A Case for Hell?

Several days ago, conservative blogger Ross Douthat wrote a piece for the New York Times called A Case for Hell. According to Douthat, belief in hell is diminishing among religious Americans. This is evidenced by the enormous media attention recently received by Rob's Bell's new book, Love Wins", and its subsequent popularity. Douthat suggests there are two primary reasons for the waning influence of hell. First is escalating religious pluralism. In the United States, where Christianity claims the most adherents by far, more and more people are struggling with the condemnation of their non-Christian friends and neighbors to an eternal hell solely for "wrong belief". Second is that "our sense of outrage at human suffering...has grown sharper". With the recognition of how terrible suffering can be and how wide-spread it is in the world today, it becomes more problematic for people to believe in a God who subjects some of His own children to even more heinous suffering in hell.

For the most part, I agree with Douthat on why belief in the concept of hell is shrinking. Earlier in American history, Christianity was practically universal except in urban sectors. In rural areas of the country, it was possible to live your entire life with little or even no interaction with non-Christians. With the advent of globalization, Americans were increasingly exposed to people from various religious traditions outside Christianity. Today, new technology has allowed news to travel around the world in a matter of minutes. Wars, political strife, famines, and natural disasters we wouldn't have been aware of 200, or even 100, years ago are now available at the push of a button on our phones or computers.

Of course, I believe the rise in those who are rejecting hell is a fantastic development. Douthat, on the other hand, does not. He believes that:

Doing away with hell...threatens to make human life less fully human. [...] [T]o believe in God and not hell is ultimately to disbelieve in the reality of human choices. If there is no possibility of saying no to paradise then none of our no's have any real meaning either. [...] In this sense, a doctrine of universal salvation turns out to be as deterministic as the more strident forms of scientific materialism. Instead of making us prisoners of our glands and genes, it makes us prisoners of God himself. We can check out any time we want, but we can never really leave.

The doctrine of hell, by contrast, assumes that our choices are real [...] The miser can become his greed, the murderer can lose himself inside his violence, and their freedom to turn and be forgiven is inseparable from their freedom not to do so.

Basically, Douthat thinks that, without a hell, our choices have no significance because there is neither punishment for our sins nor a way for an individual to truly reject God. While Douthat makes a valid point, I believe he has misunderstood the beliefs of universal salvation.

Yes, the doctrine universal salvation does affirm that all souls will eventually be reunited with God, and I am a staunch believer in that doctrine. But, it does not indicate that our negative choices have no consequences or that it is impossible to repudiate God. Universal salvation merely asserts that hell is not of an eternal duration, not that it does not exist not exist. Actually, I, and most advocates of universal salvation that I know, do believe in some form of hell where sins are punished, although the form this hell takes varies widely.

I do not believe in eternal punishment because there is no finite crime an individual can commit that is deserving of eternal punishment. Nor do I believe that God punishes a person out of wrath or a sense of revenge. Those are human weaknesses. But, as I said, I do believe in punishment. You cannot live a life of evil and selfishness without consequences. Instead, I believe God punishes in order to redeem a person, just as a loving parent must sometimes punish their child in order to help them mature into a good person. Our all-loving God uses rehabilitative, spiritual correction, not eternal, physical torture in order to help us become the people we were created to be.

Since I do believe in a form of hell, I also believe it is possible for a person to reject God. God does not coerce anyone to come to Him against their will. A forced relationship is beyond worthless; it is anathema. An individual is free to rebuff God for as long as they desire. Theoretically, they are free to reject God forever, if they so choose. However, as a believer in universal salvation, I believe that God will never give up and abandon anyone. He will never cease pursuing and attempting to guide and comfort those who have rejected Him. I am a universalist because I believe God's love will ultimately triumph and that He will eventually convince every soul to come home.

Personally, I think Douthat's belief in hell "makes us prisoners of God". How can there be any legitimate meaning behind your choices when you have the threat of everlasting damnation hanging over your head? If you honestly believe in the reality of endless, conscious, and physically agonizing torture for all those who believe or act "wrong", all of your "right" beliefs and "right" actions will be done out of fear, not free choice. How could any of your actions be considered "good" if you are only doing them to avoid eternal hell? Would you genuinely love God and desire a relationship with Him, or would you only be pretending so that you would not be thrown into the fiery pit of unending and relentless torment?

