Post millennialism has been One of the most encouraging doctrines, to me over the last year and a half, and pastors Doug’s family and ministry have been a consistent testimony of it “ Coming out of his fingertips.” I’ve gleaned a lot from him and it’s been a blessing to and my family.
Doug I want to thank you for your work and helping me understand Post Mil. I think it harmonizes so many things like Limited Atonement with all the passages on God's love for the Whole World and even this issue.
Thank you Pastor Wilson. Having come to this understanding of postmill, I can finally understand so many things in God's word that simply escaped me in the past. I believe I have a piece of truth that the church desperately needs. There is a burden on my heart to share this, and I intend to do just that. May the Lord bless our efforts to bring this into every Christian home, and may He also grant me the patience to allow my brethren the time they need to absorb it.
Will you publish or make available that which your piece of truth is, as claimed by yourself? Will you do that via your own channel but by more subtle means?
For Rob Bell to imply that no one goes to hell completely undermines the message of the Gospel, that Jesus died and rose again for a reason. Jesus' didn't save us from an angry God as if Jesus disagreed with the plan of salvation of sinners as Rob Bell insinuates, rather Jesus and the Father (God) were one (John 14) Pastors like Doug Wilson and John MacArthur challenge Rob Bell because he is a false teacher and many people are being lead astray by lies.
Jesus said the way to Hell is broad and MANY who find it, the way to Heaven is narrow and FEW will find it. There’s your proportions, to Hell with anyone who says something else.
The problem with Doug’s approach here is the belief in hell- eternal punishment is permanent if you end up dead, eternal flames and worms destroy those thrown into them.
@@jgeph2.4 *"...the damned are resurrected as well"* You are almost right, Jamie. All will be resurrected. Only the redeemed will be given immortal bodies, however. The lost, in their resurrected mortal bodies, will die a second time and those bodies will be utterly consumed. ✴ _“Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and the day that is coming will set them on fire,” says the Lord Almighty. “Not a root or a branch will be left to them. … Then you will trample on the wicked; they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day when I act,” says the Lord Almighty._ (Malachi 4: 1;3, NIV)
Zeitgeist sniffer. 😂. One of the ways in which our Lord has gifted you is that you are not a vocabulary snob showing no bent towards haughty or lowly words. It's one of the reasons you are such an effective communicator in that you don't allow your knowledge of more sophisticated words displace your use of the banal but rather enhance it resulting in gems such as "zeitgeist sniffer". If this isn't original to you, the point still stands. Blessings to you Pastor Doug.
I don't believe they are jealous. The fact that a lot of young people like his message, does not give credibility to his teachings or show that he faithful to Holy Scripture. This isn't the first time that Rob Bell has said something or wrote a book that has been popular or that other pastors have been adamant about addressing/correcting. They issue at state is biblical accuracy and faithfulness to the Gospel.
@dohboy3000 I'm the producer, and know Doug Wilson. I'm quite sure he will read the book soon after it arrives. I'm also quite sure he would meet (and be wiling to debate) Rob Bell in person. And judging from his debates and personal interaction with MANY other men, including a documentary with Christopher Hitchens, I know he would be very gentlemanly in his actions. And he believes Bell is wrong because he goes against what is clear in the Bible. I feel you are the one who is quick to judge.
I want to thank Doug Wilson (and Canon Press) for leaving the comments section open for discussion. William Lane Craig YT channels (not republished channels) are nearly always set to disable comments and it is difficult to deal with being restrained from, in WLC's case, refute error.
Well, they're dead already (Heb. 9:27) so your question about a living biological creature being able to survive a lake of fire for more than a couple seconds is moot.
@@frikandelthaisaus Except that when the lake of fire is spoken of in Revelation, after the 1000 years of Satan's binding (when the false prophet and the beast were thrown in), Satan was also thrown in. And what does that passage say? "And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet ARE also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever." Revelation 20:10 NASB Notice that the beast and false prophet ARE still in the lake of fire after 1000 years, not WERE. This speaks to eternality, that they won't be consumed or blotted out. It is an eternal state.
@@douglasmcnay644 Yes and death and hades will also be there, are you saying that death and hades (the grave) will be tormented for eternity? Or do you understand that Revelation is using mostly symbolic language? Furthermore, according to John 3:16 the ones who don't love the Lord will perish and not have eternal life. And according to 2 Thes. 1:9 they will be punished with everlasting destruction. Jesus taught that God will "destroy body and soul" of the unrighteous ones in hell or gehenna (Mat. 10:28).
I cannot seem to reconcile the predominant view of Gods justice being eternal punishment, as in punishment that is unending, with His law. I think His standard of justice must be consistent with His law. That is the very standard. I think we should all be asking more questions. Why the jubilee? Why does His law place a limit on all judgement? Does He act contrary to the law? That is does He act against His very nature?
*"How can we harmonize the passages that talk about the reality of hell....?"* (@5:30) I can't find any _"passages that talk about the reality of hell",_ Brother Doug. I can only find passages which talk about Sheol, Hades and Gehenna.
@@contactmatts That is a good question. It seems a great many people think that the Lake of Fire is hell. However, in Revelation 20: 14 we see death and hell cast _into_ the Lake of Fire. Thus, "hell" and the Lake of Fire are two entirely different entities. P. S. "Hell" is a mistranslation here. The original word is "Hades" and Hades is not hell. Hades is the state of being dead . . . deathdom . . . essentially, the grave.
@@IsaacNussbaum "9 And another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he also will drink the wine of God's wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.” 12 Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus." Revelation 14:9-12 Those who worship the beast are tormented forever, in the presence of the Lamb and the holy angels. Scripture is very clear, Hell is very real, and eternal. We are eternal beings, and our destination is eternal, it just depends is it away from the presence of the Lord, in torment and anguish, in outer darkness, or with the Lord in His kingdom.
i thought the documentary was very well done and quite professional.. Hitchens, from my perspective, does a lot of scoffing at the Bible and its teachings, but doesn't refute them.. most atheists can't tell the difference though..
pastor ,I so want to agree with your words,you are so wise-but when you said few in hell and many in heaven =isn't this contrary to Jesus saying-many find the broad way that leads to destruction and the narrow way few there be that will find it?
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. (MATT 7)
Yes, Matthew 7: 13 is a great verse which teaches that the lost will be destroyed, not tortured. Thank you for sharing that, danullb. Here is another one: 🔥 _And be not afraid of those killing the body, and are not able to kill the soul, but fear rather Him who is able both soul and body to destroy in gehenna._ [ ge-henna - valley of Hinnom ] (Matthew 10: 28, YLT)
preach to the pulpit Art.. :) why care who is winning or loosing, the point being, why even choose a side at all? i don't believe in much, but i do live on the concept of removing the self from the system.
Jesus was the premiere "hellfire and damnation" preacher, as Douglass suggests (MUCH more so than Paul or really anybody), but Jesus was also the most metaphorical. When Jesus referred to Hell, he either used the Greek word, "Adou," (which translates, "Hades") or "Gehenna," which derives from Gehinnom or Hinnom, which was the town dump outside the outskirts of Jerusalem, where things were usually burning. Very parabolic language...
By his words, it doesn't sound like @dohboy3000 really paid attention to the video or that he would treat Doug WIlson civily in conversation, which is similar to the accusations he made about Wilson. Projection?
Yup, he said it. I don't know _why_ he said it but he said it. I have come to realize that none of us has all the answers. The best I can tell, we are all a mixture of truth and error. Even Douglas Wilson.
Heresy in my opinion or theory is birthed out of pre-mature ordination (new pastor officially appointed). A young man straight outta high school, straight to Bible College and directly to seminary and then immediately accepted into ministry never having worked a real job in his entire life. In his early thirties he is already taking on the pulpit with very little wisdom and no retirement savings so that he is not a financial burden to the church. The pulpit is only for older gentlemen with callaced hands and a nest egg of their own and decades of experience and staying above reproach as they pass one test of faith after another and clean up their life a little more and more as they learn more and more.
With Ron Bell. Watch, listen and see. He’s smooth, ambiguous in his answers when questioned, he’s a best seller, he’s ideal for Oprah’s super soul Sunday melting pot of spirituality, his words leave me feeling maybe deep down, hey, I’m not such bad guy at heart after all. Oh…my itching ears. Ask for (God given) discernment in these matters of recognising false teachers. The notion of universalism appeals greatly as essentially it dilutes, or completely does away with, the issue of free will it’s consequences and man’s fallen nature. Beware smooth talkers. Seek instead those who convey the truth in love. Like Jesus maybe.
I would agree with his point that the people in hell don't want to be in heaven. But how does this correspond with God's punishment of sinners? How does this correspond with the Angry God of Edwards? And even if you approach this from a Calvinistic framework, why would God create people who he knew he would be angry with and ultimately damn to a literal firepit beneath the surface of the earth.
Not to perpetuate this (ok, maybe to perpetuate) but, by his words, it doesn't sound like @dohboy3000 really paid attention to the video or that he would treat Doug WIlson civily in conversation, which is similar to the accusations he made about Wilson. Projection?
Admittedly, the doctrine of Sin and Hell are not easy for Christians to lovingly convey to unbelievers. The notion that torment in hell for eternity is the judgment for a person who sees themselves as generally "good" is not something they will want to hear. Nor will it be easy for a Christian listen lovingly to an unbeliever's response to that idea. I can see if Rob Bell was challenging the action of the person who wrote "News Flash, Gandhi is in hell" as unloving or unchristian because
I only disagree with Doug Wilson concerning that few will be in hell compared to the numerous that will be in heaven. Even Christ said, "wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, AND ONLY A FEW FIND IT." To account for the many people in heaven seen in the book of Revelation, look no further than the billions of babies that are slaughtered in the womb every year throughout the world.
That, to me, kinda makes Jesus out to be a lesser Adam than Adam himself instead of the greater Adam the Bible says he is, as if it really says "for in Adam all die, so in Christ only a few will be made alive," or "where sin multiplied, grace multiplied only a little," or "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall only a few be made alive." For the story to begin with Adam's sin condemning all of humanity, and the story ends with only a tiny fraction of his beloved creations whom God wills to be saved actually ends up with him, that sort of seems like a really pyrrhic victory as though the work of the Second Adam ultimaty doesn't conquer, doesn't outweigh, and isn't more efficacious than the work of the first. Sure, God restores the cosmos and Satan loses, but Satan also kinda wins because he still manages to take the vast and overwhelming majority of God's most beloved creations down with him forever in the commonly taught view.
Doug Wilson does not support slavery. He wrote a book that contained some stupid commentary; he's human, OK? I think he got his butt kicked pretty good for that book. He is good to listen to and learn from, and I wish him well.
This issue is quite plain in Scripture, though theologians in their philosophies have tried to explain this away. The answer is given in Romans 9 which cites Psalm 19, and it is reflected in the relationship of Melchizedek, Abraham, King Hiram, Rahab, the Roman Cornelius, and what Paul also wrote a few chapters earlier in Romans 1. We also get a glimpse of it in Jesus' parables and His teachings in the book of John. Though everyone won't hear the full Gospel, everyone hears it through the testimony of the Spirit of God who moves through the world. The order and beauty of creation even in the fallen state is evidence of God, and the strict reality of morality is evidence of God's coming judgment and wrath. So with the degree of the Gospel revealed to each person, they are responsible for it. To whom much is given, much more is required. So there are no excuses because God will judge the inner secrets of all human hearts and reveal His truth given to us each, Romans 1 & 2:13-16
Excuse me, Romans 10:13-21 cites Psalm 19, and not Romans 9. Though Romans 9 does show in real time in the beginnings of the formation of the people of Israel how God's revelation works out in real life as He is received and as He is rejected. Romans 9 is the example, but Romans 10 is the final revelation of how the Spirit of God moves, searching for men and women who will serve Him and who seek His face. 2 Chronicles 16:1-10 is another real time example, and it is testified by Revelation 5:5-14. Every person has a choice to make. Seek the LORD, or fall under God's wrath: from the very words of Jesus (who was no flower child) John 3:16-21.
we are called to speak true in love, but it seems that Rob Bell has thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Rather than emphasizing that Christians should carefully and lovingly evangelize, Rob Bell teaches that hell is empty and that God is unloving if He judges anyone to that fate. If that were the case, than what was the purpose of Jesus dying on the cross if even those who openly reject him are granted salvation? This "love" that Rob Bell isn't true love.
