Do you think the atonement allowed people to avoid hell?
The answer to that question depends on the denomination.
Mormons and Universalists dont take a Hell construct seriously. Other denominations do.
Two things come to mind regarding hell - (1) The gospels discuss hell more than (I think this is correct) the entire OT.(2) Orthodox Christianity considers, as the basis for this matter, being with God, or separated from God.
Too often, hell is seen as a punishment with all types of devices and demons inflicting great pain and torment on souls (who presumably can feel physical pain from physical torture), but such descriptions are more in keeping with a “hell on earth” in which human beings inflict great pain and suffering on other human beings.
Separation from God can only occur if a human being freely, without any compulsion or force, chooses, as an act of will, to deny God and act in every way, contrary to God.
All human souls that repent and turn to God’s Grace, through Faith in Christ, will be saved.
So maybe hell’s not so bad after all? [quote=“GJDS, post:104, topic:5677”]
Separation from God can only occur if a human being freely, without any compulsion or force, chooses, as an act of will, to deny God and act in every way, contrary to God.
All human souls that repent and turn to God’s Grace, through Faith in Christ, will be saved.
[/quote]
Do all the Hindus, Muslims, and Buddhists who chose not to embrace Jesus’ sacrificial death on the cross go to hell?
No. Of course I don’t believe hell exists.
2 Likes
And many denominations, @GJDS, would severely rebuke your interpretation. Interestingly those groups are the ones BioLogos targets for a less arbitrary, more nuanced, interpretation of the Word of God.
So you and BioLogos are certainly on the same wavelength in this regard…
I don’t know what I think about the specifics of hell. It don’t spend much time thinking about it. I believe that God will judge everyone at the end of time. My problem with conceptualizing every human being ever born as by default “going to hell” is that it feels to me like that is doing the judging for God, when the judging hasn’t happened yet. (To be fair, I understand where people get it, when you have John saying things like whoever does not believe in the Son stands condemned already and Paul saying there is now no condemnation for those in Christ. I don’t think those kind of verses should just be ignored.) But, I don’t think anyone knows how God will judge the world in righteousness.
If every human post-Adam is automatically “going to hell,” it makes it hard to explain all the pre-Christ saints in Hebrews 11. Somehow they were “saved” by their hope in God’s future faithfulness without knowing any of the specifics of Jesus, the cross, and the resurrection. There are Gentiles on that list that weren’t even part of God’s covenant community.
I think there is definitely an important mercy aspect to the atonement that “gets people out of” the judgment they deserve and the future judgment they would have received. I believe the atonement was a substitutionary sacrifice. But we get more than mercy from God, we get grace. We get love, and favor, and worth, and shared glory that we don’t deserve. And maybe I am more oriented to celebrating God’s grace that his mercy, because that it what is exciting and inspirational to me.
People focus on different aspects of the gospel. Some people get overly caught up in the bad news. My husband once looked at all the recorded sermons of the apostles and tallied up the good news and the bad news (judgment, condemnation, etc) and he found the ratio was about 3 to 1.
Here’s an analogy: There’s lots of good news for you if you eat right and exercise. You’ll have more energy, you’ll be stronger, your body will fight off infections more effectively, there will be psychological and possibly social benefits, etc. You could be motivated to eat right and exercise purely out of a fear of obesity. But a fear of obesity taken to extremes can lead to anorexia and bulimia, not health. And someone could very well eat junk their whole life and be a couch potato and never get obese, But the fact that obesity might not even exist in the future of a given individual is not a good reason to pass up the benefits of eating right and exercising. Similarly, I don’t think the fear of the possibility of hell is a good motivation for believing the gospel. And even if hell doesn’t exist, Jesus is still worth it. It would be a shame if someone passed up on grace altogether because they were skeptical about hell.
1 Like
Brockway says, the New Testament authors interpreted Christ’s death as the once-and-for-all atonement event, fulfilling and surpassing all other means humans had previously relied on to atone for sin. Payments of money to the temple, incense, and all other forms of securing reconciliation with God are eclipsed by the cross. Even the sacrifices and atoning rituals of the first covenant are reinterpreted as having been effective only in light of Christ (Heb 9).
Despite this radical interpretation of the means of atonement in the New Testament, much of the theology surrounding the meaning of atonement remains the same. As in the Old Testament, sin remains a problem, alienating humans from God and leaving us in need of redemption (Rom 1:18–32). The New Testament authors often view Christ’s death as a parallel to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah (compare Matt 8:17 and Isa 53:4) who carries the sins of many, lifts their iniquities, and is even referred to as a “guilt offering” (Isa 53:10–12; compare Lev 5:14–19).