Such a dilemma reminds me of an image Bruce at Fallen from Grace (an awesome blog, by the way, and highly recommended) posted yesterday:

Universal salvation does not make us prisoners. On the contrary. By freeing us from the fear of unending hell, universal salvation frees us to choose our own path. 

Concepts of Hell

The primary reason I left conservative Christianity as a teenager was my utter revulsion in the idea of hell and in a God who would send people there for nothing more than being born into the "wrong" religion. As I mentioned in my post Fear, Anger, Guilt, and God last week, total terror of hell was drilled into me from a young age and continues to haunt me to this day. However, even within the small churches my family attended, there was no single conception of hell. Ideas about hell differ as much as preferences for things such as music or food.

In this post, I would like to examine the ideas of hell I was exposed to as a child in a conservative Christian community. I realize that it will be in no way exhaustive of all the ideas about hell that can be found within Christianity, let alone the entire world. To examine every view of hell in all of human history, one would have to write an immense book, so I am just going to stick with my personal experience.

The three main views of hell I encountered are: Eternal Physical Torture, Seperation from God, and Annihilation.

Eternal Physical Torture

This is the most traditional view of hell in the Christian church. It is what appears in most people's minds when they imagine hell. It is the hell at the center of the Earth, home of naked, bright-red demons, blood-curdling screams, the smell of burning flesh, volcanoes of fire and brimstone, and rivers of lava. In this hell, the damned keep their bodies (and, of course, all sensation of pain) and are eternally and gruesomely tortured by Satan's demons, if not Satan himself, using methods scarcely imaginable to those still living.

This version of hell seems to be derived from Tartarus in Classical mythology. Tartarus was the ancient version of hell. While all dead souls inhabited the underworld, the underworld itself contained a deep pit, where the wicked were harshly punished for their sins. Much of our imagery for this hell comes from Dante Alighieri's Inferno, where Dante himself takes a journey through hell with the ancient poet Virgil as his guide. The idea that hell has distinct levels and punishments for different types of sinners comes from the Inferno.

This form of hell is the most common in Christianity and Islam. It is, in my opinion, also the most vile. As a universalist, my one and only creed is that God is love. Although I do not claim to fully understand God (not even close), I know that God would not, and could not, do such a thing to creatures He loves. All sins, no matter how depraved or evil, are still finite. Yet, this version of hell condemns man to infinite punishment. To put it simply, that punishment just does not fit the crime.

Separation from God

This view of hell is becoming more and more popular lately. It is a more "metaphorical" take on hell. Instead of souls being actually physically tortured, souls are sent into a dark abyss, to a place of tremendous mental and spiritual suffering. While not being subjected to physical torment by demons, they are totally separated from God for all of eternity. Some describe this hell as less of a place and more of  a state of being.

Although this hell is marginally better than the hell of Eternal Physical Torment, it still involves God eternally torturing a person. Any type of eternal torment is unjust because of the finite nature of human sin. Again, I do not believe a God of love would allow His children to be subjected to eternal damnation. It makes God out to be a monster who cares nothing for justice but a reveller in the agony of lesser creatures.

Annihilation

The doctrine of annihilation holds that, instead of eternally tormenting the wicked, God will just permanently destroy them. Some annihilationists believe evil souls will first be punished in the hell of Eternal Physical Torment before being annihilated, while others believe that they are annihilated upon bodily death, since the soul is not immortal.

Again, this version of hell is slightly less revolting than the last. At most, malevolent people will only endure a finite punishment before ultimately being destroyed. It would be as if they never existed in the first place. Nonetheless, if I reflect on this for too long, it makes me nauseous. The thought of God just snapping His fingers and the offending person is instantly gone is sickening. What if that were me? I must admit, the idea of losing my consciousness to pure oblivion is quite scary to me. I do not know anyone who is not somewhat afraid of that, although many pretend not to be. How could a loving God do such a thing?

