Struggling with Hell

[ksw0203]

Hi everyone,

I'm a christian but I'm really struggling with the idea of eternal punishment for unbelievers, it just seems very cruel and unlike the God I think I know. Has anyone else struggled with this or has any parts of scripture that could suggest something other than this? I know that Judaism and some sects of early Christianity viewed hell as a temporary punishment that sort of 'refined' people but don't know how reliable this is?

Thanks!

Of course there are surface level similarities

Which is the point

but it's the insistence that the Jesus story was created upon the back of these that is the issue

The similarities are unequivocally there though. It's not too much of a stretch to think that those trying to sell a whole new brand of religion in a world soaked in it might want to make use of elements already familiar to their audience as a softener.

From the article I cited:

Aspects of Jesus's life as recorded in the gospels bear some similarities to various other figures, both historical and mythological. Proponents of the Christ Myth theory frequently exaggerate these similarities as part of their efforts to claim that Jesus never existed as a historical figure. Maurice Casey, the late Emeritus Professor of New Testament Languages and Literature at the University of Nottingham, writes that these parallels do not in any way indicate that Jesus was invented based on pagan "divine men" but rather that he was simply not as perfectly unique as many evangelical Christians frequently claim he was.

Are you suggesting that these christians wouldn't help others if they have no faith?

This is an interesting one to ponder. From the perspective that spiritual entities do not exist, it can be argued human beings are entirely a product of nurture and nature - which does somewhat impede the concept of free will. Having faith means someone can supersede an unfortunate genetic inheritance combined with traumatic, damaging upbringing against all odds as it acknowledges that are other (spiritual) factors which can affect our destiny. Which enables hope which can affect what we are prepared to believe and the risks we are prepared to take which inspires the decisions we make.

The similarities are unequivocally there though. It's not too much of a stretch to think that those trying to sell a whole new brand of religion in a world soaked in it might want to make use of elements already familiar to their audience as a softener.*

Of course there are similar elements because humans do human when it comes to practising faith matters. The point is though that with the Jesus beginnings, the community would absolutely not have used the contemporary myth systems as some kind of 'softener' largely because those systems were complete anathema and partly because many wouldn't even have been familiar with them (thinking Jewish Christians here.) The other point is that these similarities have been massively overcooked and often completely fabricated, so do need to be challenged - as the wiki article I posted on the Jesus mysteries sums up. I have no issues whatsoever with some surface level similarities on dates, ceremonial stuff etc, what I do take issue with is the whole 'jesus is Mithras' narrative that's been totally debunked because there's simply not the evidence proponents claim.

@Sudokuzebra

I'm confused. It sounds like you are saying people deserve to burn in hell for eternity for minor misdemeanors such as not paying parking tickets, if they don't happen to believe in Jesus ?

Sudokuzebra - no, the point of the example of Danny is that we don’t think we’re ‘all that bad’. Most people think they’re pretty good, but the trouble with this is that we’re comparing ourselves to eachother, rather than God’s holy law, His standard. I look pretty good compared to Harold Shipman! But compared to Jesus my life is a mess of sin, whole filing cabinets worth of ‘parking ticket’ type sins. Multitudes of them. Without Jesus covering these sins, I will bear the penalty at judgement. Danny thought he would be ok as they were ‘just’ parking tickets, we think we’ll be fine as we were ‘just’ telling white lies, a bit of gossip there, bit of jealousy there, being angry with someone, hurting someone’s feelings, thinking of someone lustfully. How about disrespecting our parents (who didn’t backchat their parents as a teenager?!). Using God’s name as a swear word? Nothing big. Just a lifetime of sins.