And further, the atonement is not to be seen as penal substitution. God's justice is not punitive. It is resotorative. The cross is about freeing us from sin, death and the evil one. Jesus came to destroy the work of the devil as the apostle says. when the Messiah dies, the tombs are opened up. Christ has conquered death by his death. This is the testimony of scripture. This is how the early church fathers understood the atonement. And this is the historical faith.
I want to know how it would be just for God to "send" anyone to hell? If hell is a state of eternal punishment for sin then we have a problem. The punishment has to be proportional to the crime; if it is not then it is not justice. But infinite punishment for finite sin would not be proportional and therefore not just. I agree with Hans Urs Von Balthasar that we cannot claim that everyone will be saved but we can hope that all will be saved.
@Phil Andrew As Christians we are supposed to believe that "God is love", that "God so loved the world that he sent his son...", that God in Christ died on the cross for us, and so on. If God is love then it is consistent with his 'character' to give us infinitely more than we deserve. He is goodness itself. Moreover, I would say with St Isaac the Syrian that there is no 'justice' in God: he does not give according to our merits but according to his goodness. One only has to think of the parables of the workers in the vineyard and the prodigal son. Christ says, "Be merciful even as your father is merciful". God is merciful. It is consistent with the goodness and love of God to give us more than we deserve of good, but it is not consistent with his character for God to condemn people for all eternity to misery. Even human beings can be more compassionate than this picture of God!
@Phil Andrew Everyone who believes in universal salvation also believes in hell (gehenna). The question is: is gehenna forever or not forever? Isaac the Syrian thought that it would not last forever. Metropolitan Hilarion Alfayev summaries Issac’s position: “Gehenna, then, is a sort of purgatory rather than hell: it is conceived and established for the salvation of both human beings and fallen angels”. (Alfayev, Isaac the Syrian, p.290). Gregory of Nyssa and many other saints also believe this too. Furthermore, when our English Bibles talk about “eternal hell” (or cognates) the Greek word being translated as “eternal” here doesn’t actually mean eternal. Aionios means “for an indeterminate length of time”, or “for an age”, whereas aidios (which is not used in the NT) definitely means eternal. I’m sure the Holy Spirit could have inspired the authors to use aidios instead of aionios but he didn’t.
@Phil Andrew One more thing: if the wrath of God is a manifestation of his love then his wrath cannot be eternally against anyone, for love always wills the good of the other as other. God might cause suffering to bring about a greater good but he never causes suffering simply to cause suffering. That would not be wrath as a form of love but simply wrath.
@Phil Andrew You asked for a reference with respect to Isaac the Syrian on Universal Salvation. I could quote a few but let this one suffice: "Rather, He acts towards us in ways He knows will be advantageous to us, whether by way of things that cause suffering, or by way of things that cause relief, whether they cause joy or grief, whether they are insignificant or glorious: all are directed towards the single eternal good, whether each receives judgement or something of glory from Him-not by way of retribution, far from it!-but with a view to the advantage that is going to come from all these things. …That is how everything works with Him, even though things may seem otherwise to us: with Him it is not a matter of retribution, but He is always looking beyond to the advantage that will come from His dealing with humanity. And one such thing is this matter of Gehenna". (II.39.3,5)
@Phil Andrew Metropolitan Hilarion and Sebastian Brock, amongst others, read the passage as clearly implying universal salvation. St Isaac the Syrian is clearly saying that God uses suffering (gehenna) to our advantage. But if you want something more explicit read this: “There exists with the Creator a single love and compassion which is spread out over all creation, a love which is without alteration, timeless and everlasting... No part belonging to any single one of all rational beings will be lost, as far as God is concerned, in the preparation of that supernal kingdom” (Isaac the Syrian, II 40. 1, 7). Professor Andrew Louth interprets Isaac as clearly embracing universal salvation (Louth, Eastern Orthodox Theology, p 158). I could mention other scholars too. There is a clear consensus on this.
Most, if not all the wrath in the New Testament is pointed at the judgement coming upon Israel as a nation. Brother Wilson is not a preterist, and therefore, I believe is confused, especially when bringing the 144k into the argument. Those were the elect of the Jews, for the end of days of Israel, not the last days of the church. And if one is to speak of the gospel, one has to go back to Gen 3:14 and the promise to Satan, with apparently Eve in close proximity. The works of Satan, including bring about sin in man, and death by sin, is comparable to a bruised heel, whereas the work of Christ Jesus is a crushed head to Satan’s works. This is the essential, “Law of First Mention” form of the gospel and its scope. When Paul unpacked this in Romans 5, it becomes even more clear that Adam brought death, Jesus brought life. Adam brought sin upon all, Jesus brought Justification and righteousness, etc. we’re talking the only two federal heads in mankind - their actions speak for all of creation. Younwill not find “ man;s belief” changing one iota of either Adam and his consequences, and the work of Jesus and his. God id a jealous God, he is not, nor ever will, allowing the works of man to mingle with the work of Christ. The core problem with Hell, is it is not taught in the Law. It was an actual place, Gehanna, which Jesus referred to, while speaking directly to the Jews. Paul, the Apostle to the gentiles, for some reason did not think it so important of an item to teach to the gentiles. And the way christians, get out of Hell is, by way of works righteousness, there’s no other explanation. And this changes the gospel. Pauls message was “become what has been done” , “While we were yet sinners and at enmity with God, Christ not only died for us, but reconcilled us, (2Cor 5) and as a result of this grace, we are conquered. The first sin recorded in the bible was Eve adding to the word of God, in a self righteous statement telling Satan, “…and we cant touch it either.” God never said that. Adding restrictions, to increase righteousness, was the essence of the pharisees, and I believe the church uses Hell in the same way. Unfortunately, it leads to self righteousness and moves away from grace.
@CanonWired Can I ask you whether Doug Wilson believes that hell is a literal place? Does he think that it is literally a lake of fire with worms in it etc? If so, where is it and what temperature is it done there? Reading the bible as if metaphor were concrete reality has lead many astray especially in Protestantism.
@saintoccasionally Hmmm. Karl Barth pointed out that God's actions reveal who God is. What is the fullest expression of God for a Christian? The Word of God (Jesus Christ). What does Jesus Christ reveal about God? I think, first of all, Jesus Christ reveals a God of kenotic love (read Phillippians)- that is, self-emptying love; secondly, this kenosis reveals the humility of God. If that is the case, I cannot imagine this God feeling the need to "defend" himself; even in defeat he is victorious.
The doctrine of the christian hell we have today started way before Christ with people like Plato. I’m not talking about scripture but the idea and imagery we have today. So because of philosophers like Plato and even Augustine we have this idea of eternal conscious torment. The ancient Egyptian religions thought this way and in Greek mythology also. Eternal conscious torment is possibility the biggest lie ever to be taught. The Bible clearly teaches annihilation of the wicked. Take a look at the history of how hell was brought into Christianity and I don’t mean in scripture but the doctrine. Reading the Bible with a preconceived notion of hell won’t do anything if you continue to believe the traditional view of hell. Tradition doesn’t make it true. Eternal conscious torment was a Pegan belief long before the New Testament. Now I cannot see universalism a legitimate possibility so I don’t agree with Rob Bell on that but to call him a heretic is not a valid description of what he’s trying to say. People usually believe what they’re told especially if they’re young or ignorant on biblical language and the ones preaching to them are only preaching what they’ve been told. Why can’t we go to the Bible and try to read scripture from a fresh perspective. If annihilation is true what does that change and why does that bother people. Do Christians want people to burn for eternity so they don’t even care to study history. Yes you can go outside scripture to find truth in fact you can’t even understand Revelation with studying the first century Roman Empire of Domitian. You can’t understand many stories in the Bible with studying ancient Hebrew. Western cultures are so much different than eastern cultures. People in the West especially Americans are so arrogant and set in their ways that they’re not even open to the idea that maybe just maybe they’ve been told a lie their entire lives.
Yes even Messianic Jewish scholar Michael Brown leans toward it, I think strongly but he said he doesnt want to risk harming evangelism. Bart Erhman said Jesus did not believe in ECT. I saw a short debate with a britsh guy getting visibly angry at the idea that God never gives up on people. I think things wont change in the US unless someone makes people makes people understand that misjudging Gods character is serious slander.
And further, under a Calvinistic framework, heaven could definitely not be more highly populated than hell. Doug just takes the passage about the 144000 and says "there you go, there's gonna be a lot of people there." Well HOW are they going to get there? That's the question that is utterly unexplainable from a Calvinistic perspective.
A false teacher is someone who teaches things that purposely create distance between them and God. So let me get this straight, Rob Bell is a false teacher because he doesn't affirm the reality of an obviously unreal realm of torture? So you're saying, not believing in hell, is creating distance from God? Or are you saying that it's important for "hell" to be one of the driving factors that make you want to believe in God, because that's more money from scared wallets for your church? Thought so
@bayreuth79 Indeed, if eternal punishment is truly the price for sin, then a resurrected Christ is a problem! He should still be paying the price eternally in hell. But, no, the wages of sin is DEATH, not eternal torture. Christ is the remedy for DEATH. And if, by the way, Paul says that God will be all in all again, then nothing He has created will be lost. In that sense, we can definitely KNOW that all will ultimately call Jesus Lord and be saved. The death "deadline" in man's concoction
1:59 I find it very odd that Paul NEVER, in ANY of his epistles, writes about eternal torment of those who are not in Christ. It is absolutely something one expects to have preached and written about by Paul.
So should we compare scripture with scripture? I am not sure why you think this is weird unless you are saying that some scripture is relevant and other scripture is not.
It makes what we get from Jesus all the more remarkable. The reality of hell ought to be extremely uncomfortable for any sinner to teach with authority.
How about Jesus teaching that adulterers are not condemned? Or that God the Father judges no one? (John 5:22) or that Jesus himself judges no one? (John 8:15). Or the fact that he commands forgiveness for his murderers without their permission? Or that he came to "take away the sin of the world" and FINISHED? Or that he came to seek AND SAVE THE LOST and finished? nah... lets wink at all that... @@PaDutchRunner
I like how he minimizes clearly universalist passages by referring to them as talking about "the world," as in "Jesus came to save the world" (which would be easier to interpret the way he wants to). Actually, quite a few of these verses speak more in terms of "all men," as in John 12:32: "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me," (a future proclamation which seems to imply every single person).
Often in the Scriptures words like "world" (in particular in the writings of John) and "all men" are a reference fo Jews and Gentiles, not every single individual person.
@saintoccasionally Your argument seems to imply that our sin can injury God in some way. Now, it is certainly true that to sin is by definition to do injury to someone- so, for example, when I tell I lie I deprive someone of the truth, which is a kind of injury; or when I steal from someone I deprive someone of their property, which again is a type of injury. In each case, to sin against someone is to deprive them of something that is due to them (the truth, right to property, health, etc), so
Hell (Dante’s inferno) is a very important fantasy for us to defend so that the business model will hold up and we can continue to decimate humanity. Paul mentioned the wrath of a God “against all unrighteousness “ since sin hurts humans. It’s important to CP to keep gods wrath focused on humans since that will keep them eviscerated and oppressed.
Is this the same Jesus that said God doesn’t judge anyone? And that he doesn’t judge anyone? Is this the same New Testament that states everyone is justified and God doesn’t count anyone’s sin against them? The real heresy here is the false version of Christianity that throws out all those verses and misrepresents the loving, forgiving nature of God the Father of all. It’s so repulsive.
Jesus never said that. In fact, he says the opposite -- see "unquenchable fire" in Matt 3:12. The New Testament says many times that after death comes judgment (for one, see Heb 9:27). God is both forgiving and just. That's the glory of Christ's death and resurrection. You should read the Gospel of Matthew, Mark!
Mark did you read those chapters before linking them? Jn 5:22 SAYS that the Son's purpose is to judge (and few moments later, Jesus says that "those who have done evil [will be resurrected] to condemnation"). Your Jn 8:15 verse is consistent with what Jesus says in Jn 3 -- that you're not condemned IF YOU BELIEVE but that "he who does not believe is condemned already" (Jn. 3:18). Happy to discuss the Corinthians verse and the Romans verses if you're interested. Without judgment, Jesus did not need to die for anyone. But that's not good news -- anyone who preaches a message without the necessity of Jesus' death is not a Christian. The Church has preached this since the beginning -- and the real Gospel really is good news for sinners! (which we all are!). I repeat that you should read the gospel of Matthew (or the gospel you're named after!).
It seems you are basing your response (to a book you hadn't read yet) upon a human definition of justice that you are attributing to God. The cross, the parable of the prodical son/loving father, the story of the woman caught in adultry, etc., these are examples of God's justice which is grace based, not wrath based. Likewise, the gospel you talk about is wrath centered. Jesus didn't go to the cross so we could be punished for sin, but forgiven of sin.