For me, the answer is simple. He cannot. Not because He does not have the power, but because He could never discard one of His beloved children, no matter what they had done.

Please do not get me wrong, I do not think bad people get a free pass. There are consequences for harming other people. Yet, an eternal hell is not the answer. God loves all of us too much to lose even a single one of us. Heaven could never be heaven unless everyone made it there eventually. For, how could a good person in heaven be happy knowing someone they love is forever suffering in hell or just simply gone? How could God ever be happy or satisfied knowing that He had failed some of His children?

Hell is mostly a human creation. As a species, we are obsessed with "fairness". Obviously, people do not always get the punishment they deserve in this life. Hell is a handy way to comfort  people who have been harmed by awful people. Unfortunatly, hell has morphed from being solely a place of punishment to a place of vengeance. Hell has been used by ambitious men to gain power. They threaten their followers with hell for disobedience and teach that anyone outside their little sect will burn forever. Most of the time, these groups are small and radical enough that they are classified as cults. Occasionally, however, they can become leading sects or denominations in one of the world's major religions with the ability to influence thousands, if not millions, of religious believers.

Self-righteous individuals even take great pleasure in "knowing" someone is going to hell. The famous fire and brimstone preacher Jonathan Edwards said that "The view of the misery of the damned will double the ardor of the love and gratitude of the saints of heaven." Think about that quote for a moment. Really think about it. He is asserting that if you go to heaven, you will spend some of your time gazing at the damned souls in hell and enjoying their severe suffering. It's beyond disgusting.

Hell has done nothing but traumatize children and cripple adults with fear. It has driven genuinely good people away from God. I do not claim to have the answers. I am not even sure I am asking the right questions. All I know for sure is that my God would never harm one of His children in such a savage way, nor throw them out like yesterday's garbage. My God is a God of love, who will not rest until every last one of His children has returned home to Him.

God's Injustice

One of the most common criticisms of universalism is that it is unjust. The lack of a form of eternal punishment, whether conscious torment or complete annihilation, means that universalists are focusing only on God's love and mercy and totally excluding His judgment.

This criticism can be narrowed down into two schools of thought:

First are those who equate "no eternal hell" with "no punishment". This is a simple misunderstanding. Punishment is important. Any decent parent punishes their children, and since God is the perfect parent, His punishment would be perfect. Its purpose is for correction and reconciliation, not torment.

Second are those who believe you cannot have justice without eternal punishment. They see anything other than nonbelievers and unrepentant sinners in hell as injustice. In my opinion, this approach is completely irrational and does a huge disservice to God.

In The Republic, the philosopher Plato, using the voice of his mentor, Socrates, creates a dialogue around the question "What is justice?" With Socrates as a guide, the characters in The Republic outline the perfect city-state modeled with justice as the centerpiece. This dialogue is eye-opening in that is proves not only that justice is difficult to define, but that it is almost impossible to create a perfectly just world.

One of my favorite quotes from The Republic is "The highest reach of injustice is to be deemed just when you are not." (Book II). I believe this perfectly describes the god of eternal punishment. This god commits acts of unspeakable horror, all in the name of justice. Logically, it makes no sense. Finite crimes committed in a finite period of time, no matter how terrible, do not deserve infinite punishment. 

Almost every human today considers Adolf Hitler to be the face of evil. Yet Hitler's systematic torture and murder of 7 million people is nothing, absolutely NOTHING, compared to what this god does. The current lifetime of the universe (almost 14 billion years) is infinitesimal to the amount of time this god will torture sinners and unbelievers.

But that is not even the worst part. The worst part is that all of this is supposedly done out of love, from a god who is love.

As I mentioned earlier, through The Republic, Plato does a wonderful job of showing you how difficult it is to define justice, and I in no way claim I know what justice is in every circumstance. Only God knows. But, I do know what love is. I know how it feels and I know how it acts. The Bible itself knows:

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. (1 Corinthians 4-8)

I know that God is Love, and no God who is Love could ever abandon and torture one of His children eternally, with absolutely no hope of redemption. No good human would do such a thing to their enemies, let alone anyone they truly loved. Is God worse than us? The mere thought is horrific!