The bible doesn’t say big sins bad, small sins fine. Just that sin is death. “ The wages of sin is death”(Romans 6:23). “The soul who sins will die” (Ezekiel 18:20)

God doesn’t want us to die, he doesn’t want us to pay the penalty for our (multitudes of) sins. Romans 6:23 goes on to say “but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

God hates sin because it separates us from him and his perfect love, his perfect forgiveness. He hates sin because it is the death of us forever. Any mother’s here remember the overwhelming love they felt for their baby? holding them and loving them through and through, God holds us in that same love. His sent His son to pay our penalty. Our lifetime cabinet full of sins.

I stopped being a christian because I feel hell is a political invention to keep people firmly in line. A loving God wouldn't do that.
I'm now pagan, I don't believe in hell and my life is so much happier.
I firmly believe in a divine being but now I'm a lot happier and I know I'm a good person because I want to be and I respect all living things not because I'm being threatened with hell.

The other point is that these similarities have been massively overcooked and often completely fabricated

Overcooked maybe but set it in the context of a community familiar with accounts of various miraculous events (not least those of the OT). Combine that with the fact they were waiting for the messiah and the additional fact the gospels weren't written until several decades after the death of Jesus and it's hard not to make a connection.

Are we to conclude you think the accounts of the virgin birth and the assorted miracles of Jesus aren't completely fabricated?

@CathyorClaire

The other point is that these similarities have been massively overcooked and often completely fabricated

Overcooked maybe but set it in the context of a community familiar with accounts of various miraculous events (not least those of the OT). Combine that with the fact they were waiting for the messiah and the additional fact the gospels weren't written until several decades after the death of Jesus and it's hard not to make a connection.

Are we to conclude you think the accounts of the virgin birth and the assorted miracles of Jesus aren't completely fabricated?

Certainly a community familiar with the OT stories and expecting a Messiah. But they weren't expecting a Messiah like Jesus and in fact most rejected the idea. They were expecting a political Messiah, someone who would come and free them from Roman oppression. The idea of a Messiah who upended power structures and elevated the least and the weakest - and who suffered death himself in such a stark way, in fact in the way most shameful to Jewish culture - was an idea many wanted no part of, because they were expecting a Messiah in line with the cultural structures of power and privilege they were familiar with. Jesus was an unlikely Messiah, and because of that this new subculture was born. The gospels, written just 20-30 years after the death of Jesus, were in terms of writings of antiquity incredibly close to the time and built on a solid oral history (Paul's letters even earlier and contained very early material, creeds of faith etc.) There was simply no time for myths to weave in, and the writers of the gospel would have no agenda at all for building some kind of convoluted religion based on mythical structures around the time. It simply makes no sense.

Totally agree Madhairday.

Jesus was most definitely not the Messiah they were expecting, especially by the Jewish high priests. He associated with leper’s - the most reviled, excluded and cast out of all people. Prostitutes and tax collectors (again who were highly reviled and hated) poor beggars. These were not respected people held in high regard, they were the scorned, spat on, the lowest of the low in society. Association with them in any way, let alone with the close compassion and kindness Jesus did, was abominable in their eyes.

His choice of followers was completely unorthodox too, fishermen, a tax collector, women. Even the place of Jesus’s birth - Nazareth, was held in low regard and there was a saying ‘can anything good come out of Nazareth?’

So Jesus was rejected by the Jewish leaders in the main, and was not the strong political hero Messiah many of the ordinary Jewish people wanted either ( they wanted another strong King, like King David, to break them free from Roman occupation and oppression)

The disciples were a band of scared and broken-hearted men after the crucifixion. They all ran off and went into hiding. It was only after his resurrection, when Jesus appeared to the disciples proving Himself to be the Lord he had claimed to be that the 1st century church was born. I said before and will say again that on one occasion Jesus after his resurrection was witnessed by over 500 people(!). And absolutely the the gospels being written 20-30 years after the events is very close indeed, in living witness and memory, of the events of Jesus’s life, death and resurrection.

@MissingSummertime

Totally agree Madhairday.