True Love winning is that the perfect and sinless Son of God Jesus Christ, died on the cross as payment for the sins of those who believe. That is the core message of the Gospel, that in this life, we can be forgiven of all of our sins that condemn us to hell and have a restored relationship with God if we truly believe that Jesus did all of that for us. That is Good News. So by that logic, if I don't believe Jesus is the son of God or even existed, what would that imply?
Most English Bibles are not fully accurate translations of the original written texts of the Bible. I ordered literal translations because I wanted to know what the original Bible text said, not what traditional translations said. If you look at a LITERAL translation of the original Greek text of the NT, you will see that Jesus did not say that afterlife punishment was eternal. He sad that it was "age-lasting", "age-during", or "eonian". None of those things mean "eternal". Further, the Greek word for punishment in Jesus' sheep and the goats parable was "kolasin". Kolasin means "corrective punishment". Corrective punishments are intended to change behavior or mindset for the better. Corrective punishment does not last forever. What would be the point in trying to change someone's behavior for the better if their punishment lasts forever? What would the point of the correction? There is a Greek word for punishment that would better fit the Western Christian concept of eternal damnation. That word is "timoria", which means "vengeance" or "retribution". This is punishment that is performed to satisfy the person who was wronged by the crime or sin. However, "timoria" was never used in the Greek NT text to describe afterlife punishment, only "kolasin". Only corrective punishment. God bless!
So many of the points being raised here are valid tangental approaches and or arguments to the epistemological problems of heaven, hell and eternity. All reasonable eschatological interpretations should be voiced and considered no matter how unorthodox they might appear or seem to be.
RE:we have to accept those pasSAGES AT FACE VALUE"roflol, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT"WE STOPPED DOING THAT BACK AROUND THE 17TH CENTURY WITH THE GERMAN "HIGHER CRITICISM--- STMBOLIC? ARE YOU SOME SORT OF LIBERAL?
Thank you Pastor. I'm no post millenienialst and no Calvinist. But our damnation to hell is God's justice for those who deny Jesus and the Salvation He gave us. Many, many will be saved. Many, many will go to hell, whether Premenialist, Amenialist or Post milinialist. Mr. Robert Bell claims one of the most basic means of damnation is the abomination of homosexuality is NOT in fact an abomination. I pray that those who listen to this false teacher, as the Scriptures warned, turn away from this blesephy.
There is no eternal, conscious torment in "hell." *_Here are verses showing the wicked will be destroyed and will not "be" anymore:_* "For yet a little while, and *_the wicked shall not be:_* yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be" (Psalms 37:10). "When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that *_they shall be destroyed for ever_*" (Psalms 92:7). "As the whirlwind passeth, *_so is the wicked no more_*: but the righteous is an everlasting foundation" (Proverbs 10:25). "Knowest thou not this of old, since man was placed upon earth, That the triumphing of the wicked is short, and the joy of the hypocrite but for a moment? Though his excellency mount up to the heavens, and his head reach unto the clouds; Yet *_he shall perish for ever_* like his own dung: they which have seen him shall say, Where is he?" (Job 20:4-7). Even Satan will be destroyed: "Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee. Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; *_therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee._* All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and *_never shalt thou be any more_*" (Ezekiel 28:17-19). The apostle Paul wrote, "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 6:23). Yes, the wages of sin is death, not eternal life in some sort of burning hellfire. We either perish in death, or we receive the gift of eternal life: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (John 3:16). Those are the two alternatives; we perish in death, or else we receive the gift of eternal life. Salvation is not about *_where_* you'll spend eternity. You won't even *_have_* an eternity - of any sort, anywhere - unless and until God chooses to give you the gift of eternal life. Otherwise, you'll perish in death. For anyone reading this who is undecided about the meaning of "hell" I recommend using a Bible search tool to find all the New Testament uses of "hell" and see what Greek word "hell" was translated from. You'll discover that "hell" in the KJV NT appears 23 times and was translated from three different original Greek words, (_gehenna_, _hades_ and _tartaroo_) each of which has a different meaning. That's where a lot of today's confusion begins! Look into it! Revelation 21:8 shows that being cast into the lake of fire *_IS_* the second death, which for the wicked is death after the resurrection for judgment as described in Rev 20:12-15 . Those who get the second death do not exist anymore and they have no further hope of consciousness or life or resurrection. It is the end of them, just as described in the verses I quoted earlier. Here's Revelation 21:8: "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." So, here's the big question: Is the "lake of fire" a literal place, or, is it a figurative expression signifying destruction? It's both. Remember the verses about God bringing forth a fire "in the midst" of Satan and reducing Satan "to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee"? Well, Revelation 20:7-10 tells more of the story. In short, after the millenium Satan will be allowed to deceive and lead "the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea" (Rev 20:8). "And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city [Jerusalem]: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them" (Rev 20:9). Satan and his followers are destroyed by fire sent by God. With so many on fire it will probably look like a "lake of fire" has surrounded Jerusalem. The prophet Malachi described the event: "For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch... And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts" (Malachi 4:1,3). The "lake of fire" is also used in a figurative sense. After the final resurrection and the judgment, there will be no more mortals left, and there will be no one left in the grave awaiting resurrection for judgment. Everyone will have received eternal life, or else the second death. Because there will be no more mortals, death will not happen any more... death will have been destroyed. Likewise no one will be left in the grave awaiting resurrection for judgement... the grave will also have been destroyed. In the following verse "hell" is from the Greek word _hades_ meaning the grave, the place of those who have died (died the first death): "And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death" (Rev. 20:14). As the apostle Paul wrote in 1 Cor 15:26, "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death"... after the wicked are destroyed *_through_* death, specifically the second death. So, what about verses like this: "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal" (Matthew 25:46). It's helpful to realize that words like _permanent_ and _final_ never appear in the KJV. Instead, words like _everlasting_ or _eternal_ or _for ever_ are used. Words like _everlasting_ often suggest to us today an ongoing, continuing situation, like perpetual motion. When you see "everlasting," you have to discern what was intended: is it permanent, finished and irretractable, or, is it perpetual, unfinished and ongoing? For example, when we execute someone, the punishment is permanent: we can't undo it, it's final and it's done. The punishment is eternal in the sense that it stands forever, but it's not perpetual, ongoing punishing. Likewise for the wicked: they will be punished permanently in death, specifically the second death. That punishment will be permanent and final; it will stand forever and in that sense it will be eternal or everlasting. They will not be subjected to perpetual, ongoing punishing. This is consistent with the verses quoted earlier showing the wicked will perish, will be destroyed and no longer "be."
death and/or destruction are never synonymous with annihilation. In fact, nothing physical on this earth can be annihilated. Why would God suffer and die if everyone is going to heaven or just cease to exist? Its everlasting punishment, not everlasting nothingness.Love God with all your mind. You're reading what you want into the text.
"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." Revelation 20:10 NASB Forever and ever...sounds like forever to me. But what do I know, I just read the Word as it plainly says.
@saintoccasionally The central point is as to whether God can be injured by my sin. I would argue, along with the whole tradition of classical christianity, that God cannot be affected positively or negatively by us. If this were not the case then God would not be immutable (changeless) and he would not be perfect either (because if sin injures God then he by definition lacks something that is due to him). God does not change, we change; God is not affected by sin, we are.
I thank him for defending the doctrine of hell, but I do disagree with his interpretation of the 144,000 in the book of Revelation. He says it is "symbolic" and "spiritual Israel". This is terrible interpretation, it does not refer to the church, but believing Jews of every tribe. That is what the grammar tells us.
hell is not a place, it is simply the rejection of God's love by the person,it is the same place same person, same love of God which becomes heaven for the one who accepts His love and hell for the one who rejects His love, hell is not God's wrath or anything like that, that was never the teaching of the early church,,
Then that is sufficient and non-negotiable for those who come to know the Lord. I truly trust him and trust him enough to know that he will equitably deal out the hands of fate when humanities journey has come to fruition.
lfcizdabest Seriously? I am quite confused by your statement. Do you mean that Jesus never spoke of Hades or Gehenna? Or are you saying that the English translations never once record Him as saying, "Hell." If so, here is a couple of examples(among many). Matthew 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Hope this helps.
Jeff Spencer Hi there, sorry for the late response. I was saying that there is no word spoken by Jesus called 'hell' or indeed any word that necessitates an absolute reading of eternal hopeless suffering. 'Hades' itself is thrown into the lake of fire in Revelation 20 so that word itself cannot really mean hell in terms of eternal conscious torment because it's done away with. The word 'gehenna' is a bit more complicated I think and it's largely dependent on context to unravel its meaning but the word in itself does not mean 'hell' or eternal conscious torment. It's a reference to the Valley of Hinnom, which is not 'hell' but is merely a picture of it (whatever we decide hell truly is).
Seems to me a lot of the pastors and leaders who are denouncing Rob Bell are jealous. Yes, jealous. I think they are shocked at how fast Bell's message is flourishing and how loudly it is resonating especially in young people. I think these leaders were caught off guard and many are shocked. They are angry that their brand of faith isnt being recognized. It is plain old jealousy.
@saintoccasionally ... that the offended person is lacking something that was his by right. However, if my sin against God deprives him of something, i.e., that is, injurys him, then God is lacking something because of my sin. But the question then is: how can God, who is by definition that than which nothing greater can be conceived, lack anything? He would no longer be God if he were lacking something, including my honouring him.
This is the problem with Western Christianity, particularly Calvinism. They construct a God who damns them to a literal hell, but then decides to save some and call it the gospel. Are they kidding? In Orthodoxy hell is a reality because of free will. Further it is not a literal place. God will eventually be all in all. there wont be a place where He is not. Therefore ppl in hell experience his light and love as torment and those who love God experience this as heaven. No damnation on God's part
If you believe Scripture to be true then surely you believe these passages because world restoration is spoken of a million times more than the erroneously translated verses on endless conscious suffering using the word, hell which was falsely swapped from the word sheol and also replaced the word Hades (grave). The false doctrine of hell (actually meaning death and the grave) is worthy of being decimated once and for all!!! "And He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you, whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets, since the world began." Acts 3:20,21 "The Lord is good to all, and His tender mercies are over all his works." (Psalms 145:9) God is the same, yesterday, today, and forever. "The Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces: (Isa. 25:8) The work of the Gospel will not be fully done, until tears shall be wiped away from all faces. Sorrow shall cease. Paul applies the subject to the resurrection of the dead. Romans 2:4 Or despise you the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance? Psalm 145:14 The LORD upholds all who fall and lifts up all who are bowed down. Romans 14:11 According to what is written: “As I live, says THE LORD JEHOVAH, EVERY knee shall bow to me and to me EVERY tongue shall swear.”
"He gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." (1 Tim. 2:6) 1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have ALL men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. The people who heard Jesus preach said, "we have heard Him ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world." (John 4:42) Jesus cannot be the Savior of the world, if the world will never be saved!!!
My impression is that the Bible is very unspecific about hell and contains only very few verses about it. Therefore I am pretty surprised that so many people have so much to say about hell.
What I find most disturbing though and somewhat laughable, are the trite and subtle backhanded verbal slaps that pastor Wilson keeps directing towards Rob Bell - i.e. " Zeitgeist Sniffer", negative and pejorative references to hippies, etc...
So folks, if in the end, all shall be reconciled and saved, then what did Christ save us from? Sin? God's wrath? Sure but why? Without hell is there even a consequence for sin? Even if sin's penalty is death, what's so bad about death if salvation is universal and all will eventually be saved in a sort of Buddhist-esque pseudo-rebirth system, where everyone eventually "makes it".
Still don't understand the gravitation toward "positive" and "robust post-millenialism" in this argument. Frankly, I find pre-millenialism a bit more positive, and biblical, and less humanistic, for that matter.
If God has a spot for eternal torment and torture for people who spend a few years of life on earth not loving him, what kind of God do you know? In the end of the world all sin will be cleansed from the world, meaning all sinners/demons/devil will be destroyed. You cant have a separate torture cell somewhere... that would make no sense to what the bible says about heaven and eternity.
I am an atheist (former "born again" believer for many years) and as lazy and selfish as I am, I could never "deserve" to spend an eternity paying for misdeads I've committed in my short 71 years on Earth. No one does. Hell is just Christian revenge fantasy.