Love NEVER fails, and because God is Love, God NEVER fails. Losing even one of His children forever is failure. Not only would it be torture for the lost soul, but it would be torture to God Himself. Think about the person you love most. Could you ever be happy knowing they are being forever tortured? So how could God be happy knowing one of His children is lost eternally? Heaven cannot exist if even one soul is missing.

Eternal hell also fixes nothing. Will a woman who has been raped feel better knowing her rapist is in hell? Or a father who has lost his only child? Maybe for awhile. But does the eternal torture of the rapist and murderer do anything to heal the woman and the father? Not a thing. It might satisfy their desire for revenge, but it serves no redeeming purpose. Their pain and anger need to be healed by reconciliation and forgiveness. Since rape and murder are acts so damaging to the victims, it is doubtful this can occur during this lifetime. But if they are ever to occur, the perpetrators themselves must also be healed and redeemed, and an eternal hell precludes this from happening.

Justice and love are not exclusionary. On the contrary, they can exist in harmony. I believe God will eventually create justice for every singe being in the universe. But eternal hell is neither just nor loving, and it is definitely not of God. 

Negative Reactions Towards Universalism

One more time, I wish to expand my recent writings on intolerance of religious beliefs. Specifically, how intolerance is directed at universalism.

The examples of intolerance mentioned in my last two posts were committed by a minority of believers in the religious community. But, at the risk of sounding like I have a persecution complex, I feel the dislike of universalism is more widespread (although definitely less vigorous and violent).

Christianity in the United States is extremely diverse, with thousands of different denominations. The more liberal denominations often have adherents willing to except the validity of other religions (i.e., you do not necessarily have to be a Christian to get into heaven), yet even they usually reject universalism. Why is this?

One theory is that universalism is perceived as "not fair". Universalism is often interpreted to mean "no punishment for the wicked". Yes, there is the "death then glory" school of universalism, with Hosea Ballou being the most well known advocate of this position. However, a majority of universalists I have encountered do not interpret universalism this way. They believe in some form of punishment for unrepentant sins, usually a type of purgatory (and the many forms that could take), using corrective punishment for rehabilitation.

Another theory is that universalism is a threat to the familiar. When someone is raised in a particular religious tradition, it frequently becomes part of their identity and the basis of their security. They believe their path is the correct path, and all other paths lead to destruction. Universalism shuns this idea, allowing (depending on the precise type of universalism) several to almost infinite paths to salvation. Recognizing multiple options inevitably takes away power and control from the traditional churches and threatens their monopoly on the truth. Since humans find comfort in being convinced their beliefs are the "true" ones, a system claiming otherwise would easily attract derision.

The final, and most disturbing, theory on universalism's threat is that there are religious believers who despise, whether secretly or openly, people with opposing religious beliefs and who feel no regret at the thought of them suffering in hell. According to some Christian theologians:

•  "The blessed in the heavenly realm will watch the torments of the damned so that their beatitude will please them all the more." (Thomas Aquinas)

• "At that greatest of all spectacles, that last and eternal judgment how shall I admire, how laugh, how rejoice, how exult, when I behold so many proud monarchs groaning in the lowest abyss of darkness…". (Tertullian)

• "The view of the misery of the damned will double the ardor of the love and gratitude of the saints of heaven." (Jonathan Edwards)

While few today would be willing to say this in such bold terms as the three men above, the sentiment remains. They feel nonbelievers deserve eternal hellfire and plan to enjoy the sufferings of those not lucky enough to be saved as an added bonus of their own redemption.

Universalism, even when framed within conservative Christianity, is a radical idea. The Catholic Church even considers it heresy. When fear of hell is used to control people's religious beliefs, radical ideas are painted as a threat to their salvation. Who can blame them? If they truly believe that becoming a universalist gives you an express ticket to hell, you cannot blame them for their dislike. On the other hand, with those who delight in everlasting hell (but only for others, of course),  universalism becomes not a threat to their salvation, but to their eternal happiness.