Jesus was most definitely not the Messiah they were expecting, especially by the Jewish high priests. He associated with leper’s - the most reviled, excluded and cast out of all people. Prostitutes and tax collectors (again who were highly reviled and hated) poor beggars. These were not respected people held in high regard, they were the scorned, spat on, the lowest of the low in society. Association with them in any way, let alone with the close compassion and kindness Jesus did, was abominable in their eyes.

His choice of followers was completely unorthodox too, fishermen, a tax collector, women. Even the place of Jesus’s birth - Nazareth, was held in low regard and there was a saying ‘can anything good come out of Nazareth?’

So Jesus was rejected by the Jewish leaders in the main, and was not the strong political hero Messiah many of the ordinary Jewish people wanted either ( they wanted another strong King, like King David, to break them free from Roman occupation and oppression)

The disciples were a band of scared and broken-hearted men after the crucifixion. They all ran off and went into hiding. It was only after his resurrection, when Jesus appeared to the disciples proving Himself to be the Lord he had claimed to be that the 1st century church was born. I said before and will say again that on one occasion Jesus after his resurrection was witnessed by over 500 people(!). And absolutely the the gospels being written 20-30 years after the events is very close indeed, in living witness and memory, of the events of Jesus’s life, death and resurrection.

But you have no idea what it was like really? There could be all sorts of reasons why 500 (if that is actually the number) people think they witnessed someone come back from the dead. There could have been all sorts of agendas at play that we just don't know about because they have been drowned out by the religious stuff. The historical context around the time of Jesus and around the time of when the New Testament was written is highly likely to influence what was recorded at the time. Who knows what happened in those 20-30 years before the gospels were written, why they were written, who influenced them, what interests they had in doing that.

As I said upthread, I do find the whole thing rather fascinating.

I stopped being a christian because I feel hell is a political invention to keep people firmly in line.

Of course it is. Religion has been used for thousands of years to get people to do certain things and behave in certain ways 'or you risk going to hell'.

There could have been all sorts of agendas at play that we just don't know about because they have been drowned out by the religious stuff. The historical context around the time of Jesus and around the time of when the New Testament was written is highly likely to influence what was recorded at the time. Who knows what happened in those 20-30 years before the gospels were written, why they were written, who influenced them, what interests they had in doing that

Excellently put.

There was simply no time for myths to weave in, and the writers of the gospel would have no agenda at all for building some kind of convoluted religion based on mythical structures around the time

But that doesn't explain the apparently irrelevant inclusion of miraculous events mirroring those in parallel stories and faiths of the time. It does however beg an answer to my previous question about whether we should take the accounts of the supernatural events attributed to Jesus literally.

And absolutely the the gospels being written 20-30 years after the events is very close indeed, in living witness and memory, of the events of Jesus’s life, death and resurrection

What do you make of the accounts of the miracles Jesus performed?

The historical context around the time of Jesus and around the time of when the New Testament was written is highly likely to influence what was recorded at the time. Who knows what happened in those 20-30 years before the gospels were written, why they were written, who influenced them, what interests they had in doing that.

One of the interesting things is that we do know a whole lot about those years and about how the gospels were formed. We know very early creeds (within a few years of the death of Jesus) were proclaiming the central tenets of the Christian faith, the death and resurrection of Jesus. We know that a beaten down bunch of very ordinary people changed from fearful to full of courage. We know that an early movement started, a movement that took seriously the teaching of their founder. They fed the poor and cared for orphans and widows. They believed in equality despite the very firm boundaries of their society. They grew from very few to homes full of people to thousands, and grew from there throughout the Roman empire. Even before the gospels were written we have records of communities in Corinth and Laodicea, in Ephesus and Rome. We know a surprising amount for what is usually known about in these times, and we know a whole lot of details, again unusual and fascinating.

What agendas would the gospel writers form 30 years on when all of this was happening, when all the stories they told were being repeated and learned by each generation as was the norm, when they knew their story was so strange to the ears of those in their society? Did they make up stories to get power for themselves? Most of them were executed. Was it all a mass hallucination? Studies into such things consistently show that such a thing on that kind of level does not exist.