Imagine the worst possible way one could die. For example, (sorry for the gruesome description) scaphism involved a person being strapped naked to a boat, covering in honey, and force fed milk and honey. The victim was then left in his own diarrhea covered in hordes of burrowing insects that eventually caused gangrene, organ decomposition, and death. Does the average person who questions God's infinite love personally deserve this fate? Then what about an even worse torture, forever? Doug Wilson describes the gospel as, "dependent on a recognition that all people deserve to go to hell.” You must accept that everyone deserves eternal torture. This psychopathic and disgusting concept (that somehow I used to accept) is most often justified by explaining, "God's ways are higher than our ways.” I ask that people at least recognize that this concept is unconscionable to our human way of thinking! Doug Wilson describes eternal hell fire with a grin on his face. Certainly Hitler deserves to pay for his crimes. However, in the world in which we live, in every realm of our experience, it is morally repugnant to accept that ETERNAL torture could ever be justifiable punishment for FINITE crimes. Eternal torture is unjustified because it is, by definition, utterly out of proportion. And how could we justify worshiping such a torture demon (for lack of a better word)? The only way to accept the eternal torture of hell as acceptable (as so thoroughly described in Mark 9, Matthew 8, Matthew 25, and Luke 16) seems to be to simply "take God at his word," as if what is good is good because God says it's good not because it is good by its own merit. By that logic, if God told you to kill me you would be justified in doing so (and incidentally, also psychotic). I think we understand that it’s wrong to kill even if God tells us to because our moral intuition holds the position of primacy above faith and scripture. We decide what is good in the good book. That is why there are endless Bible studies, disagreements, and discussions. If we accept Jesus's description of hell as literal while denying a literal interpretation of Jesus guidance regarding personal amputations we are showing our cards: once again our own intuitions are primary over the teachings of Jesus. We say that Jesus meant hell is eternal torture, but we shouldn't actually cut of an appendage that causes us to sin. Why is there a difference? Isn’t accepting literal hell (while denying the need to self-mutilate), another example of how our own intuitions are primary over the authority of scripture? According to this doctrine, I will be saved if I agree to worship a God who would allow my friends who did not find belief compelling to suffer eternal torture. How could that doctrine be anything but disgusting? Even if you maintain your Christian faith, can you really understand eternal hell fire doctrine in a way that makes it ok? Can you accept it with a smile? At least concede that we just don't understand it, that in our world it isn't ok to allow people to be tortured for any length of time. Adding insult to injury, this doctrine requires that a person sacrifice his intellectual integrity by denying what is empirically verifiable through science. This torture doctrine requires intentional, active ignorance and not only calls it a virtue but demands acceptance of the implausible (if not impossible) on penalty of eternal torture!
Hell is not infinite punishment for finite crimes. Hell is infinite punishment for infinite crimes. Sinners do not suddenly become sinless in Hell. Sinners continue to revile God, even while they are being punished for the crimes they committed on Earth. It is like a man who goes to prison for stealing, but then murders people while in prison. The punishment continues to be piled on. I would also note that the value of an image bearer of God is infinite. So taking the life of a human being is not a finite crime. A single murder is an infinite sin against an infinite God.
Read Brian McLaren's books and some of his exegesis of the Gospel of John. There are many Christians that would disagree that the only people who will be in heaven are those that are Evangelical Protestants. I would actually submit a Christian who runs with this idea is potentially doing Jesus Christ's mission a disservice.
That's a bold epistemic claim you're making there. You (and I) are not at the epistemic standpoint where we can make such claims as it "makes no sense." We just aren't well equipped enough in our knowledge and to make such sweeping claims can be both naive and arrogant. There are a whole slew of older theologians (2000 years worth actually), that have been talking about this for centuries. Rob Bell isnt saying anything new. And nothing hes saying hasnt been theologically obliterated in the past.
He actually said "The Gospel is dependent on the recognition that all people deserve to go to Hell"??? That's the most ridculous, blasphemous idea I've ever read! First of all, "Hell" is absolutely NOT a proper and sound way to translate Sheol (or Hades) and ESPECIALLY NOT a proper and sound way to translate Gehenna! In fact, I've NEVER, to this day, heard a single "Hell" preacher provide one solitary justification for why the Greek word Gehenna (whose ONLY PROPER TRANSLATION is "Valley of Hinnom") gets translated with the non-Biblical word "Hell"! You can't provide one single literary, hermeneutical, or exegetical justification for that clear MIS-translation! All you have is a bunch of translators deciding that "Yeah, we know it SAYS Valley of Hinnom, but WE think it's more proper to translate it as "Hell" because WE think that the Jews of Jesus' day clearly heard "Hell" whenever Jesus said "Valley of Hinnom" and WE think it fits what non-Greek-speaking Latin church "father" Augustine told us it meant! Secondly, "Hell" and "eternal conscious torment" are ideas that you falsely "READ INTO" legitimate Biblical terms like "the wrath of God" and "the justice of God" - since NOT ONE VERSE in the entire Bible says "God's wrath means 'eternal Hell'" or "God's justice requires eternal conscious torment". You merely read those notions into the terms and assume you've settled the matter. That's not exegesis, sir!
Tyehimba Jahsi Great points you bring up. This is something I have been working through as well. I am an advocate for incorporating intertestamental writings into my knowledge of interpreting the New Testament. From my own research as well as a community of others, i believe it is evident the New Testament authors are quite familiar with the writings from this time (Jude quoting Enoch, possibly the Assumption of Moses). We see in Second Temple Jewish writings, far before the time of Yeshua, the tactic of correlating this very tangible Valley of the Sons of Hinnom (Gehenna) to the afterlife that is to await the unrighteous after their time of earthly existence. Yeshua is of course far from unique in his usage of Gehanna and it was a predominant thought process running through Judaism at that time; the idea that Gehenna is representative of what we now call 'Hell' - Enoch develops this idea further. This is of course far from a conclusive argument and I care neither to promote nor negate either side. But this is what I have been working through. I don't know if you have, but reading extra-biblical sources from that era of Judaic thought has really helped me work through some ideas. I am, of course, still wrestling through many things, and I think that is a beautiful thing about faith.
Is it loving for God to force someone to be in His presence for all of eternity against their will by saving them despite their hatred of Him? Someone like say, Christopher Hitchens, a known anti-theist who has explicitly stated that he would want nothing to with the Christian God even if he believed in Him. Sounds like an abusive relationship and not a loving one to me...
@saintoccasionally It seems to me that for you the degree of seriousness of a sin is evaluated on the basis of the degree of importance of the person (in this case, God) one has offended. But surely this is fallacious and for this reason: if the degree of seriousness of a sin is extrinsic to the sin itself (i.e., the degree of seriousness is assessed in relation to the importance of the person offended) then there is no intrinsic difference between telling a white lie and genocide.
After reading Love Wins a couple of times I came away from the book doctrinally unscathed and firmer in my faith than ever. I was not bamboozled, brainwashed or satanically influenced- laughable again!
I think it is pretty obvious that hell is incompatible with God's forgiveness and that heaven is incompatible with God's justice. You see, forgiveness and punishment will always be at odds. If one forgives, one does not punish. If one punishes, one does not forgive.
Forgiveness is not GIVEN to all men, only OFFERED. That is where you are missing it. It is only given to those that "call" and "repent" and believe in Him with a living faith. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world MIGHT be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but WHOEVER DOES NOT BELIEVE IS CONDEMNED ALREADY, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." - John 3:16-18 By this text we understand that all men are offered eternal life, but not all men will obtain it, and the difference between those that will and those that won't comes down to whether they BELIEVE IN HIM OR NOT. All the world is "condemned already" but those that "believe in Him" will escape this condemnation, and will "not perish, but have eternal life."
"... forgiveness and punishment will always be at odds. If one forgives, one does not punish. If one punishes, one does not forgive." This statement makes sense in an informal social context, but not in a legal context. In a legal context, forgiveness and punishment can and do exist simultaneously. Forgiveness can be offered at the same time punishment is given, if forgiveness is not received. Imagine a situation where a man is convicted of murder and sentenced to death, but is given a way to escape this condemnation if he will accept another man as his Lord, submit to him for the rest of his life as a slave, and do his will alone, forsaking his own will from that day forward. From thenceforth, he will be dead to himself, and live only to serve this man as his Lord, becoming his slave and his possession. If he accepts these terms, all his debts will be forgiven and he will be set free to serve this man. Forgiveness is offered, and punishment is still a reality. Does the murderer have to accept this forgiveness? Do you see how a legal context changes your "compatibility" problem?
elijah5791 No, the man is not forgiven, he is sentenced. The only thing that changes is the punishment, but the punishment is still in place. If I forgive someone, I don't ask ANYTHING from them, for it is forgiven.
Mike, one of us confused. I have no idea what you're talking about. The situation as presented in scripture is this: men are under condemnation for their sins. The condemnation comes with a penalty -- eternal death by fiery destruction in hell. All men find themselves in this predicament. The good news is simply that Christ bore the penalty for all men, so that any man who believes in Him and accepts Him as 1) Savior and 2) Lord will be saved from eternal death and given eternal life. It is justification by substitution. The issue at hand is that forgiveness, while offered, is NOT given UNTIL a person believes in Christ, accepting Him as his Savior who died in their place. This new believer THEN offers his own life to Christ as a slave to Him (making Him their Lord). In exchange for accepting the free gift offered of eternal life, that individual is PURCHASED and agrees to a loss of his own life, dying to himself, his life is now offered as a sacrifice to God. That is the deal. What is so confusing about that?
elijah5791 Substitution is not just at all. I think penal substitution theory is immoral and a late invention by Calvin with that. Christus victor is much better. You have accepted a lot of dogma around hell, but you have not cared to look for the meaning behind the words that are translated as hell, nor have you cared to look for the meaning behind the words that are translated as eternal. They do not mean the things you think they mean. My problem is not confusement, it is immoral teaching.
@saintoccasionally I think that this is fallacious: The idea that the severity of a crime is dependent on the differing degrees of importance of the persons offended is a medieval notion and one which the bible actually teaches against. Throughout the bible God is shown as no respecter of persons. Futhermore, it would follow from what you say that even one small sin (such as telling a "white" lie) warrants eternal punishment; but surely that is absurd.
All of the sin and evil we see in our world today (genocide, rampant abortion, war, slavery, etc.) was all caused by one woman and one man eating a piece of fruit they were told not to eat. If that is the consequence for one tiny little indiscretion, then the "white lie" seems to have much further implications.
Post millennialism has been One of the most encouraging doctrines, to me over the last year and a half, and pastors Doug’s family and ministry have been a consistent testimony of it “ Coming out of his fingertips.” I’ve gleaned a lot from him and it’s been a blessing to and my family.
Doug I want to thank you for your work and helping me understand Post Mil. I think it harmonizes so many things like Limited Atonement with all the passages on God's love for the Whole World and even this issue.
Thank you Pastor Wilson. Having come to this understanding of postmill, I can finally understand so many things in God's word that simply escaped me in the past. I believe I have a piece of truth that the church desperately needs. There is a burden on my heart to share this, and I intend to do just that. May the Lord bless our efforts to bring this into every Christian home, and may He also grant me the patience to allow my brethren the time they need to absorb it.
Will you publish or make available that which your piece of truth is, as claimed by yourself? Will you do that via your own channel but by more subtle means?
Zeitgeist sniffing coolmeister.
Best theological insult.
"Coolmeister". I laughed.
For Rob Bell to imply that no one goes to hell completely undermines the message of the Gospel, that Jesus died and rose again for a reason. Jesus' didn't save us from an angry God as if Jesus disagreed with the plan of salvation of sinners as Rob Bell insinuates, rather Jesus and the Father (God) were one (John 14)
Pastors like Doug Wilson and John MacArthur challenge Rob Bell because he is a false teacher and many people are being lead astray by lies.
All the best Doug :) Thank you
Jesus said the way to Hell is broad and MANY who find it, the way to Heaven is narrow and FEW will find it. There’s your proportions, to Hell with anyone who says something else.
The problem with Doug’s approach here is the belief in hell- eternal punishment is permanent if you end up dead, eternal flames and worms destroy those thrown into them.
Edmund of the Angles not with a resurrected body , the damned are resurrected as well
1 Corinthians 15:20-28, Romans 5:17-19, 1 John 2:2, 1 Tim. 2:3-6, 4:9-11
@@jgeph2.4 *"...the damned are resurrected as well"* You are almost right, Jamie. All will be resurrected. Only the redeemed will be given immortal bodies, however. The lost, in their resurrected mortal bodies, will die a second time and those bodies will be utterly consumed.