Either way, this intolerance arises from the teaching of an eternal hell. It uses fear to force people into unquestioning compliance, can twist minds into sickening glee at the sufferings of others, and drives away those seekers whose heart cannot mesh their desire for a loving God with His supposedly eternal and fiery torture chamber. It is a doctrine which, in my opinion, has done more damage to both God and religion than any other.

Defining My Universalism

Like any theological concept, the idea of universalism will have varying meanings for different people. In my last post, I discussed how I do not see universalism through the lens of Christianity, despite the commonality of that view. In this post, I will attempt to put forth in more detail exactly what I mean when I state "I am a universalist". The best way I perceive to do this is with a list of what I do believe, what I do not believe, and what I am unsure of.

1. I believe God is absolutely unconditional love and that this love extends to all people indiscriminately, regardless of their beliefs or actions.

2. I believe that, because God is love, God will not allow any of his creation to be lost forever. In the end, all people will be saved.

3. I do NOT believe this means a person is allowed to do whatever he/she pleases and still "get into heaven". I do believe there are consequences for our negative actions, especially those which we do not repent. Universalism is NOT an excuse to sin. It should be an excuse to become a better person when you realize that all people are truly equal in the eyes of God.

4. I am unsure of how exactly sin in punished. I have heard of many options, including a temporary hell of corrective punishment (like a purgatory) or reincarnation (where important life lessons are repeated until properly learned). While I lean toward the former explanation, I have not yet formed a final decision.

5. I do believe that, whatever form punishment may take, God does out of love and concern, not anger.

6. I do believe there are many paths to God and to being a good person, and that a belief in God (theism) is NOT necessary to be a good person.

7. I do NOT believe that all paths lead to God, nor that all paths are equal. Every major religion has (in my opinion) valid paths to God. But every major religion also has paths that I consider lead away from God. Any belief system can lead to God, but when twisted for selfish personal gain, it will quickly lead the follower down a destructive path away from God.

These 7 statements sum up my universalism and my belief about God. Obviously it is not perfect. There is a certain degree of uncertainty (especially in point 4) that I hope to write on in more detail with a later post. Until then, I hope this explanation will at least assist you in understanding more precisely what I mean when I say "I believe in universalism".

My Journey

From early childhood, religion presented a problem for me. I grew up in a religious family, and my identity as a Christian was just assumed.It was never a conscious choice made on my part, it just was.

My grandfather had taught me to read even before I entered kindergarten, and I devoured numerous books. It was around this time my interest in science became apparent. At first it was biology. I loved reading about animals, especially reptiles. Later, I transitioned into astronomy after learning about the constellations at summer camp.

Around the same time I began to attend Sunday school, where I was taught many Bible stories. Even at a young age, I noticed inconsistencies between what I was taught in school and read in books to what I was told the Bible said. I remember asking my mother how cave men fit into the story of Adam and Eve. Since she had grown up in the Catholic Church, with its more accepting attitude towards science, she explained to me how the Bible stories were not necessarily meant to be taken literally, but were stories told thousands of years ago to help people make sense of the world. This made sense to me, and for a time everything was fine.

Just before my 5th birthday, my family moved to Oklahoma when my step-dad received a job offer. Almost immediately, we began attending a church which was much more conservative, both in its politics and its theology. Since it was also a small church, Sunday school was not offered, only a nursery for children under 7, so I attended regular sermons with my parents for the first time. It was at this time religion, and specifically Christianity, became a destructive force in my life.

Although not a fire and brimstone preacher, the pastor at my church often talked about hell. He made it clear that those who did not accept Jesus Christ as their savior would suffer eternally in ways that could not even be imagined. But, more frequently, he talked about what he called "false" Christians: those who believed they were saved, but because they did not live a life free of sin and measure up to the perfection of God, were actually damned by the judgment of a vengeful and wrathful god.