It does however beg an answer to my previous question about whether we should take the accounts of the supernatural events attributed to Jesus literally.

As a Christian I do believe in these miraculous events. As I believe in the resurrection, it's not too difficult to believe in a few healings - it's not only that I place my faith in some old books, but that my lived experience and that of millions of others attests to these miracles in our lives and in the transformation of communities. It's a living hope, it's sustaining and bursting with peace in a world that is noisy and cluttered.
Yes, there were 1st century Messiah pretenders who went around claiming miracles and followings of a sort (he's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy.) But life throws up similarities and parallels all the time, and the distinction of Jesus was in his teaching and the fact that his followers saw enough to believe in something more, to pass it on, to write it down, to change their lifestyles, to practice radical inclusion in a world hostile to these teachings.

As for hell, I do agree it's been used for oppression and that much of the traditional teachings about it have been formed and influenced from everything from Platonism through to how royalty saw themselves and their subjects and a million other things in between. I remain appalled by this twisting of scripture and denial of God's love, forgiveness and willingness to welcome all who ask.

See the film ‘Risen’ with Joseph Fiennes.

An excellent telling through the eyes of a non- believing Roman military tribune.

(Here’s the trailer):

I remain appalled by this twisting of scripture

Can you elaborate on this?

Jesus himself is very clear on the dangers of unbelievers being condemned to the fiery pit so while the brimstone and fire brigade may have run with the ball the basic premise is right there.

@CathyorClaire

There could have been all sorts of agendas at play that we just don't know about because they have been drowned out by the religious stuff. The historical context around the time of Jesus and around the time of when the New Testament was written is highly likely to influence what was recorded at the time. Who knows what happened in those 20-30 years before the gospels were written, why they were written, who influenced them, what interests they had in doing that

Excellently put.

There was simply no time for myths to weave in, and the writers of the gospel would have no agenda at all for building some kind of convoluted religion based on mythical structures around the time

But that doesn't explain the apparently irrelevant inclusion of miraculous events mirroring those in parallel stories and faiths of the time. It does however beg an answer to my previous question about whether we should take the accounts of the supernatural events attributed to Jesus literally.

And absolutely the the gospels being written 20-30 years after the events is very close indeed, in living witness and memory, of the events of Jesus’s life, death and resurrection

What do you make of the accounts of the miracles Jesus performed?

I believe them CathyorClaire.

It is not hard at all, I know Jesus for myself. I know His power and His incredible love. I have been blessed enough to have been in the physical presence of the risen Christ twice in my life, and in the presence of God through His Holy Spirit throughout my life since childhood. This to me will forever be the highest of all honours I could ever have.

I have experienced 6 miracles firsthand. 3 of which were life or death situations that I would not have survived without Jesus’s direct and immediate life saving intervention. 3 were healing miracles, including the instantaneous healing of a broken spine.

I have more things I could share from my own personal testimony, but they would just get ripped apart here like all the other things I and other believers have posted here to try and show why we believe what we believe and that it is not based on blind faith. You chose to believe the bible is not reliable and that Jesus Christ was not who He said He was. I hope and pray for your sake, that you have a change of heart and your own personal encounter with Jesus one day.

@CathyorClaire

I remain appalled by this twisting of scripture

Can you elaborate on this?

Jesus himself is very clear on the dangers of unbelievers being condemned to the fiery pit so while the brimstone and fire brigade may have run with the ball the basic premise is right there.