In keeping with the Old Testament, God is the initiator of atonement who provides a means for people to receive cleansing and enter into a relationship with him (John 3:16–17). Additionally, the cross is understood as an act of self-sacrificial obedience by Christ, enacted as a demonstration of the Father’s love for sinful humanity (Rom 5:8).
New Testament authors employ a number of vivid metaphors to explain the atoning work of Christ. Drawn from various spheres of public life, these images enabled the earliest Christians to better understand the significance of Christ’s death and the meaning of atonement. The remainder of this section will explore five of the most significant atonement metaphors in the New Testament: ransom, sacrifice, reconciliation, victory, and Second Adam.
Second Adam
While the atonement metaphors above focus primarily on the death and resurrection of Jesus, His incarnation as the Second Adam attributes atoning significance to His entire life. The angel’s message to Joseph in the opening chapter of Matthew connects the salvation Jesus brings with His status as Immanuel, “God-with-us” (Matt 1:21–23). Similarly, in the Gospel of John, the incarnation of the Word in human flesh is presented as the means through which grace has become available (John 1:14–17). Paul also viewed Christ’s arrival “in the likeness of men” as the precursor to His atoning death and exaltation (Phil 2:5–11 ESV). In the incarnation, Christ became God’s perfect image, the Second Adam who overcomes death (see Rom 5:12–21). In sum, “what Adam did, Jesus undid to excess. Adam disobeyed God and brought death, but Jesus obeyed God and so passed on (abundant, eternal) life for all” (McKnight, Community, 58).
In the world of the early church, worshiping someone who had been crucified was a scandal. Jews and Greeks alike rejected the notion that someone worthy of worship (or for Jews, the Messiah) would suffer and die in such a disgraceful manner. In addition to the biblical metaphors discussed above, the earliest Christians answered their challengers by narrating the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. It comes as no surprise, therefore, that the Gospel accounts devote so much space to Calvary—depicting Christ as fully aware and accepting of His fate and the cross as the culmination of His atoning mission (Green & Baker, Recovering, 13–20).
Church fathers Irenaeus (ca. AD 130–202) and Athanasius (ca. AD 297–373) were among the first Christian writers to produce explicitly theological accounts of the atonement. Their work represents a theory of the atonement that contemporary scholars call recapitulation.
Broadly speaking, recapitulation teaches that Jesus “recapitulated” the life of Adam, Israel, and all people, bringing humanity into fullness before God. This recapitulation has two dimensions: exclusive and inclusive. Exclusively speaking, Christ stands alone as humanity’s substitute, achieving the perfect life none of us could live. In an inclusive sense, Christ incorporates us into the divine life so that we may join with Him in His suffering and glory (McKnight, Community, 100–106).
Brockway, D. (2016). Atonement. In J. D. Barry, D. Bomar, D. R. Brown, R. Klippenstein, D. Mangum, C. Sinclair Wolcott, … W. Widder (Eds.), The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
It depends - if you think alienation from God and His Grace is not so bad, then you can easily choose to go to hell.
My belief is that these people more often choose to do good, and this is the basis of their belief. Since God is the source of all goodness, I think you can, if you wish, work this one for yourself.
Christ died so that all of our sins (I mean all of humanity) may be forgiven.
I’m not asking specifics, just basics about what it means to be saved.
Is that really your only problem with hell being the default position? Don’t worry, you are not doing the judging, you would just be stating the theology of your religion. That’s like saying, “Who am I to tell God he’s three persons?”
William Lane Craig deals with this problem. If you’re interested check out episodes 27-30. Doctrine of Christ | Reasonable Faith
It sure sounds like you believe the atonement “allowed people to avoid hell”
I’m glad eternal conscious torment isn’t exciting and inspirational, but I don’t think you can just slough it off, as if avoiding hell is just kind of a nice fringe benefit of accepting Jesus’ atoning death on the cross.
What is the bad news?
I think I have a better one. There’s this man that I adore. He gives warm hugs, offers good advice, and is reliably there for me whenever I need help. He’s so great, but apparently he also tortures puppies. If he could, he’d keep the puppies alive forever so their suffering could be endless. I try not to focus on this part of his nature. He’s so loving, the whole puppy thing is kind of weird, but whatever.
1 Like
Again I find it difficult to come up with a reasonable response to such a rant - if you do not believe something, why are you so worked up about it, since absence of belief can only be reasonable if you do not think the thing exists?
The freedom to choose is a profound aspect of the Christian faith - you turn it into something like a shopping mall, where people are given what they want (or not as you would say).
