I've listened to Steve's lessons and am reading his book on the subject of hell.
Steve I really appreciate how you logically present all sides of the argument.
Like some of you I've been on the fence about which view is ultimately correct, but because of that, I have by default found myself pitted against staunch traditionalists arguing for conditional immortality, which theoretically sounds reasonable to me. I can't find a passage that says the soul of man is inherently immortal - that only comes through faith in Jesus.
However in arguing that point (albeit without firm conviction) it dawned on me that suggesting the torment may eventually end for the "goat", I'm introducing a glimmer of hope for him that the Bible does not provide.
All the relevant passages make it very clear that the unbeliever will be separated from God. No God and therefore no hope. No love, no joy, no peace, no light, no pleasure or relief from torment.
It's not a pretty picture and there's no way to dress that up.
For all intents and purposes this is an eternal state to the one cast from God's presence.
Any discussion of that suffering somehow ending gives a hope that the Bible does not offer. The lost will not have a sense of hope (which is a gift from God) that it will ever end.
To humans, the concepts of hope and eternity are very closely entwined. As a Christian, I have hope that an unbeliever does not possess. Hope in this life to me means that I know that any suffering I experience here will eventually end. That's a gift.
When the Bible speaks of eternity or everlasting, it can be taken literally in a dimension that humans can comprehend. Everlasting punishment means no hope or end in sight, and that's what these passages are conveying.
Beyond that, any discussion about the global nature of eternity is speculation. The concepts of hell and eternity get into dimensions of space and time beyond my comprehension. Discussion about them can quickly go beyond the scope of the text. It's an intentional mystery I believe.
I completely trust that God is perfectly just and will ultimately set things in the universe exactly according to His perfect will.
I don't have to understand or make sense of it beyond that. I really can't wrap my mind around infinity and I don't have to.
In short, even though I have some theoretical agreement with the notion of conditional immortality, I can teach the traditionalist view with a clear conscience, rather than muddy the water. In a practical sense, that's the message the Bible conveys. Why offer hope to someone who, when they get there, can't enjoy it?
Wrestling with what to teach
-
- Posts: 903
- Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm
Re: Wrestling with what to teach
Hi pgdavis2. In what capacity do you teach and what do you teach people to do? I lean strongly towards the CI view, but I'm not a teacher.
As I understand these things, both CI and the traditional view affirm eternal/everlasting punishment. The first defines punishment primarily as the opposite of eternal/everlasting life (i.e., destruction and death) and the latter defines it primarily as torment (forever alive in some sense). UR doesn't affirm eternal/everlasting punishment but it does affirm aiónios kolasis. That's a whole discussion, with which I suppose you're familiar.
As for hope, I think of 1 Thess 4:13-18. I don't think there is hope in eternal destruction and death passed down as judgment from the Almighty. In older times, people seemed to think that "hell" will consist of unending grotesque tortures, which would be described in sickening detail. Are you therefore offering hope to people when you tell them that that will not happen?
I wouldn't appreciate it if any teacher told me something only b/c he or she thought that I couldn't handle nuance. If you are certain which view is correct, then I guess you can tell people that. Otherwise, present the different views.
Your 2nd to last paragraph is very agreeable to me.
As I understand these things, both CI and the traditional view affirm eternal/everlasting punishment. The first defines punishment primarily as the opposite of eternal/everlasting life (i.e., destruction and death) and the latter defines it primarily as torment (forever alive in some sense). UR doesn't affirm eternal/everlasting punishment but it does affirm aiónios kolasis. That's a whole discussion, with which I suppose you're familiar.
As for hope, I think of 1 Thess 4:13-18. I don't think there is hope in eternal destruction and death passed down as judgment from the Almighty. In older times, people seemed to think that "hell" will consist of unending grotesque tortures, which would be described in sickening detail. Are you therefore offering hope to people when you tell them that that will not happen?
I wouldn't appreciate it if any teacher told me something only b/c he or she thought that I couldn't handle nuance. If you are certain which view is correct, then I guess you can tell people that. Otherwise, present the different views.
Your 2nd to last paragraph is very agreeable to me.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23
Re: Wrestling with what to teach
Thanks for the response ![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
I teach Bible studies and Sunday school settings - not a vocational teacher. I take it seriously though, and I don't want to present something as fact when it's not a certainty.
In this area there are certain facts but a whole lotta mystery.
I would not advocate taking the concept of torment beyond what scripture actually says about it...no need to make up grotesque scenes.
I'm just saying that it seems clear that the Bible's message is that those who go to hell it might as well be forever as far as they know, since they will be devoid of hope of it ever ending.
Ever been on a car drive like that?
So I can comfortably support the practical message that hell will last forever for those people in the dimension in which the author intended.
Anything beyond that I'd be speculating - whether in a global sense which of the three views it "true" is so far beyond my comprehension that I am not qualified to say.
That would basically be my message if I ever teach it or be asked about it. No hope for the goat.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
I teach Bible studies and Sunday school settings - not a vocational teacher. I take it seriously though, and I don't want to present something as fact when it's not a certainty.
In this area there are certain facts but a whole lotta mystery.
I would not advocate taking the concept of torment beyond what scripture actually says about it...no need to make up grotesque scenes.
I'm just saying that it seems clear that the Bible's message is that those who go to hell it might as well be forever as far as they know, since they will be devoid of hope of it ever ending.
Ever been on a car drive like that?
So I can comfortably support the practical message that hell will last forever for those people in the dimension in which the author intended.
Anything beyond that I'd be speculating - whether in a global sense which of the three views it "true" is so far beyond my comprehension that I am not qualified to say.
That would basically be my message if I ever teach it or be asked about it. No hope for the goat.
-
- Posts: 903
- Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm
Re: Wrestling with what to teach
And thank you for the response. ![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
That's neat. Do you teach children or adults?
I agree with you - no hope for the "goats" - but we may differ how that works out (while there's life there's hope, they say).
If I'm trying to explain some controversial theology to somebody, I try to just quote the Bible verbatim. I figure it's a better teacher than I could ever be, and I don't have to worry about being wrong or speculative. If I can express in my own words some theology that the Bible "teaches" better than it can, then the Bible probably doesn't teach it ... is what I figure.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
That's neat. Do you teach children or adults?
I agree with you - no hope for the "goats" - but we may differ how that works out (while there's life there's hope, they say).
If I'm trying to explain some controversial theology to somebody, I try to just quote the Bible verbatim. I figure it's a better teacher than I could ever be, and I don't have to worry about being wrong or speculative. If I can express in my own words some theology that the Bible "teaches" better than it can, then the Bible probably doesn't teach it ... is what I figure.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23
Re: Wrestling with what to teach
Usually adults... Sometimes teens.
I completely agree with you on all points!
Thanks
Paul
I completely agree with you on all points!
Thanks
Paul