I think there is a fundamentally flawed premise that needs to be addressed, because it's perhaps more important than the question on the nature of Hell is itself. That is the assumption that living without God isn't a terrible, terrible punishment. You should be far, far more afraid of separation from God than you should be of being thrown into a "fiery pit". The reason that the Bible uses such strong language to describe Hell is because it is such a terrible fate.
Matthew 10:28: Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
Jesus spoke more about Hell than he did about heaven, so from the biblical perspective it is clear that Hell is real, that it is fearful, and that it is the final judgment for rebellion against God. The rest strikes me personally as somewhat less important.
In terms of the technicalities:
1. Sheol and Hades do not refer to hell, they refer to death - a place of waiting until the final judgment (the bosom of Abraham). The NIV always translates this as Hades.
2. Tartarus (From Peter 2:4) is used specifically in reference to a place that fallen angels are sent. You could argue that it is Hell, but I personally don't think it's terribly important.
3. The word Gehenna is used in the New Testament for the final place of punishment for the wicked after the resurrection (Hell). The NIV translates this as Hell.
Those are the only three terms in the Bible, the rest reference exactly the same thing:
|
The confusion seems to stem around old translations like the KJV, which translated all of them as the same thing (deeply unfortunate), except that it translates Sheol as Hell, the pit, and the grave (again an unfortunate inconsistency as a result of poor translation); and around the unpopularity of the concept of a holy God, who would actually dare to judge sinful humanity.
So Why Does it All Matter Anyway?
If Hell doesn't exist, there is no need for a merciful God, or for grace, or for the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. Doing so reduces both our sinfulness and God's holiness. Essentially it's an attack on the core of the Gospel, packaged so neatly in a lovely sounding argument about a loving and merciful God, while removing His need to be either.
It always come back to a single point - the Cross. By removing Hell, we effectively remove the punishment for sin, and thereby negate the Cross. The reality of Hell emphasizes Jesus incredible sacrifice, and points us to an merciful and loving God who is also Holy. It emphasises the depth of our sin and depravity, and our incredible need for salvation through Jesus. I find that for me the benchmark is always what a particular statement implies about Jesus and the Cross (the gospel). In this case the article take an underhanded approach to effectively eliminating the offense of the Cross.
That centrality of the Cross, is the same now as it was when Paul wrote his letter to the Corintians - "but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."
In response to a second related question that was asked: "what about God sending those who have never discovered Jesus to Hell?", I would say that the Bible doesn't say that people who haven't discovered Jesus will go to Hell, it says that they will be judged on their lives (those who have heard the Gospel preached, have understood it, and have rejected it are the ones who will be condemned by their own choices). I believe that God is a fair and a just God, and I can think of no better analogy than the one that CS Lewis provides in the final book of the Narnia series - The Last Battle. At the culmination of the story when Tash (representing Satan) arrives, one of the Calormen volunteers to go into the stable to meet his god Tash face to face, without fear, because he has lived his life honorably and well. He find that instead of meeting Tash, he meets Aslan in the country of the Emperor. I think it's one of the simplest and best representations that I can think of of a just and righteous God, who is also merciful and kind.
To quote CS Lewis, “There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, "All right, then, have it your way”. And that I think is the essence of Hell, we refuse the grace of God, we reject Him, and are left only with ourselves.
It always come back to a single point - the Cross. By removing Hell, we effectively remove the punishment for sin, and thereby negate the Cross. The reality of Hell emphasizes Jesus incredible sacrifice, and points us to an merciful and loving God who is also Holy. It emphasises the depth of our sin and depravity, and our incredible need for salvation through Jesus. I find that for me the benchmark is always what a particular statement implies about Jesus and the Cross (the gospel). In this case the article take an underhanded approach to effectively eliminating the offense of the Cross.
That centrality of the Cross, is the same now as it was when Paul wrote his letter to the Corintians - "but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."
In response to a second related question that was asked: "what about God sending those who have never discovered Jesus to Hell?", I would say that the Bible doesn't say that people who haven't discovered Jesus will go to Hell, it says that they will be judged on their lives (those who have heard the Gospel preached, have understood it, and have rejected it are the ones who will be condemned by their own choices). I believe that God is a fair and a just God, and I can think of no better analogy than the one that CS Lewis provides in the final book of the Narnia series - The Last Battle. At the culmination of the story when Tash (representing Satan) arrives, one of the Calormen volunteers to go into the stable to meet his god Tash face to face, without fear, because he has lived his life honorably and well. He find that instead of meeting Tash, he meets Aslan in the country of the Emperor. I think it's one of the simplest and best representations that I can think of of a just and righteous God, who is also merciful and kind.
To quote CS Lewis, “There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, "All right, then, have it your way”. And that I think is the essence of Hell, we refuse the grace of God, we reject Him, and are left only with ourselves.
That would be my take on the issue, although I'm positive that someone like Michael Eaton would do the subject far more justice.