✴ _“Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and the day that is coming will set them on fire,” says the Lord Almighty. “Not a root or a branch will be left to them. … Then you will trample on the wicked; they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day when I act,” says the Lord Almighty._ (Malachi 4: 1;3, NIV)
Zeitgeist sniffer. 😂. One of the ways in which our Lord has gifted you is that you are not a vocabulary snob showing no bent towards haughty or lowly words. It's one of the reasons you are such an effective communicator in that you don't allow your knowledge of more sophisticated words displace your use of the banal but rather enhance it resulting in gems such as "zeitgeist sniffer". If this isn't original to you, the point still stands. Blessings to you Pastor Doug.
I don't believe they are jealous. The fact that a lot of young people like his message, does not give credibility to his teachings or show that he faithful to Holy Scripture. This isn't the first time that Rob Bell has said something or wrote a book that has been popular or that other pastors have been adamant about addressing/correcting. They issue at state is biblical accuracy and faithfulness to the Gospel.
Mark Steyn book in the background 👍
@dohboy3000 I'm the producer, and know Doug Wilson. I'm quite sure he will read the book soon after it arrives. I'm also quite sure he would meet (and be wiling to debate) Rob Bell in person. And judging from his debates and personal interaction with MANY other men, including a documentary with Christopher Hitchens, I know he would be very gentlemanly in his actions. And he believes Bell is wrong because he goes against what is clear in the Bible. I feel you are the one who is quick to judge.
I want to thank Doug Wilson (and Canon Press) for leaving the comments section open for discussion. William Lane Craig YT channels (not republished channels) are nearly always set to disable comments and it is difficult to deal with being restrained from, in WLC's case, refute error.
What's wrong with WLC?
@@ennuiblu That the original content channels he posts to are by and large comments disabled.
@@ennuiblu denies election and genesis
Not sure - the lake of fire sounds like a final death. Can someone survive in the lake of fire for eternity?
Well, they're dead already (Heb. 9:27) so your question about a living biological creature being able to survive a lake of fire for more than a couple seconds is moot.
Correct, the lake of fire is the second death - the destruction of the body and the soul.
@@frikandelthaisaus Except that when the lake of fire is spoken of in Revelation, after the 1000 years of Satan's binding (when the false prophet and the beast were thrown in), Satan was also thrown in. And what does that passage say?
"And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet ARE also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever."
Revelation 20:10 NASB
Notice that the beast and false prophet ARE still in the lake of fire after 1000 years, not WERE. This speaks to eternality, that they won't be consumed or blotted out. It is an eternal state.
@@douglasmcnay644 Yes and death and hades will also be there, are you saying that death and hades (the grave) will be tormented for eternity? Or do you understand that Revelation is using mostly symbolic language?
Furthermore, according to John 3:16 the ones who don't love the Lord will perish and not have eternal life. And according to 2 Thes. 1:9 they will be punished with everlasting destruction. Jesus taught that God will "destroy body and soul" of the unrighteous ones in hell or gehenna (Mat. 10:28).
I cannot seem to reconcile the predominant view of Gods justice being eternal punishment, as in punishment that is unending, with His law. I think His standard of justice must be consistent with His law. That is the very standard. I think we should all be asking more questions. Why the jubilee? Why does His law place a limit on all judgement? Does He act contrary to the law? That is does He act against His very nature?
*"How can we harmonize the passages that talk about the reality of hell....?"* (@5:30) I can't find any _"passages that talk about the reality of hell",_ Brother Doug. I can only find passages which talk about Sheol, Hades and Gehenna.
What about the lake of fire in revelation?
@@contactmatts That is a good question. It seems a great many people think that the Lake of Fire is hell. However, in Revelation 20: 14 we see death and hell cast _into_ the Lake of Fire. Thus, "hell" and the Lake of Fire are two entirely different entities.
P. S. "Hell" is a mistranslation here. The original word is "Hades" and Hades is not hell. Hades is the state of being dead . . . deathdom . . . essentially, the grave.
@@IsaacNussbaum
"9 And another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he also will drink the wine of God's wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”
12 Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus." Revelation 14:9-12
Those who worship the beast are tormented forever, in the presence of the Lamb and the holy angels. Scripture is very clear, Hell is very real, and eternal. We are eternal beings, and our destination is eternal, it just depends is it away from the presence of the Lord, in torment and anguish, in outer darkness, or with the Lord in His kingdom.
i thought the documentary was very well done and quite professional.. Hitchens, from my perspective, does a lot of scoffing at the Bible and its teachings, but doesn't refute them.. most atheists can't tell the difference though..
@sunsirel oh, that's intelligent.
pastor ,I so want to agree with your words,you are so wise-but when you said few in hell and many in heaven =isn't this contrary to Jesus saying-many find the broad way that leads to destruction and the narrow way few there be that will find it?
It is contradictory. Beware of false teachers. Stick with King Jesus.
For further biblical perspective of GOD's Love and Sovereignty, I recommend reading 'Hope Beyond Hell' by Gerry Beauchemin.
Three weeks ago??? The book was not out yet and he is this nervous. Lining up the troops?
Important subject. Deserves an in-depth treatment.
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. (MATT 7)
Yes, Matthew 7: 13 is a great verse which teaches that the lost will be destroyed, not tortured. Thank you for sharing that, danullb. Here is another one: 🔥 _And be not afraid of those killing the body, and are not able to kill the soul, but fear rather Him who is able both soul and body to destroy in gehenna._ [ ge-henna - valley of Hinnom ] (Matthew 10: 28, YLT)
I would like to see a review of David Bentley Hart's "That All Shall be Saved" from Doug Wilson.
That would be a complete waste of time.
@@bayreuth79 You're correct. Don't ever engage anything different from what you already believe.
preach to the pulpit Art.. :) why care who is winning or loosing, the point being, why even choose a side at all? i don't believe in much, but i do live on the concept of removing the self from the system.
Jesus was the premiere "hellfire and damnation" preacher, as Douglass suggests (MUCH more so than Paul or really anybody), but Jesus was also the most metaphorical. When Jesus referred to Hell, he either used the Greek word, "Adou," (which translates, "Hades") or "Gehenna," which derives from Gehinnom or Hinnom, which was the town dump outside the outskirts of Jerusalem, where things were usually burning. Very parabolic language...
I like books.
Me too
Jesus spoke more on hell than anyone else/
lol dumb fuck
@@Aapskiller1 rude
By his words, it doesn't sound like @dohboy3000 really paid attention to the video or that he would treat Doug WIlson civily in conversation, which is similar to the accusations he made about Wilson. Projection?
Zeitgeist sniffer 🤣
rob bell is a very, very destructive human being, probably more so than any false teacher in my lifetime.
Right up there with Olsteen.
You are correct
Did he say there will be more in heaven than hell? What?
Yup, he said it. I don't know _why_ he said it but he said it. I have come to realize that none of us has all the answers. The best I can tell, we are all a mixture of truth and error. Even Douglas Wilson.
Heresy in my opinion or theory is birthed out of pre-mature ordination (new pastor officially appointed). A young man straight outta high school, straight to Bible College and directly to seminary and then immediately accepted into ministry never having worked a real job in his entire life. In his early thirties he is already taking on the pulpit with very little wisdom and no retirement savings so that he is not a financial burden to the church. The pulpit is only for older gentlemen with callaced hands and a nest egg of their own and decades of experience and staying above reproach as they pass one test of faith after another and clean up their life a little more and more as they learn more and more.
With Ron Bell. Watch, listen and see.
He’s smooth, ambiguous in his answers when questioned, he’s a best seller, he’s ideal for Oprah’s super soul Sunday melting pot of spirituality, his words leave me feeling maybe deep down, hey, I’m not such bad guy at heart after all.
Oh…my itching ears.
Ask for (God given) discernment in these matters of recognising false teachers.
The notion of universalism appeals greatly as essentially it dilutes, or completely does away with, the issue of free will it’s consequences and man’s fallen nature.
Beware smooth talkers.
Seek instead those who convey the truth in love.
Like Jesus maybe.
They got hell on earth scripted with the 5G - 60 gigahertz frequencies, setting the stage for real-time zombie apocalypse
Storm Chaser 5G is a nightmare for sure.
I would agree with his point that the people in hell don't want to be in heaven. But how does this correspond with God's punishment of sinners? How does this correspond with the Angry God of Edwards? And even if you approach this from a Calvinistic framework, why would God create people who he knew he would be angry with and ultimately damn to a literal firepit beneath the surface of the earth.
REFUSING TO UNDERSTAND HELL IS DECEPTION!!!!!!
Not to perpetuate this (ok, maybe to perpetuate) but, by his words, it doesn't sound like @dohboy3000 really paid attention to the video or that he would treat Doug WIlson civily in conversation, which is similar to the accusations he made about Wilson. Projection?
What if hellfire exists, just not in the material sense of the word.
Admittedly, the doctrine of Sin and Hell are not easy for Christians to lovingly convey to unbelievers. The notion that torment in hell for eternity is the judgment for a person who sees themselves as generally "good" is not something they will want to hear. Nor will it be easy for a Christian listen lovingly to an unbeliever's response to that idea. I can see if Rob Bell was challenging the action of the person who wrote "News Flash, Gandhi is in hell" as unloving or unchristian because
I only disagree with Doug Wilson concerning that few will be in hell compared to the numerous that will be in heaven. Even Christ said, "wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, AND ONLY A FEW FIND IT."
To account for the many people in heaven seen in the book of Revelation, look no further than the billions of babies that are slaughtered in the womb every year throughout the world.
That, to me, kinda makes Jesus out to be a lesser Adam than Adam himself instead of the greater Adam the Bible says he is, as if it really says "for in Adam all die, so in Christ only a few will be made alive," or "where sin multiplied, grace multiplied only a little," or "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall only a few be made alive." For the story to begin with Adam's sin condemning all of humanity, and the story ends with only a tiny fraction of his beloved creations whom God wills to be saved actually ends up with him, that sort of seems like a really pyrrhic victory as though the work of the Second Adam ultimaty doesn't conquer, doesn't outweigh, and isn't more efficacious than the work of the first. Sure, God restores the cosmos and Satan loses, but Satan also kinda wins because he still manages to take the vast and overwhelming majority of God's most beloved creations down with him forever in the commonly taught view.
I don’t understand how to justify heaven being more populated then hell in light of Matthew 7:13-14
Doug gets a great many things right and I am a big fan. Having said that, I think he gets a number of things very wrong. That is one of them.
Doug Wilson does not support slavery. He wrote a book that contained some stupid commentary; he's human, OK? I think he got his butt kicked pretty good for that book. He is good to listen to and learn from, and I wish him well.
What about people who are culturally isolated and will never hear about Jesus? Are they damned to hell as well?
This issue is quite plain in Scripture, though theologians in their philosophies have tried to explain this away. The answer is given in Romans 9 which cites Psalm 19, and it is reflected in the relationship of Melchizedek, Abraham, King Hiram, Rahab, the Roman Cornelius, and what Paul also wrote a few chapters earlier in Romans 1. We also get a glimpse of it in Jesus' parables and His teachings in the book of John. Though everyone won't hear the full Gospel, everyone hears it through the testimony of the Spirit of God who moves through the world. The order and beauty of creation even in the fallen state is evidence of God, and the strict reality of morality is evidence of God's coming judgment and wrath. So with the degree of the Gospel revealed to each person, they are responsible for it. To whom much is given, much more is required.
So there are no excuses because God will judge the inner secrets of all human hearts and reveal His truth given to us each, Romans 1 & 2:13-16
Excuse me, Romans 10:13-21 cites Psalm 19, and not Romans 9. Though Romans 9 does show in real time in the beginnings of the formation of the people of Israel how God's revelation works out in real life as He is received and as He is rejected.
Romans 9 is the example, but Romans 10 is the final revelation of how the Spirit of God moves, searching for men and women who will serve Him and who seek His face. 2 Chronicles 16:1-10 is another real time example, and it is testified by Revelation 5:5-14.
Every person has a choice to make. Seek the LORD, or fall under God's wrath: from the very words of Jesus (who was no flower child) John 3:16-21.
we are called to speak true in love, but it seems that Rob Bell has thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Rather than emphasizing that Christians should carefully and lovingly evangelize, Rob Bell teaches that hell is empty and that God is unloving if He judges anyone to that fate. If that were the case, than what was the purpose of Jesus dying on the cross if even those who openly reject him are granted salvation? This "love" that Rob Bell isn't true love.
