed Daniel. He told the disciples on the Mount of Olives that the end would be similar to what Noah experienced. Daniel used this language when discussing the demolition of the city and the sanctuary, “Its end shall come with a flood” (Daniel 9:26).
To summarize, Jesus anticipated an end that would come within the lifetime of his original disciples. It included the fall of Jerusalem and the flattening of the temple. To escape the devastation that would accompany the end, those living in the environs of Jerusalem were to hide in the nearby mountains. This end, therefore, is not the end of time. It was the end of the Old Covenant arrangement that was housed in the Jerusalem temple. This end reached its acme in the Roman-Jewish War.
Sorry, this is the one I wanted to cut and paste. This is more specific.
– The Resurrection of Condemnation –
Jn 5:24-29 "Most assuredly, I say to you [of Israel], he who hears My word and believes [the first-fruits] in Him who sent Me has everlasting life [life unto or into the age/s Eph 2:7 – the AD70+ world of righteousness 2Pet 3:13], and shall not come into judgment [condemnation], but has passed [present tense] from death into life [into covenantal resurrection]. Most assuredly, I say to you [of Israel], the hour is coming, and now is [present tense], when the dead [in trespasses and sins] will hear the voice [the Gospel] of the Son of God; and those who hear will live [in fulness of life i.e., eternal life – Jn 10:10]. For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all [the harvest] who are in the graves [Israel – Eze 37:1-14] will hear His voice and come forth--those who have done good [righteous works of grace], to the resurrection of life [the AD70 reward of such works], and those who have done evil [self-righteous works of law], to the resurrection of condemnation [the AD70 consequences of such works].
The context of this passage shows that this resurrection was a spiritual-moral-covenantal awakening and was occurring as a result of the contemporary and concurrent proclamation and acceptance of the Gospel – this the language makes abundantly clear "he who hears My word and believes… has eternal life" Those who came into this awareness of the truth [verse 25 first-fruits resurrection], but in shame subsequently disregarded the heavenly message and calling [Heb 2:3; 6:4-8; 10:26-17, 29; Jn 8:30-33, 37, 44; 2Pet 1:10] indeed experienced resurrection from "the death" – out of trespasses and sins, only to experience the consequences of the resurrection of condemnation i.e., personal shame and or the actual loss of life in the second death, lake of Fire – Israel's AD70 conflagration.
Those who had acquiesced again [Gal 2:18] to that which they had initially abandoned in Christ – the law for righteousness, literally paid with their lives. Entrusting their lives yet again to that old covenant world and identity of Jerusalem, Temple and Law – that to which they had returned, having "fallen from grace" [Gal 3:1-3; 5:4] returning as it were like dogs to vomit [2Pet 2:20-22], reverting once more to law observance for righteousness – "filthy rags", "dung" and "loss" [Isa 64:6; Phil 3:8; 1Cor 3:15]; yet for those who remained "in Christ Jesus" there was "no condemnation" [Rom 8:1], no shame [Mk 8:38].
Yet even through this did the grace of God reach:
1Cor 3:15 If anyone's work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved [delivered], yet so as through [the AD70] fire.
The resurrection of AD70 did have temporal and corporeal outcomes [destruction and loss of physical life], but the main thrust of the Age Changing Resurrection was the fulfillment of Israel's restoration-resurrection – "the promise" [Act 26:6-8], which subsequently brought Life to the world [Rom 11:15]. Thus resurrection was about transition and covenantal stance; it was not about individual substance post death i.e., one's composition or disposition, but rather about humanity's renewed, restored and reconciled position with God through Christ.
David G. Embury © Copyright 2002-2004
Email: webmaster@pantelism.com
– The Resurrection of Condemnation –
Jn 5:24-29 "Most assuredly, I say to you [of Israel], he who hears My word and believes [the first-fruits] in Him who sent Me has everlasting life [life unto or into the age/s Eph 2:7 – the AD70+ world of righteousness 2Pet 3:13], and shall not come into judgment [condemnation], but has passed [present tense] from death into life [into covenantal resurrection]. Most assuredly, I say to you [of Israel], the hour is coming, and now is [present tense], when the dead [in trespasses and sins] will hear the voice [the Gospel] of the Son of God; and those who hear will live [in fulness of life i.e., eternal life – Jn 10:10]. For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself, and has given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all [the harvest] who are in the graves [Israel – Eze 37:1-14] will hear His voice and come forth--those who have done good [righteous works of grace], to the resurrection of life [the AD70 reward of such works], and those who have done evil [self-righteous works of law], to the resurrection of condemnation [the AD70 consequences of such works].
The context of this passage shows that this resurrection was a spiritual-moral-covenantal awakening and was occurring as a result of the contemporary and concurrent proclamation and acceptance of the Gospel – this the language makes abundantly clear "he who hears My word and believes… has eternal life" Those who came into this awareness of the truth [verse 25 first-fruits resurrection], but in shame subsequently disregarded the heavenly message and calling [Heb 2:3; 6:4-8; 10:26-17, 29; Jn 8:30-33, 37, 44; 2Pet 1:10] indeed experienced resurrection from "the death" – out of trespasses and sins, only to experience the consequences of the resurrection of condemnation i.e., personal shame and or the actual loss of life in the second death, lake of Fire – Israel's AD70 conflagration.
Those who had acquiesced again [Gal 2:18] to that which they had initially abandoned in Christ – the law for righteousness, literally paid with their lives. Entrusting their lives yet again to that old covenant world and identity of Jerusalem, Temple and Law – that to which they had returned, having "fallen from grace" [Gal 3:1-3; 5:4] returning as it were like dogs to vomit [2Pet 2:20-22], reverting once more to law observance for righteousness – "filthy rags", "dung" and "loss" [Isa 64:6; Phil 3:8; 1Cor 3:15]; yet for those who remained "in Christ Jesus" there was "no condemnation" [Rom 8:1], no shame [Mk 8:38].
Yet even through this did the grace of God reach:
1Cor 3:15 If anyone's work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved [delivered], yet so as through [the AD70] fire.
The resurrection of AD70 did have temporal and corporeal outcomes [destruction and loss of physical life], but the main thrust of the Age Changing Resurrection was the fulfillment of Israel's restoration-resurrection – "the promise" [Act 26:6-8], which subsequently brought Life to the world [Rom 11:15]. Thus resurrection was about transition and covenantal stance; it was not about individual substance post death i.e., one's composition or disposition, but rather about humanity's renewed, restored and reconciled position with God through Christ.
David G. Embury © Copyright 2002-2004
Email: webmaster@pantelism.com
Hmm, haven't really given hell too much thought. Maybe because I'm not planning on going. You keep thinking about it though.
The point is...no one is. It's over.
In reponse to Jerry's question,
The resurrection is indiscriminate. Some of us will be resurrected to eternal life, others to damnation. Consider that we were originally created as equally spiritual and physical - a foreshadowing of the incarnation - and thus we would not be able to experience the joys of the presence of God nor the torment of estrangement from the same without a physical body. Perhaps it makes the punishment that much more... exquisite that we will be experiencing it through the lens of a flawless, perfected physical body.
The resurrection is indiscriminate. Some of us will be resurrected to eternal life, others to damnation. Consider that we were originally created as equally spiritual and physical - a foreshadowing of the incarnation - and thus we would not be able to experience the joys of the presence of God nor the torment of estrangement from the same without a physical body. Perhaps it makes the punishment that much more... exquisite that we will be experiencing it through the lens of a flawless, perfected physical body.
http://www.knowingtodaysgod.com/index_files/Page535.htm
