Rob Bell--Love Wins
#21
Posted 28 February 2011 - 12:10 AM
#22
Posted 28 February 2011 - 08:53 AM
Overstreet, on 27 February 2011 - 05:57 PM, said:
You're not alone, Jeff.
I think the traditional doctrine of hell has done more to repel people from Christ than any other peripheral belief in Christendom. The evangelicals who defend it the most stridently don't even preach it consistently in their sermons. And without question, if such a place exists men ought to be warning others with strong tears... night and day. Name one mainstream Protestant preacher who speaks of a burning, smoldering hell every Sunday-- the place of weeping and gnashing of teeth. There are none that I know of. As a stripling, I used to listen to old David Wilkerson and Leonard Ravenhill tapes. I had quite a collection. Those were the only guys I ever heard shriek about the terrors of hell consistently. But they represented a very niche, neo-puritan market in Christendom-- hardly mainstream.
I reject this traditional view enthusiastically, and not -- as the conservatives tend to charge-- merely because it's "unpleasant" or offends my liberal sensibilities. The idea of fiery judgement upon sinners actually sorta thrills me sometimes. Something in me would rejoice to see the world's worst, most violent politicians tormented day and night forever. Absolutely.
But that's one reason why I reject the traditional view of hell-- it has a distinctly primitive, human aroma.
Edited by Greg P, 28 February 2011 - 08:55 AM.
#23
Posted 28 February 2011 - 09:03 AM
But as I've said, I'd gladly leap into the annihilationist camp with ya, Greg, if I could reconcile it completely with the Biblical witness (and yes, I know you believe your position is supported by the Biblical witness, but I don't quite see that), which, as a child of the Reformation, I grant primacy of authority. That said, the "traditional view of hell," i.e. a physical space of unceasing fire and torture, doesn't quite strike me as cutting it, either.
Edited by Ryan H., 28 February 2011 - 09:04 AM.
#24
Posted 28 February 2011 - 09:23 AM
Ryan H., on 28 February 2011 - 09:03 AM, said:
Don't feel bad, I don't think I know anyone any more who truly believes the traditional view of hell. At least not in my limited sphere. I'm sure there are some stragglers out there. I used to be one. But faith without works is dead, and anyone who believed their friends, relatives and neighbors were rushing headlong into an unending universe of torture would of necessity be out of the closet and doing something about it.
Edited by Greg P, 28 February 2011 - 09:23 AM.
#25
Posted 28 February 2011 - 09:36 AM
Greg P, on 28 February 2011 - 09:23 AM, said:
That passage in Hebrews reminds me of something from Bell's preview for LOVE WINS, to which he objects to the notion that somehow Jesus rescues us from the wrath of God. He may dislike that idea, but I'd say the Biblical witness attests to that notion pretty strongly, and not just in Hebrews.
Greg P, on 28 February 2011 - 09:23 AM, said:
And he said, 'Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house—for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.' But Abraham said, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.' And he said, 'No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' He said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.'"
Edited by Ryan H., 28 February 2011 - 09:52 AM.
#26
Posted 28 February 2011 - 09:52 AM
Greg P, on 28 February 2011 - 08:53 AM, said:
But that's one reason why I reject the traditional view of hell-- it has a distinctly primitive, human aroma.
Yes, hell seems to appeal to people just fine. It's the "who goes there" that people find troubling. Frankly, a heaven with no Freddie Mercury but a Jerry Falwell seems pretty unjust.
#27
Posted 28 February 2011 - 10:23 AM
FWIW though what's usually called the "traditional" view of hell isn't. All 3 broad positions go way back, and IIRC it's conditionalism that's the oldest.
Stef said:
: particularly the one that describes a burning trash dump outside of Jerusalem.
Does he debunk that at all? The evidence for that is 2nd millennium at the earliest. It's about as reliable as the convenient traditions about there being a smallish gate in Jerusalem called the needle's eye.
Matt
#28
Posted 28 February 2011 - 10:43 AM
Ryan H., on 28 February 2011 - 09:36 AM, said:
#29
Posted 28 February 2011 - 10:57 AM
Greg P, on 28 February 2011 - 10:43 AM, said:
And isn't passivity/inactivity problematic if believers hold *any* conception of Hell that's not along the lines of a Purgatorial/Universalist standpoint and allows room for human agency to participate in the narrative of salvation? We hardly want to shrug our shoulders at the prospect of annihilation, which is a pretty horrifying idea. I fail to see how this is only a significant issue for those who believe Hell is an actual lake of sulfur where people writhe in flame for eternity.
