I want to start off with a question of my own as we jump into this big, tough issue:
Why is a belief in hell—an eternity of horrendous torture mandated by God—the litmus test for true Christianity?
I was born into and raised in the Church. And like the overwhelming majority of Christians, I believed in heaven and hell: That those who believe in Jesus, no matter what kind of people they are, will go to heaven; and that those who reject Jesus, no matter what kind of people they are, will fry in hell.
Admittedly, it seemed to make sense. God, in Jesus, has made it possible for us to live in relationship with God. That relationship is one of grace and forgiveness. If we choose to reject that overture of love we’ll live with the consequences—forever.
But as I began to wrestle with my understanding of the character of God, I realized that my starting point was wrong. I recognized that the starting point for God’s character is not that of an angry judge but that of a radically gracious parent. And if that’s the true character of God, the issue of hell becomes increasingly problematic. If God truly is lavishly and recklessly gracious, then how can that same God be capable of creating such a horrific eternity for those who might reject that grace?
For a while I tried to say that hell is, in essence, an act of love. Love forced is not love but abuse. A loving God will not force God’s self on us. If we chose to reject God’s act of love in Jesus, God will love us enough to respect that choice. God, out of love, would not want to force us to spend eternity with him.
But still… it didn’t answer all the questions:
Is my rejection of God’s love stronger than God’s love for me?
Does my free will usurp God’s grace?
Will the God who goes to the cross for us finally give up on us?
Is God’s grace bound by human time and space?
Or, as my friend, the late BJ Thomas, put it in one of his songs: I wonder why the pure in heart… they have to have a judgment day. I wonder what the Lord has made… that he plans to throw away.
One blog post will not solve the problem of hell.
But I want to suggest a starting point by going back to the story of the Prodigal Son which I referred to in another post.
The Context: Jesus is caught red handed in the act of eating with the wrong kinds of people: sinners and tax collectors—those the religious leaders had written off because they believed God had written them off. No self-respecting Jewish Rabbi would debase himself in such a way. By eating with these people Jesus was in essence treating them as friends and equals. And in the process, ceremonially defiling himself. In response to criticism from the religious elite, Jesus tells the story of a father of radical, reckless grace.
A quick summary:
1) The younger son asks for his father for his inheritance early bringing shame onto the father, his family, and his village. Strike one.
2) The younger son takes his money to a non-Jewish (unclean) land and wastes it all there on wild living. Strike two.
3) The younger son ends up feeding pigs (unclean animals) for a gentile (an unclean person) in order to survive. Strike three.
Culturally, this younger son has gone beyond the point of no return. He is now considered dead to the village and his family with no way of redemption. Story over!
A major point: When the son decides to head home, he does not go home, as we often assume, repentant. He goes home defiant. He goes home with a scheme in place to manipulate his dad. He wants his dad to hire him in the hope that he can work off his debt, weasel himself back into the family, and receive his inheritance all over again when dad dies. This young man is still dead! He still rejects his dad’s love.
What does this have to do with hell?
Should the villagers catch the son walking into the village they will beat him up and banish him (to hell) from the community once and for all.
But notice what the dad does. And remember, this son is defiant. This son still rejects his father’s love!
The father (representing God) runs to this son who deserves only punishment and condemnation—and rescues him with grace.
He throws his arms around his son to protect him from the mob.
He puts the family robe around his shoulders.
He puts the ring of sonship on his finger.
He puts shoes on his feet.
Then he throws a party for him!
All this for a son who, to that point, has rejected his father’s love!
As the father says to the older brother later: This son of mine was lost, but I found him. He was dead. But I made him alive again.
The grace of the father proved stronger than the rejection by his son.
The picture Jesus paints of God in this story is not one of a God who condemns people to hell but who runs to hell-condemned people and graces them with life. God runs to dead people—people who can neither reject or accept love—and raises them to life!
Theologian Jurgen Moltmann says it this way: According to this Christian view, neither God nor human beings decide about hell, but Christ alone: ‘I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of death and hell’ (Rev. 1:18). What is Christ going to do with ‘the keys of hell’? ‘Christ hath burst the gates of hell,’ says Charles Wesley in his Easter hymn. So all its gates are open. Hell is no longer inescapable… (In the End, the Beginning—the Life of Hope. 2004)
Or as John says it in his Gospel: For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved. (John 3:16)
Does God send people to hell?
The Cross says: For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people’s sins against them. (2 Corinthians 5:19)
The Cross says:
You were lost but God found you.
You were dead but God through Christ raised you to life.
You are the one clothed in the robes of grace.
You are the one wearing the ring of sonship/daughterhood.
You are the one wearing the shoes of forgiveness.
Because God’s grace will always have the final word…
And that word is life.
More next time.
You can reach me at Tim@TimWrightMinistries.org