And further, the atonement is not to be seen as penal substitution. God's justice is not punitive. It is resotorative. The cross is about freeing us from sin, death and the evil one. Jesus came to destroy the work of the devil as the apostle says. when the Messiah dies, the tombs are opened up. Christ has conquered death by his death. This is the testimony of scripture. This is how the early church fathers understood the atonement. And this is the historical faith.
I want to know how it would be just for God to "send" anyone to hell? If hell is a state of eternal punishment for sin then we have a problem. The punishment has to be proportional to the crime; if it is not then it is not justice. But infinite punishment for finite sin would not be proportional and therefore not just.
I agree with Hans Urs Von Balthasar that we cannot claim that everyone will be saved but we can hope that all will be saved.
@Phil Andrew As Christians we are supposed to believe that "God is love", that "God so loved the world that he sent his son...", that God in Christ died on the cross for us, and so on. If God is love then it is consistent with his 'character' to give us infinitely more than we deserve. He is goodness itself. Moreover, I would say with St Isaac the Syrian that there is no 'justice' in God: he does not give according to our merits but according to his goodness. One only has to think of the parables of the workers in the vineyard and the prodigal son. Christ says, "Be merciful even as your father is merciful". God is merciful. It is consistent with the goodness and love of God to give us more than we deserve of good, but it is not consistent with his character for God to condemn people for all eternity to misery. Even human beings can be more compassionate than this picture of God!
@Phil Andrew Everyone who believes in universal salvation also believes in hell (gehenna). The question is: is gehenna forever or not forever? Isaac the Syrian thought that it would not last forever. Metropolitan Hilarion Alfayev summaries Issac’s position: “Gehenna, then, is a sort of purgatory rather than hell: it is conceived and established for the salvation of both human beings and fallen angels”. (Alfayev, Isaac the Syrian, p.290). Gregory of Nyssa and many other saints also believe this too. Furthermore, when our English Bibles talk about “eternal hell” (or cognates) the Greek word being translated as “eternal” here doesn’t actually mean eternal. Aionios means “for an indeterminate length of time”, or “for an age”, whereas aidios (which is not used in the NT) definitely means eternal. I’m sure the Holy Spirit could have inspired the authors to use aidios instead of aionios but he didn’t.
@Phil Andrew One more thing: if the wrath of God is a manifestation of his love then his wrath cannot be eternally against anyone, for love always wills the good of the other as other. God might cause suffering to bring about a greater good but he never causes suffering simply to cause suffering. That would not be wrath as a form of love but simply wrath.
@Phil Andrew You asked for a reference with respect to Isaac the Syrian on Universal Salvation. I could quote a few but let this one suffice:
"Rather, He acts towards us in ways He knows will be advantageous to us, whether by way of things that cause suffering, or by way of things that cause relief, whether they cause joy or grief, whether they are insignificant or glorious: all are directed towards the single eternal good, whether each receives judgement or something of glory from Him-not by way of retribution, far from it!-but with a view to the advantage that is going to come from all these things. …That is how everything works with Him, even though things may seem otherwise to us: with Him it is not a matter of retribution, but He is always looking beyond to the advantage that will come from His dealing with humanity. And one such thing is this matter of Gehenna". (II.39.3,5)
@Phil Andrew Metropolitan Hilarion and Sebastian Brock, amongst others, read the passage as clearly implying universal salvation. St Isaac the Syrian is clearly saying that God uses suffering (gehenna) to our advantage. But if you want something more explicit read this: “There exists with the Creator a single love and compassion which is spread out over all creation, a love which is without alteration, timeless and everlasting... No part belonging to any single one of all rational beings will be lost, as far as God is concerned, in the preparation of that supernal kingdom” (Isaac the Syrian, II 40. 1, 7). Professor Andrew Louth interprets Isaac as clearly embracing universal salvation (Louth, Eastern Orthodox Theology, p 158). I could mention other scholars too. There is a clear consensus on this.
Most, if not all the wrath in the New Testament is pointed at the judgement coming upon Israel as a nation. Brother Wilson is not a preterist, and therefore, I believe is confused, especially when bringing the 144k into the argument. Those were the elect of the Jews, for the end of days of Israel, not the last days of the church. And if one is to speak of the gospel, one has to go back to Gen 3:14 and the promise to Satan, with apparently Eve in close proximity. The works of Satan, including bring about sin in man, and death by sin, is comparable to a bruised heel, whereas the work of Christ Jesus is a crushed head to Satan’s works. This is the essential, “Law of First Mention” form of the gospel and its scope. When Paul unpacked this in Romans 5, it becomes even more clear that Adam brought death, Jesus brought life. Adam brought sin upon all, Jesus brought Justification and righteousness, etc. we’re talking the only two federal heads in mankind - their actions speak for all of creation. Younwill not find “ man;s belief” changing one iota of either Adam and his consequences, and the work of Jesus and his. God id a jealous God, he is not, nor ever will, allowing the works of man to mingle with the work of Christ. The core problem with Hell, is it is not taught in the Law. It was an actual place, Gehanna, which Jesus referred to, while speaking directly to the Jews. Paul, the Apostle to the gentiles, for some reason did not think it so important of an item to teach to the gentiles. And the way christians, get out of Hell is, by way of works righteousness, there’s no other explanation. And this changes the gospel. Pauls message was “become what has been done” , “While we were yet sinners and at enmity with God, Christ not only died for us, but reconcilled us, (2Cor 5) and as a result of this grace, we are conquered.
The first sin recorded in the bible was Eve adding to the word of God, in a self righteous statement telling Satan, “…and we cant touch it either.” God never said that. Adding restrictions, to increase righteousness, was the essence of the pharisees, and I believe the church uses Hell in the same way. Unfortunately, it leads to self righteousness and moves away from grace.
@CanonWired Can I ask you whether Doug Wilson believes that hell is a literal place? Does he think that it is literally a lake of fire with worms in it etc? If so, where is it and what temperature is it done there? Reading the bible as if metaphor were concrete reality has lead many astray especially in Protestantism.
@saintoccasionally Hmmm. Karl Barth pointed out that God's actions reveal who God is. What is the fullest expression of God for a Christian? The Word of God (Jesus Christ). What does Jesus Christ reveal about God? I think, first of all, Jesus Christ reveals a God of kenotic love (read Phillippians)- that is, self-emptying love; secondly, this kenosis reveals the humility of God. If that is the case, I cannot imagine this God feeling the need to "defend" himself; even in defeat he is victorious.
The doctrine of the christian hell we have today started way before Christ with people like Plato. I’m not talking about scripture but the idea and imagery we have today. So because of philosophers like Plato and even Augustine we have this idea of eternal conscious torment. The ancient Egyptian religions thought this way and in Greek mythology also. Eternal conscious torment is possibility the biggest lie ever to be taught. The Bible clearly teaches annihilation of the wicked. Take a look at the history of how hell was brought into Christianity and I don’t mean in scripture but the doctrine. Reading the Bible with a preconceived notion of hell won’t do anything if you continue to believe the traditional view of hell. Tradition doesn’t make it true. Eternal conscious torment was a Pegan belief long before the New Testament. Now I cannot see universalism a legitimate possibility so I don’t agree with Rob Bell on that but to call him a heretic is not a valid description of what he’s trying to say. People usually believe what they’re told especially if they’re young or ignorant on biblical language and the ones preaching to them are only preaching what they’ve been told. Why can’t we go to the Bible and try to read scripture from a fresh perspective. If annihilation is true what does that change and why does that bother people. Do Christians want people to burn for eternity so they don’t even care to study history. Yes you can go outside scripture to find truth in fact you can’t even understand Revelation with studying the first century Roman Empire of Domitian. You can’t understand many stories in the Bible with studying ancient Hebrew. Western cultures are so much different than eastern cultures. People in the West especially Americans are so arrogant and set in their ways that they’re not even open to the idea that maybe just maybe they’ve been told a lie their entire lives.
Yes even Messianic Jewish scholar Michael Brown leans toward it, I think strongly but he said he doesnt want to risk harming evangelism.
Bart Erhman said Jesus did not believe in ECT.
I saw a short debate with a britsh guy getting visibly angry at the idea that God never gives up on people.
I think things wont change in the US unless someone makes people makes people understand that misjudging Gods character is serious slander.
And further, under a Calvinistic framework, heaven could definitely not be more highly populated than hell. Doug just takes the passage about the 144000 and says "there you go, there's gonna be a lot of people there." Well HOW are they going to get there? That's the question that is utterly unexplainable from a Calvinistic perspective.
Old man yells at protestantism
A false teacher is someone who teaches things that purposely create distance between them and God. So let me get this straight, Rob Bell is a false teacher because he doesn't affirm the reality of an obviously unreal realm of torture? So you're saying, not believing in hell, is creating distance from God? Or are you saying that it's important for "hell" to be one of the driving factors that make you want to believe in God, because that's more money from scared wallets for your church? Thought so
@bayreuth79 Indeed, if eternal punishment is truly the price for sin, then a resurrected Christ is a problem! He should still be paying the price eternally in hell. But, no, the wages of sin is DEATH, not eternal torture. Christ is the remedy for DEATH. And if, by the way, Paul says that God will be all in all again, then nothing He has created will be lost. In that sense, we can definitely KNOW that all will ultimately call Jesus Lord and be saved. The death "deadline" in man's concoction
That's interesting. I never looked at it that way.
@@mazklassa9338 Don't trust what he says, that is universalism. Read the Bible, it is very plain that there is no turning back after death.
1:59 I find it very odd that Paul NEVER, in ANY of his epistles, writes about eternal torment of those who are not in Christ. It is absolutely something one expects to have preached and written about by Paul.
Would there be any other books that you would recommend (excluding 'Love Wins' ) that articulate your own theological understanding ?
So should we compare scripture with scripture? I am not sure why you think this is weird unless you are saying that some scripture is relevant and other scripture is not.
It makes what we get from Jesus all the more remarkable. The reality of hell ought to be extremely uncomfortable for any sinner to teach with authority.
How about Jesus teaching that adulterers are not condemned? Or that God the Father judges no one? (John 5:22) or that Jesus himself judges no one? (John 8:15). Or the fact that he commands forgiveness for his murderers without their permission? Or that he came to "take away the sin of the world" and FINISHED? Or that he came to seek AND SAVE THE LOST and finished? nah... lets wink at all that... @@PaDutchRunner
Mark Townsend So I take it that you are a universalist?
I like how he minimizes clearly universalist passages by referring to them as talking about "the world," as in "Jesus came to save the world" (which would be easier to interpret the way he wants to). Actually, quite a few of these verses speak more in terms of "all men," as in John 12:32: "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me," (a future proclamation which seems to imply every single person).
Dudeist Pianist You have yet to study fundamental hermeneutics, I assume?
In the wilderness only those who looked at r serpent lived. The rest died. That is the passage that Jesus is referring to
Often in the Scriptures words like "world" (in particular in the writings of John) and "all men" are a reference fo Jews and Gentiles, not every single individual person.
@saintoccasionally Your argument seems to imply that our sin can injury God in some way. Now, it is certainly true that to sin is by definition to do injury to someone- so, for example, when I tell I lie I deprive someone of the truth, which is a kind of injury; or when I steal from someone I deprive someone of their property, which again is a type of injury. In each case, to sin against someone is to deprive them of something that is due to them (the truth, right to property, health, etc), so
Hell is destruction not eternal torment. The wicked will perish and disappear after judgment.
Does that square with Revelation 14:11...?
Hell (Dante’s inferno) is a very important fantasy for us to defend so that the business model will hold up and we can continue to decimate humanity. Paul mentioned the wrath of a God “against all unrighteousness “ since sin hurts humans. It’s important to CP to keep gods wrath focused on humans since that will keep them eviscerated and oppressed.
It's not Dante, it's Jesus who tells you hell will be full of humans: if you sin, you're going to the place full of worms and fire (Mk. 9:43-45).
Is this the same Jesus that said God doesn’t judge anyone? And that he doesn’t judge anyone? Is this the same New Testament that states everyone is justified and God doesn’t count anyone’s sin against them? The real heresy here is the false version of Christianity that throws out all those verses and misrepresents the loving, forgiving nature of God the Father of all. It’s so repulsive.
Jesus never said that. In fact, he says the opposite -- see "unquenchable fire" in Matt 3:12.
The New Testament says many times that after death comes judgment (for one, see Heb 9:27).
God is both forgiving and just. That's the glory of Christ's death and resurrection. You should read the Gospel of Matthew, Mark!
John 5:22, John 8:15, Romans 5:18, 2 Corinthians 5:19, Romans 3:24. May God help your unbelief.