Edited by Ryan H., 28 February 2011 - 11:17 AM.
#30
Posted 28 February 2011 - 11:50 AM
Ryan H., on 28 February 2011 - 10:57 AM, said:
Men naturally die and cease to exist-- that is a reality that offers no guilt or anxiety for those of us who believe in a conditional afterlife. I don't have to wring my hands over those tired arguments about the fate of some tribe in Africa who doesn't "know Jesus". Their minds will not travel to another plane after death-- the machine will auto-terminate as it has naturally for every person since the beginning of time. Fairly painless, although i believe there could be considerable angst on the way out, not having been touched by God's Grace and having no hope in an afterlife. Regardless, in this view, God is not "doing" anything to anyone. Christopher Hitchens and Billy Graham will die in like manner, without respect to persons.
I am not apathetic about death, but it is a reality for all humanity and I dont get my undies in a bunch about who hits the cosmic lottery and gets Second Life. I imagine many, many more will be there than religious people commonly envision. The Judge of all the earth shall do right. The option to continue living after the body dies, is a privilege given only to those who receive God's Grace.
Edited by Greg P, 28 February 2011 - 11:57 AM.
#31
Posted 28 February 2011 - 12:09 PM
Edited by Ryan H., 28 February 2011 - 12:10 PM.
#32
Posted 28 February 2011 - 12:26 PM
When I read NT scripture now about the future of the wicked, I see nothing there to indicate torment or torture. On the contrary, I read language implying termination, cessation and merciful finality. Granted some have great difficulty over the extravagant, poetic language used to describe such a fate, but many of those verses are quoted directly from OT passages.
Edited by Greg P, 28 February 2011 - 12:32 PM.
#33
Posted 28 February 2011 - 12:28 PM
Greg P, on 28 February 2011 - 12:26 PM, said:
#34
Posted 28 February 2011 - 12:37 PM
From the old Fudge camp debates: It's interesting that of the over 200 NT texts dealing with the future estate of the wicked only one seems to indicate eternal torment (Rev. 14:11) The majority of verses indicate literal destruction/finality.
Edited by Greg P, 28 February 2011 - 12:47 PM.
#35
Posted 28 February 2011 - 01:06 PM
#36
Posted 28 February 2011 - 01:10 PM
: Persona wrote:
: : . . . particularly the one that describes a burning trash dump outside of Jerusalem.
:
: Does he debunk that at all? The evidence for that is 2nd millennium at the earliest.
Really? Huh. This is a reference to "Gehenna", right? I thought that was associated with "the Valley of Hinnom", which is one of the valleys bordering Jerusalem.
#38
Posted 28 February 2011 - 04:07 PM
Peter T Chattaway, on 28 February 2011 - 01:10 PM, said:
: Persona wrote:
: : . . . particularly the one that describes a burning trash dump outside of Jerusalem.
:
: Does he debunk that at all? The evidence for that is 2nd millennium at the earliest.
Really? Huh. This is a reference to "Gehenna", right? I thought that was associated with "the Valley of Hinnom", which is one of the valleys bordering Jerusalem.
I can say this about Rob's beliefs and the book: I am somewhat certain he sees hell as a literal place Jesus was referring to on earth, and that Jesus was using the place as a metaphor for sin. Also, in regard to heaven, if you were to look at Mars Hill's Narrative Theology, you'd see a belief that heaven is something that comes to earth, at the culmination of the ages, the recreation of all things. I am certain Rob does not find evidence for a "rapture" in the Bible.
Edited by Persona, 28 February 2011 - 04:07 PM.
#39
Posted 28 February 2011 - 04:09 PM
MattPage, on 28 February 2011 - 10:23 AM, said:
#40
Posted 28 February 2011 - 04:20 PM
Persona, on 28 February 2011 - 04:07 PM, said:
Persona, on 28 February 2011 - 04:07 PM, said:
Edited by Ryan H., 28 February 2011 - 04:21 PM.