Jesus talked a lot about gehenna, the translation of a name for the Valley of Hinnom, a place of desolation where children were sacrificed and bodies left to rot. There are no instances of him talking about eternal torment. He talks about destruction, punishment, but does not refer to eternal duration of such. He's talking about it in terms of great evil and injustice, often oppression towards the poor - lots of very colourful language to express God's heart of justice. Lots of people would cite his parable of the rich man and Lazarus, but that was an adaptation of a popular tale to make a point about the attitude of rich folk who don't care about the poor, and in any case referenced Hades, not gehenna, a very different thing in terms of the language. The concept of an eternal hell did have some roots in Platonism and the idea of a disembodied soul/immortality, gnosticism also, but the Bible never actually says humans are immortal - quite the opposite. In fact it states that the natural consequence of life and sin is death, and Christ offers eternal life as a gift to those who accept. Hence, God does not force eternity, and also does not force people into eternal torment. Some verses in Revelation especially have been taken out of context to support a view that only developed later and became embedded in a mediaeval system of indulgences and oppression of the poor. Context is everything and it's so important to apply good robust hermeneutics to biblical texts in order to really understand what was being said in what context, and the genre of the text. Revelation's visionary poetic prophecy is a whole different ball game to Jesus words in the gospels, recorded through the years via oral histories and then writings. I believe both are inspired and both must be carefully studied to discover the meanings, but also know that the words have great transformative and liberating power for so many lives, as Missing says.

Madhairday, I agree with much of what you say, but feel the eternal nature of hell ( and heaven) are evidential in the bible. How about Matthew 25:46?

“And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Or Revelations 14:11

“And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”

I agree a lot of the imagery in Revelation is symbolic, however the verses concerning the judgement of the dead appear very clear to me:

Rev 20:11-15

The Judgment of the Dead:

“Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.”

Whoever’s name is “not found written in the book of Life” is cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death.

Also in Matthew 10:28, Jesus says:

“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.

(The New International Version translates the passage as: “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.”)

My understanding is hell (hades) is like the holding room for unsaved souls awaiting the final judgement. The darkness there is pitch and there are also evil spirits tormenting. anecdotally the people who’s testimonies I’ve seen concur with this experience of hell (the holding pit). At Judgement, the books will be opened and those not found written in the book of life will be cast into the lake of fire, which is what Jesus describes as the ‘second death’

The testimonies I mention are:
Ian McCormack (I met him face to face and heard his testimony) he was a secular young man into hedonistic party culture and drugs who died following 5 stings from the deadly box jellyfish
www.aglimpseofeternity.org/

Howard Storm, who was an atheist college Professor who suffered a medical emergency which put him at deaths door and he had a first hand experience of the hell he never believed in, and the merciful God that saved him out of the pit.

. Tamara Laroux, a lady who survived a suicide attempt and her experience of hell and God’s rescue from it.

@MissingSummertime & @Madhairday, ah, this is why I hope for church unity. I read each of your posts and understand each perspective. I don't know exactly how to choose between them, except I do believe, have Faith and have to rest on this. I cannot expect to understand everything on an intellectual level all at once right now.

I would offer my own musings. But they are just musings. Whether people 'deserve' Hell or not is not the focus to have. God doesn't want us to go there. I believe if it is of the everlasting kind then it is maybe because to be in God's presence but essentially apart from Him, that is not in unity, it is a Hell because of His overwhelming love and power and righteousness. Also outside of time what is the amount of time? A final moment could be described as a person's individual eternity because it is all the time they have. But as I say, this is just my brain attempting to make sense of things right now.

And regarding interpretations I think it is interesting to consider the scribes and Pharisees of the bible. The scribes pushing the importance of what was written, the Pharisees pushing the importance of oral traditions.

And Jesus? Emphasising love!

Hebrews 11
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen...."

I often find myself pondering on what I hope for because that is what my faith is made of. So another question to be asked regarding people's own Christian faith, is what do they hope for? What do they long to hope for?

@glimpsing yes, ah for unity! But life would be boring without a bit of diversity of thought and, in the end, like you I think we must concentrate on the goodness and love of God and stop making hell a stick to beat people with; we've done that for far too long, and the trouble is that it makes God the stick bearer. My issue with the hell as eternal separation from God position is that separation from God means separation from all that is good, beautiful, perfect, kind, safe, loving, and therefore in itself is great loneliness and torment. For me that's just the same as burning in fire for eternity.