Mark did you read those chapters before linking them? Jn 5:22 SAYS that the Son's purpose is to judge (and few moments later, Jesus says that "those who have done evil [will be resurrected] to condemnation"). Your Jn 8:15 verse is consistent with what Jesus says in Jn 3 -- that you're not condemned IF YOU BELIEVE but that "he who does not believe is condemned already" (Jn. 3:18). Happy to discuss the Corinthians verse and the Romans verses if you're interested.
Without judgment, Jesus did not need to die for anyone. But that's not good news -- anyone who preaches a message without the necessity of Jesus' death is not a Christian. The Church has preached this since the beginning -- and the real Gospel really is good news for sinners! (which we all are!). I repeat that you should read the gospel of Matthew (or the gospel you're named after!).
It seems you are basing your response (to a book you hadn't read yet) upon a human definition of justice that you are attributing to God. The cross, the parable of the prodical son/loving father, the story of the woman caught in adultry, etc., these are examples of God's justice which is grace based, not wrath based. Likewise, the gospel you talk about is wrath centered. Jesus didn't go to the cross so we could be punished for sin, but forgiven of sin.
True Love winning is that the perfect and sinless Son of God Jesus Christ, died on the cross as payment for the sins of those who believe. That is the core message of the Gospel, that in this life, we can be forgiven of all of our sins that condemn us to hell and have a restored relationship with God if we truly believe that Jesus did all of that for us. That is Good News. So by that logic, if I don't believe Jesus is the son of God or even existed, what would that imply?
Most English Bibles are not fully accurate translations of the original written texts of the Bible. I ordered literal translations because I wanted to know what the original Bible text said, not what traditional translations said. If you look at a LITERAL translation of the original Greek text of the NT, you will see that Jesus did not say that afterlife punishment was eternal. He sad that it was "age-lasting", "age-during", or "eonian". None of those things mean "eternal".
Further, the Greek word for punishment in Jesus' sheep and the goats parable was "kolasin". Kolasin means "corrective punishment". Corrective punishments are intended to change behavior or mindset for the better. Corrective punishment does not last forever. What would be the point in trying to change someone's behavior for the better if their punishment lasts forever? What would the point of the correction? There is a Greek word for punishment that would better fit the Western Christian concept of eternal damnation. That word is "timoria", which means "vengeance" or "retribution". This is punishment that is performed to satisfy the person who was wronged by the crime or sin. However, "timoria" was never used in the Greek NT text to describe afterlife punishment, only "kolasin". Only corrective punishment. God bless!
So many of the points being raised here are valid tangental approaches and or arguments to the epistemological problems of heaven, hell and eternity. All reasonable eschatological interpretations should be voiced and considered no matter how unorthodox they might appear or seem to be.
RE:we have to accept those pasSAGES AT FACE VALUE"roflol, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT"WE STOPPED DOING THAT BACK AROUND THE 17TH CENTURY WITH THE GERMAN "HIGHER CRITICISM--- STMBOLIC? ARE YOU SOME SORT OF LIBERAL?
John no doubt saw a great multitude, however Jesus said the path was narrow and FEW are those finding it.
Bingo.
@finalewiz Well put :)
Thank you Pastor. I'm no post millenienialst and no Calvinist. But our damnation to hell is God's justice for those who deny Jesus and the Salvation He gave us. Many, many will be saved. Many, many will go to hell, whether Premenialist, Amenialist or Post milinialist. Mr. Robert Bell claims one of the most basic means of damnation is the abomination of homosexuality is NOT in fact an abomination. I pray that those who listen to this false teacher, as the Scriptures warned, turn away from this blesephy.
There is no eternal, conscious torment in "hell."
*_Here are verses showing the wicked will be destroyed and will not "be" anymore:_*
"For yet a little while, and *_the wicked shall not be:_* yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be" (Psalms 37:10).
"When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that *_they shall be destroyed for ever_*" (Psalms 92:7).
"As the whirlwind passeth, *_so is the wicked no more_*: but the righteous is an everlasting foundation" (Proverbs 10:25).
"Knowest thou not this of old, since man was placed upon earth, That the triumphing of the wicked is short, and the joy of the hypocrite but for a moment? Though his excellency mount up to the heavens, and his head reach unto the clouds; Yet *_he shall perish for ever_* like his own dung: they which have seen him shall say, Where is he?" (Job 20:4-7).
Even Satan will be destroyed:
"Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee. Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; *_therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee._* All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and *_never shalt thou be any more_*" (Ezekiel 28:17-19).
The apostle Paul wrote, "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 6:23). Yes, the wages of sin is death, not eternal life in some sort of burning hellfire. We either perish in death, or we receive the gift of eternal life: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (John 3:16). Those are the two alternatives; we perish in death, or else we receive the gift of eternal life.
Salvation is not about *_where_* you'll spend eternity. You won't even *_have_* an eternity - of any sort, anywhere - unless and until God chooses to give you the gift of eternal life. Otherwise, you'll perish in death.
For anyone reading this who is undecided about the meaning of "hell" I recommend using a Bible search tool to find all the New Testament uses of "hell" and see what Greek word "hell" was translated from. You'll discover that "hell" in the KJV NT appears 23 times and was translated from three different original Greek words, (_gehenna_, _hades_ and _tartaroo_) each of which has a different meaning. That's where a lot of today's confusion begins! Look into it!
Revelation 21:8 shows that being cast into the lake of fire *_IS_* the second death, which for the wicked is death after the resurrection for judgment as described in Rev 20:12-15 . Those who get the second death do not exist anymore and they have no further hope of consciousness or life or resurrection. It is the end of them, just as described in the verses I quoted earlier. Here's Revelation 21:8:
"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."
So, here's the big question: Is the "lake of fire" a literal place, or, is it a figurative expression signifying destruction? It's both. Remember the verses about God bringing forth a fire "in the midst" of Satan and reducing Satan "to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee"? Well, Revelation 20:7-10 tells more of the story. In short, after the millenium Satan will be allowed to deceive and lead "the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea" (Rev 20:8). "And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city [Jerusalem]: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them" (Rev 20:9). Satan and his followers are destroyed by fire sent by God. With so many on fire it will probably look like a "lake of fire" has surrounded Jerusalem.
The prophet Malachi described the event:
"For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch... And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts" (Malachi 4:1,3).
The "lake of fire" is also used in a figurative sense. After the final resurrection and the judgment, there will be no more mortals left, and there will be no one left in the grave awaiting resurrection for judgment. Everyone will have received eternal life, or else the second death. Because there will be no more mortals, death will not happen any more... death will have been destroyed. Likewise no one will be left in the grave awaiting resurrection for judgement... the grave will also have been destroyed. In the following verse "hell" is from the Greek word _hades_ meaning the grave, the place of those who have died (died the first death):
"And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death" (Rev. 20:14).
As the apostle Paul wrote in 1 Cor 15:26, "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death"... after the wicked are destroyed *_through_* death, specifically the second death.
So, what about verses like this:
"And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal" (Matthew 25:46).
It's helpful to realize that words like _permanent_ and _final_ never appear in the KJV. Instead, words like _everlasting_ or _eternal_ or _for ever_ are used. Words like _everlasting_ often suggest to us today an ongoing, continuing situation, like perpetual motion. When you see "everlasting," you have to discern what was intended: is it permanent, finished and irretractable, or, is it perpetual, unfinished and ongoing? For example, when we execute someone, the punishment is permanent: we can't undo it, it's final and it's done. The punishment is eternal in the sense that it stands forever, but it's not perpetual, ongoing punishing.
Likewise for the wicked: they will be punished permanently in death, specifically the second death. That punishment will be permanent and final; it will stand forever and in that sense it will be eternal or everlasting. They will not be subjected to perpetual, ongoing punishing. This is consistent with the verses quoted earlier showing the wicked will perish, will be destroyed and no longer "be."
yOU are wrong! Read Love Wins.
death and/or destruction are never synonymous with annihilation. In fact, nothing physical on this earth can be annihilated. Why would God suffer and die if everyone is going to heaven or just cease to exist? Its everlasting punishment, not everlasting nothingness.Love God with all your mind. You're reading what you want into the text.
"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."
Revelation 20:10 NASB
Forever and ever...sounds like forever to me. But what do I know, I just read the Word as it plainly says.
@saintoccasionally The central point is as to whether God can be injured by my sin. I would argue, along with the whole tradition of classical christianity, that God cannot be affected positively or negatively by us. If this were not the case then God would not be immutable (changeless) and he would not be perfect either (because if sin injures God then he by definition lacks something that is due to him). God does not change, we change; God is not affected by sin, we are.
I thank him for defending the doctrine of hell, but I do disagree with his interpretation of the 144,000 in the book of Revelation. He says it is "symbolic" and "spiritual Israel". This is terrible interpretation, it does not refer to the church, but believing Jews of every tribe. That is what the grammar tells us.
You have to study scripture......with a believer if need be
hell is not a place, it is simply the rejection of God's love by the person,it is the same place same person, same love of God which becomes heaven for the one who accepts His love and hell for the one who rejects His love, hell is not God's wrath or anything like that, that was never the teaching of the early church,,
RICKY THOMAS you might want to reread or read your Bible!
Then that is sufficient and non-negotiable for those who come to know the Lord. I truly trust him and trust him enough to know that he will equitably deal out the hands of fate when humanities journey has come to fruition.
"The premier hell fire and damnation preacher in the bible is the Lord Jesus."
What does that mean?
1:56 "The apostle Paul doesn't mention hell by name." Neither does Jesus...
lfcizdabest Seriously? I am quite confused by your statement. Do you mean that Jesus never spoke of Hades or Gehenna? Or are you saying that the English translations never once record Him as saying, "Hell." If so, here is a couple of examples(among many).
Matthew 5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Hope this helps.
Jeff Spencer
Hi there, sorry for the late response.
I was saying that there is no word spoken by Jesus called 'hell' or indeed any word that necessitates an absolute reading of eternal hopeless suffering. 'Hades' itself is thrown into the lake of fire in Revelation 20 so that word itself cannot really mean hell in terms of eternal conscious torment because it's done away with.
The word 'gehenna' is a bit more complicated I think and it's largely dependent on context to unravel its meaning but the word in itself does not mean 'hell' or eternal conscious torment. It's a reference to the Valley of Hinnom, which is not 'hell' but is merely a picture of it (whatever we decide hell truly is).
Seems to me a lot of the pastors and leaders who are denouncing Rob Bell are jealous. Yes, jealous. I think they are shocked at how fast Bell's message is flourishing and how loudly it is resonating especially in young people. I think these leaders were caught off guard and many are shocked. They are angry that their brand of faith isnt being recognized. It is plain old jealousy.
Heresy has frequently been popular. Why else are people influenced by Gnosticism.
@saintoccasionally ... that the offended person is lacking something that was his by right. However, if my sin against God deprives him of something, i.e., that is, injurys him, then God is lacking something because of my sin. But the question then is: how can God, who is by definition that than which nothing greater can be conceived, lack anything? He would no longer be God if he were lacking something, including my honouring him.
This is the problem with Western Christianity, particularly Calvinism. They construct a God who damns them to a literal hell, but then decides to save some and call it the gospel. Are they kidding? In Orthodoxy hell is a reality because of free will. Further it is not a literal place. God will eventually be all in all. there wont be a place where He is not. Therefore ppl in hell experience his light and love as torment and those who love God experience this as heaven. No damnation on God's part
If you believe Scripture to be true then surely you believe these passages because world restoration is spoken of a million times more than the erroneously translated verses on endless conscious suffering using the word, hell which was falsely swapped from the word sheol and also replaced the word Hades (grave).
The false doctrine of hell (actually meaning death and the grave) is worthy of being decimated once and for all!!!
"And He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you, whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets, since the world began."
Acts 3:20,21
"The Lord is good to all, and His tender mercies are over all his works." (Psalms 145:9) God is the same, yesterday, today, and forever.
"The Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces: (Isa. 25:8) The work of the Gospel will not be fully done, until tears shall be wiped away from all faces. Sorrow shall cease. Paul applies the subject to the resurrection of the dead.
Romans 2:4
Or despise you the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?
Psalm 145:14
The LORD upholds all who fall and lifts up all who are bowed down.
Romans 14:11
According to what is written: “As I live, says THE LORD JEHOVAH, EVERY knee shall bow to me and to me EVERY tongue shall swear.”