Hell is often discussed in figurative terms, and on many occasions, my understanding is that it shows how foolish people can become. Using figurative examples, such as your puppies, I would say it may be described as something like this:
People live in a city that provides for their needs, and is governed to enable all to achieve their happiness. Some people do not agree with the way it is governed, and they are told they could choose to live outside of the city. They are also told that life would be painful and many may regret their choice. They still insist, and when they go outside they find life is full of torment and hardship. Some regret their outlook and ask to return and become part of the city, while others defy all, and decide the city conspired to make their life one of pain and torment.
What can anyone do for these stubborn lot, who defy their own life experience?
And this is why I am a Unitarian Universalist!
I don’t spend a lot of time trying to develop a theodicy … I simply accept God as having limited potential to change the hardships of the Universe.
As for the metaphysics of Hell… an invention of Zoroaster. Many of the good deeds of Zoroastrians revolved around killing things.
1 Like
The basics of being saved means being reconciled to God. You don’t need any beliefs about hell.
I believe the atonement allows people to be counted blameless under God’s judgment. I don’t know exactly what judgment will entail.
The bad news is God will judge evil and we’re all complicit.
That would be disturbing, if I thought of humanity as a bunch of cute little puppies. I don’t. Humanity sucks in myriad ways. I actually find it comforting that people will have to answer for evil someday. I’m not at all convinced they will be subjected to eternal conscious torment, but the concept of judgment doesn’t bother me.
The bad news is God will judge evil and we’re all complicit.
Regarding hell, if one were to say that avoiding hell was their primary motivation for salvation, would that not then be a purely selfish action, and thus sin and self-idolatry? I object to the whole “scare the hell out of people” mode of evangelism, one that continues to be used today by some.
1 Like
First, I apologize for calling your defense of hell dumb.
You bring up another misconception. My arguing against your position on hell does not imply that I secretly believe hell or Christianity is true.
OK. You seem to be assuming that the Christian God talks to everybody, informing them of these choices - to live in the city or outside. You also say, people are told they might regret their choice. Really? God has never communicated this to me. And looking around the world, it doesn’t seem like this is the case. Independent belief systems have naturally sprouted up around the world through history. Maybe you’re saying the Bible should be so obviously true to everyone? Everyone secretly knows that this is the true word of God and those who are not Christians just don’t want God in their life. There are SO many issues with the Bible. I honestly just don’t believe the Christian story matches up well with reality. If you think this equates to my choosing to go to hell, that’s fine, but don’t be surprised when it strikes people as a little off the mark.
Plus if you told them that your God will punish them for eternity if they stay on their current path, they might look at you funny.
This kind of brings us full circle. The Christian worldview holds that no one can live a sinless life (either because Adam’s sin altered our nature or because we have evolved from lower life forms). We inevitably sin. We’re just not equipped to live up to God’s standards. Yet everyone deserves hell for not attaining something that is impossible. Yes, people do horrible things. I agree. I love the idea of justice. I just don’t think the Christian worldview is anything close to justice. We’re not talking about the murderer going to hell and grandma going to heaven. This arrangement will depend on their religious beliefs at death.
If judgment were eternal conscious torment would you still find it comforting?
Let’s assume that judgement were eternal conscious torment and that in my fleshly natural state I don’t find that comforting but rather find it disturbing and upsetting especially if I consider that some undergoing that judgement might well be close family or friends.
Now let’s assume that Christianity is true and I die and if I am a Christian I go to heaven in a changed state where I am in my spiritual state, transformed, changed, Christ like.
How do you think I would then see that judgement?
The Christian worldview? So the 2 billion plus people in the world who call themselves Christians all have the same worldview? Lets stay grounded in reality here.
Is it inevitable? Maybe for total depravity adherents. Jesus was human and didn’t sin. I think of sin as both a community identity and a personal choice. I don’t think there is anything in our DNA that makes us sinners, it is our free will that is the problem.
I would say no one deserves eternal life. The default position for physical beings is mortality. Assuming that the “punishment” for sin is staying mortal and not getting to participate in God’s new creation, is that so awful and unfair? Nobody is being sent anywhere they weren’t going already. Death is eternal separation from God’s world. (I’m not really convinced that disembodied eternal souls are a real thing. The Bible talks about resurrection of physical bodies in a kind of re-creation event.)
No, I already said I find eternal conscious torment disturbing and very difficult to reconcile with my concept of who God is. I don’t think God is vindictive. I’m wondering how you became convinced that eternal conscious torment is a necessary component of Christian theology? It seems your narrative is that all Christians believe condemning people to torture in hell is what God’s mission in the world is all about once you get past the “sugar coating.” That’s depressing.
2 Likes
Well historically eternal torment has been a dominant theme in Christian theology.