@MissingSummertime sure, of course. In fact, the texts you've given are proof texts for the conditionalism perspective (ceasing to exist.)

Matthew 25:46: Jesus talks about eternal punishment, not eternal punishing. The clue is both in the verb form and also in the Greek translation of 'eternal' which comes up several times in the NT in the context of something that has been finished but has eternal consequences: for eg, eternal salvation (we don't keep being saved forever, it's done). I'm not arguing for no judgment/punishment - Jesus uses stark language because of the seriousness of evil and oppression, and I think we can all identify with the need for justice for all the atrocities of centuries, right down to the tiny little things that hurt us and others every day (ie sin.)

Rev 14:11: the 'smoke of their torment rising' is used several times through scripture as a hyperbolic statement to show the finality of something (ie the consequences lasting for eternity.) Indeed, the exact thing is said for Sodom and Gomorrah, and we don't see the smoke rising of those cities now - it was poetic language of justice and judgment on great evil. They always say you should use the Bible to interpret the Bible, so we must look at the bigger picture. The same goes for 'having no rest day or night' - a hyperbolic statement, normal for the context of the book, that doesn't name a duration and in fact on careful study is to do with the time on earth when they are 'worshipping the beast' or having the covid vaccine as my relative would say

Rev 20 - couldn't be clearer. What is the second death? This is a plain reading. Does the second death mean people being tormented for eternity, or does it simply mean what it says it means - a cease of existence? What usually happens when someone falls into a lake of fire? - now I know this is all new and a bit scary when you're so entrenched in a traditionalist position, but to me it was an eye opener, and I also came to realise much of the language simply communicated God's abhorrence for evil and the suffering that mankind causes, and the writers therefore chose very stark language to communicate this. But nowhere in that passage does it say they were in there forever, tortured by little devils with forks.

Also in Matthew 10:28, Jesus says: “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.

Exactly...see what I'm getting at? This verse is plain reading. It doesn't say fear him who can torment you in flames forever. It says fear him who can destroy both body and soul. That's pretty plain to me in terms of the duration of the punishment. And again, Jesus is using stark language to express a great sadness at evil and oppression.

I have no idea what Hades or the 'intermediate state' is, but I don't think it matters, the Bible doesn't explain it (it talks about Christians going to sleep). I do think we use these ideas of darkness, fire and torment as sticks to beat people into submission, and I think that's not God's heart at all. Jesus talked a whole load more about oppression than gehenna, and used gehenna as a reminder of past atrocities and the nature of death, to give people the chance to repent and choose a new way of love and salvation. I do believe Jesus saves us from death (John 3:16 says it plainly as do many other passages), but I don't find any grounds for the medieval construct of eternal hell. However, I can see how the pictures used in scripture were twisted to form such.

As for testimonies, there will always be testimonies and it's very difficult to trust people when there are such differing ones. It's like near death experiences - people in different religions experience what they expect. I tend to be a bit sceptical about these, but maybe that's my issue.

My issue with the hell as eternal separation from God position is that separation from God means separation from all that is good, beautiful, perfect, kind, safe, loving, and therefore in itself is great loneliness and torment. For me that's just the same as burning in fire for eternity.

I agree. I think that's what all have an issue with. Help me have hope over the people for whom unity with God is an anathema for, though. @Madhairday.

@glimpsing

My issue with the hell as eternal separation from God position is that separation from God means separation from all that is good, beautiful, perfect, kind, safe, loving, and therefore in itself is great loneliness and torment. For me that's just the same as burning in fire for eternity.

I agree. I think that's what all have an issue with. Help me have hope over the people for whom unity with God is an anathema for, though. @Madhairday.

Help me have hope over the people for whom unity with God is an anathema for, though.

Like who?