"He gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." (1 Tim. 2:6)
1 Timothy 2:4
Who will have ALL men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
The people who heard Jesus preach said, "we have heard Him ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world." (John 4:42) Jesus cannot be the Savior of the world, if the world will never be saved!!!
My impression is that the Bible is very unspecific about hell and contains only very few verses about it. Therefore I am pretty surprised that so many people have so much to say about hell.
Christ talked more of hell than of heaven. And doesn't that fact that's it's mentioned even once prove its reality?
What I find most disturbing though and somewhat laughable, are the trite and subtle backhanded verbal slaps that pastor Wilson keeps directing towards Rob Bell - i.e. " Zeitgeist Sniffer", negative and pejorative references to hippies, etc...
-interpret on their own.
So folks, if in the end, all shall be reconciled and saved, then what did Christ save us from? Sin? God's wrath? Sure but why? Without hell is there even a consequence for sin? Even if sin's penalty is death, what's so bad about death if salvation is universal and all will eventually be saved in a sort of Buddhist-esque pseudo-rebirth system, where everyone eventually "makes it".
Still don't understand the gravitation toward "positive" and "robust post-millenialism" in this argument. Frankly, I find pre-millenialism a bit more positive, and biblical, and less humanistic, for that matter.
If one were to apply your criteria of “taking the whole Bible, at face value” one wouldn’t ever conceive of a Trinity.
If God has a spot for eternal torment and torture for people who spend a few years of life on earth not loving him, what kind of God do you know? In the end of the world all sin will be cleansed from the world, meaning all sinners/demons/devil will be destroyed. You cant have a separate torture cell somewhere... that would make no sense to what the bible says about heaven and eternity.
I am an atheist (former "born again" believer for many years) and as lazy and selfish as I am, I could never "deserve" to spend an eternity paying for misdeads I've committed in my short 71 years on Earth. No one does. Hell is just Christian revenge fantasy.
billions is an exaggeration but yea
Imagine the worst possible way one could die. For example, (sorry for the gruesome description) scaphism involved a person being strapped naked to a boat, covering in honey, and force fed milk and honey. The victim was then left in his own diarrhea covered in hordes of burrowing insects that eventually caused gangrene, organ decomposition, and death. Does the average person who questions God's infinite love personally deserve this fate? Then what about an even worse torture, forever?
Doug Wilson describes the gospel as, "dependent on a recognition that all people deserve to go to hell.” You must accept that everyone deserves eternal torture. This psychopathic and disgusting concept (that somehow I used to accept) is most often justified by explaining, "God's ways are higher than our ways.” I ask that people at least recognize that this concept is unconscionable to our human way of thinking! Doug Wilson describes eternal hell fire with a grin on his face.
Certainly Hitler deserves to pay for his crimes. However, in the world in which we live, in every realm of our experience, it is morally repugnant to accept that ETERNAL torture could ever be justifiable punishment for FINITE crimes. Eternal torture is unjustified because it is, by definition, utterly out of proportion. And how could we justify worshiping such a torture demon (for lack of a better word)?
The only way to accept the eternal torture of hell as acceptable (as so thoroughly described in Mark 9, Matthew 8, Matthew 25, and Luke 16) seems to be to simply "take God at his word," as if what is good is good because God says it's good not because it is good by its own merit. By that logic, if God told you to kill me you would be justified in doing so (and incidentally, also psychotic). I think we understand that it’s wrong to kill even if God tells us to because our moral intuition holds the position of primacy above faith and scripture. We decide what is good in the good book. That is why there are endless Bible studies, disagreements, and discussions.
If we accept Jesus's description of hell as literal while denying a literal interpretation of Jesus guidance regarding personal amputations we are showing our cards: once again our own intuitions are primary over the teachings of Jesus. We say that Jesus meant hell is eternal torture, but we shouldn't actually cut of an appendage that causes us to sin. Why is there a difference? Isn’t accepting literal hell (while denying the need to self-mutilate), another example of how our own intuitions are primary over the authority of scripture?
According to this doctrine, I will be saved if I agree to worship a God who would allow my friends who did not find belief compelling to suffer eternal torture. How could that doctrine be anything but disgusting? Even if you maintain your Christian faith, can you really understand eternal hell fire doctrine in a way that makes it ok? Can you accept it with a smile? At least concede that we just don't understand it, that in our world it isn't ok to allow people to be tortured for any length of time.
Adding insult to injury, this doctrine requires that a person sacrifice his intellectual integrity by denying what is empirically verifiable through science. This torture doctrine requires intentional, active ignorance and not only calls it a virtue but demands acceptance of the implausible (if not impossible) on penalty of eternal torture!
Hell is not infinite punishment for finite crimes. Hell is infinite punishment for infinite crimes. Sinners do not suddenly become sinless in Hell. Sinners continue to revile God, even while they are being punished for the crimes they committed on Earth. It is like a man who goes to prison for stealing, but then murders people while in prison. The punishment continues to be piled on.
I would also note that the value of an image bearer of God is infinite. So taking the life of a human being is not a finite crime. A single murder is an infinite sin against an infinite God.
Read Brian McLaren's books and some of his exegesis of the Gospel of John. There are many Christians that would disagree that the only people who will be in heaven are those that are Evangelical Protestants. I would actually submit a Christian who runs with this idea is potentially doing Jesus Christ's mission a disservice.
That's a bold epistemic claim you're making there. You (and I) are not at the epistemic standpoint where we can make such claims as it "makes no sense." We just aren't well equipped enough in our knowledge and to make such sweeping claims can be both naive and arrogant. There are a whole slew of older theologians (2000 years worth actually), that have been talking about this for centuries. Rob Bell isnt saying anything new. And nothing hes saying hasnt been theologically obliterated in the past.
Hell is for zealots who limit the grace of God. It is hell to them to think that someone they dont think should be in heaven is in heaven.
Read your bible
What a giant lolcow you are, just like the ones on the KiwiFarms.
He actually said "The Gospel is dependent on the recognition that all people deserve to go to Hell"??? That's the most ridculous, blasphemous idea I've ever read! First of all, "Hell" is absolutely NOT a proper and sound way to translate Sheol (or Hades) and ESPECIALLY NOT a proper and sound way to translate Gehenna! In fact, I've NEVER, to this day, heard a single "Hell" preacher provide one solitary justification for why the Greek word Gehenna (whose ONLY PROPER TRANSLATION is "Valley of Hinnom") gets translated with the non-Biblical word "Hell"! You can't provide one single literary, hermeneutical, or exegetical justification for that clear MIS-translation! All you have is a bunch of translators deciding that "Yeah, we know it SAYS Valley of Hinnom, but WE think it's more proper to translate it as "Hell" because WE think that the Jews of Jesus' day clearly heard "Hell" whenever Jesus said "Valley of Hinnom" and WE think it fits what non-Greek-speaking Latin church "father" Augustine told us it meant!
Secondly, "Hell" and "eternal conscious torment" are ideas that you falsely "READ INTO" legitimate Biblical terms like "the wrath of God" and "the justice of God" - since NOT ONE VERSE in the entire Bible says "God's wrath means 'eternal Hell'" or "God's justice requires eternal conscious torment". You merely read those notions into the terms and assume you've settled the matter. That's not exegesis, sir!
Tyehimba Jahsi Great points
you bring up. This is something I have been working through as well. I am an advocate for incorporating intertestamental writings into my knowledge of interpreting the New Testament. From my own research as well as a community of others, i believe it is evident the New Testament authors are quite familiar with the writings from this time (Jude quoting Enoch, possibly the Assumption of Moses). We see in Second Temple Jewish writings, far before the time of Yeshua, the tactic of correlating this very tangible Valley of the Sons of Hinnom (Gehenna) to the afterlife that is to await the unrighteous after their time of earthly existence. Yeshua is of course far from unique in his usage of Gehanna and it was a predominant thought process running through Judaism at that time; the idea that Gehenna is representative of what we now call 'Hell' - Enoch develops this idea further. This is of course far from a conclusive argument and I care neither to promote nor negate either side. But this is what I have been working through. I don't know if you have, but reading extra-biblical sources from that era of Judaic thought has really helped me work through some ideas. I am, of course, still wrestling through many things, and I think that is a beautiful thing about faith.
Is it loving for God to force someone to be in His presence for all of eternity against their will by saving them despite their hatred of Him? Someone like say, Christopher Hitchens, a known anti-theist who has explicitly stated that he would want nothing to with the Christian God even if he believed in Him. Sounds like an abusive relationship and not a loving one to me...
@saintoccasionally It seems to me that for you the degree of seriousness of a sin is evaluated on the basis of the degree of importance of the person (in this case, God) one has offended. But surely this is fallacious and for this reason: if the degree of seriousness of a sin is extrinsic to the sin itself (i.e., the degree of seriousness is assessed in relation to the importance of the person offended) then there is no intrinsic difference between telling a white lie and genocide.
After reading Love Wins a couple of times I came away from the book doctrinally unscathed and firmer in my faith than ever. I was not bamboozled, brainwashed or satanically influenced- laughable again!
I think it is pretty obvious that hell is incompatible with God's forgiveness and that heaven is incompatible with God's justice. You see, forgiveness and punishment will always be at odds. If one forgives, one does not punish. If one punishes, one does not forgive.
Forgiveness is not GIVEN to all men, only OFFERED. That is where you are missing it. It is only given to those that "call" and "repent" and believe in Him with a living faith.
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world MIGHT be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but WHOEVER DOES NOT BELIEVE IS CONDEMNED ALREADY, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." - John 3:16-18
By this text we understand that all men are offered eternal life, but not all men will obtain it, and the difference between those that will and those that won't comes down to whether they BELIEVE IN HIM OR NOT. All the world is "condemned already" but those that "believe in Him" will escape this condemnation, and will "not perish, but have eternal life."
"... forgiveness and punishment will always be at odds. If one forgives, one does not punish. If one punishes, one does not forgive."
This statement makes sense in an informal social context, but not in a legal context. In a legal context, forgiveness and punishment can and do exist simultaneously. Forgiveness can be offered at the same time punishment is given, if forgiveness is not received.
Imagine a situation where a man is convicted of murder and sentenced to death, but is given a way to escape this condemnation if he will accept another man as his Lord, submit to him for the rest of his life as a slave, and do his will alone, forsaking his own will from that day forward. From thenceforth, he will be dead to himself, and live only to serve this man as his Lord, becoming his slave and his possession. If he accepts these terms, all his debts will be forgiven and he will be set free to serve this man.
Forgiveness is offered, and punishment is still a reality. Does the murderer have to accept this forgiveness?
Do you see how a legal context changes your "compatibility" problem?
elijah5791 No, the man is not forgiven, he is sentenced. The only thing that changes is the punishment, but the punishment is still in place. If I forgive someone, I don't ask ANYTHING from them, for it is forgiven.
Mike, one of us confused. I have no idea what you're talking about.
The situation as presented in scripture is this: men are under condemnation for their sins. The condemnation comes with a penalty -- eternal death by fiery destruction in hell. All men find themselves in this predicament.
The good news is simply that Christ bore the penalty for all men, so that any man who believes in Him and accepts Him as 1) Savior and 2) Lord will be saved from eternal death and given eternal life. It is justification by substitution.
The issue at hand is that forgiveness, while offered, is NOT given UNTIL a person believes in Christ, accepting Him as his Savior who died in their place. This new believer THEN offers his own life to Christ as a slave to Him (making Him their Lord). In exchange for accepting the free gift offered of eternal life, that individual is PURCHASED and agrees to a loss of his own life, dying to himself, his life is now offered as a sacrifice to God.
That is the deal. What is so confusing about that?
elijah5791 Substitution is not just at all. I think penal substitution theory is immoral and a late invention by Calvin with that. Christus victor is much better.
You have accepted a lot of dogma around hell, but you have not cared to look for the meaning behind the words that are translated as hell, nor have you cared to look for the meaning behind the words that are translated as eternal. They do not mean the things you think they mean.
My problem is not confusement, it is immoral teaching.
And Christianity is?
@saintoccasionally I think that this is fallacious:
The idea that the severity of a crime is dependent on the differing degrees of importance of the persons offended is a medieval notion and one which the bible actually teaches against. Throughout the bible God is shown as no respecter of persons.
Futhermore, it would follow from what you say that even one small sin (such as telling a "white" lie) warrants eternal punishment; but surely that is absurd.
All of the sin and evil we see in our world today (genocide, rampant abortion, war, slavery, etc.) was all caused by one woman and one man eating a piece of fruit they were told not to eat. If that is the consequence for one tiny little indiscretion, then the "white lie" seems to have much further implications.