Being a rather sensitive child, I took these messages to heart. Although most people would not have described me as a bad child (I got good grades, usually did my chores, never got in serious trouble, etc.) I began to fear that I was somehow one of these "false" Christians, and that I was destined for hell.

For many years, I went through a vicious cycle of determination to be a good Christian and destructive failure whenever I felt I had done something to anger the god I was taught about every Sunday. Adding to this was an unhappy home life. My biological father had abandoned my mother during her pregnancy with me when she refused an abortion. Afraid of being a single mother, she quickly married my step-dad. Because of this, my step-dad's family, with the exception of my grandfather, never truly accepted me. When my little sister was born, my step-dad's attitude toward me turned cold. I was no longer necessary. Stuck in a series of dead-end jobs, he took his anger out on me, both emotionally and physically. With the deaths of my grandfather and all my mother's family occurring before the age of 10, I was left in a family that did not want me. I felt exceptionally alone.

Often, I thought these tragic events were a punishment from God because I was such a bad person. Eventually, I lost all hope. During my teenage years, I ignored God. I felt he hated me, considered me worthless, and was going to send me to hell no matter what I did. Why bother trying to please God when he wanted nothing to do with me? I became depressed. I would purposely injure myself. I even attempted suicide twice.

My life began to improve in high school. I had a wonderful group of friends. Although I never shared my religious struggles with them, they discovered my depression, self-injury, and the marks my step-dad left on me and made sure I received proper help. Because there was not enough evidence, my step-dad has never been punished for his abuse of me, but the investigation alone scared him enough to stop him from physically harming me.

With this help, I began to recover from my childhood. Religion was no longer important to me. I dedicated my life to science and felt that God was not necessary for that life. I began to call myself an agnostic. Yet, I was never able to move into atheism. As much as I desired to not believe in God, I could not. He was always in the back of my mind. Part of me knew he was there.

The problem was, along with God, was overwhelming fear. The thought of God still terrified me because it brought with it the certainty of my damnation to an everlasting hell filled with indescribable torments. It was a thought that made me physically ill.

Yet, once I left home for college, and despite my immersion into the scientific community, I longed for more. I felt that my life was missing something, and although I loathed admitting it to myself, deep down I realized this longing had something to do with God. But I did not know how to get past my terror. The metaphors of "God as a loving Father" were useless for me. "Loving" and "father", in my experience, did not belong in the same sentence. And "God is Love" was equally pointless, because an entity whose very nature was love could not have created an eternal hell and actually send the people he supposedly loved there.I had a vague idea of the God I wanted, but I had seen nothing to show me He was real. I felt very isolated and alone.

Eventually, the desire for answers was stronger than my fear. So, I did what I had always done: I began to read. I combed online for people who felt the way I felt. And I was utterly shocked when I actually found them. Lots of them. I discovered entire websites devoted to the idea of universalism. I read stories of people who had the same disillusion with Christianity and terror of God as I. I found arguments for why an everlasting hell is not consistent with God's loving character nor is it even Biblical. I saw how believers of universalism reconciled their belief in God with their hatred of conditional love and damnation.

Yet belief still eluded me. My fear was as strong as ever. What if I was wrong? What if this was a trick? How could I be sure?

This inner conflict came to a head one sleepless night. I was angry and I was scared. I wanted God. But I did not know how to trust Him. How could I? After everything that had happened to me? How could I ever overcome my fear? I spent several hours that night, crying softly and silently, feeling scared and alone. But suddenly, everything changed. I was surrounded by a feeling I knew to be the Love of God. I felt Him inside myself, almost too much to bear, but not painful. Words cannot describe it. I knew at that instant to God loved me more than I could possibly comprehend. He loved me and He was sorry for the terrible things that had happened to me. I cannot tell you how long this lasted. I just remember finally falling asleep immersed in the Love of God, the fear I had struggled with for so many years wiped away like it was nothing.

Since then, I have become a dedicated universalist. I believe that God is Love and this means that God will save every single person in the end. I still have many questions, and readily admit there are many things I still do not understand, and might not ever understand, but I know in my heart that the God I have found through universalism is real and I have nothing to fear from Him.