In doing some further research as someone commented that they do support the traditional view of Hell as a place of continual torment for all eternity, I found a great article on Hell that also has the interesting section below on Universalism:
The Universalist View of Hell
A second and more radical revision of hell has been attempted by universalists, who have reduced hell to a temporary condition of graded punishments which ultimately leads to heaven. Universalists believe that ultimately God will succeed in bringing every human being to salvation and eternal life so that no one, in fact, will be condemned in the final judgment to either eternal torment or annihilation. This belief was first suggested by Origen in the third century, and it has gained steady support in modern times, especially through the writing of such men as Friedrich Schleiermacher, C. F. D. Moule, J. A. T. Robinson, Michael Paternoster, Michael Perry, and John Hick. The arguments presented by these and other writers in support of universalism are both theological and philosophical.
Theological and Philosophical Arguments. Theologically, appeal is made to "universalist passages" (1 Tim 2:4; 4:10; Col 1:20; Rom 5:18; 11:32; Eph 1:10; 1 Cor 15:22), which seem to offer hope of universal salvation. On the basis of these texts, universalists argue that if all human beings are not ultimately saved, then God’s will for "all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim 2:4) would be frustrated and defeated. Only through the salvation of all human beings can God demonstrate the triumph of His infinitely patient love.
Philosophically, universalists find it intolerable that a loving God would allow millions of persons to suffer everlasting torment for sins committed within a span of a few years. Jacques Ellul articulates this view admirably, asking the following probing questions:"Have we not seen the impossibility of considering that the New Creation, that admirable symphony of love, could exist beside the world of wrath? Is God still double-faced: a visage of love turned toward his celestial Jerusalem and a visage of wrath turned toward this ‘hell?’ Are then the peace and joy of God complete, since he continues as a God of wrath and of fulmination? Could Paradise be what Romain Gary has so marvelously described in Tulipe, when he said that the trouble is not the concentration camp but ‘the very peaceable, very happy little village beside the camp’—the little village alongside, where people were undisturbed while millions died atrociously in the camp."66
Purgatorial Process. Universalists argue that it is unthinkable that in the final judgment God would condemn to eternal torment the countless millions of non-Christians who have not responded to Christ because they have never heard the Christian message. The solution proposed by some universalists is that God will save all the unfaithful by enabling them to be gradually transformed through a "purgatorial" process after death.
This view represents a revision of the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory, which limits this remedial process only to the souls of the faithful. The universalists extend this privilege also to the souls of the unfaithful. Thus, beyond death, God continues to draw all the unsaved to Himself, until ultimately all will respond to His love and rejoice in His presence for all eternity.
An Appealing but Unbiblical View. No one can deny that the theological and philosophical arguments of universalism appeal to the Christian conscience. Any person who has deeply sensed God’s love longs to see Him saving every person and hates to think that He would be so vindictive as to punish millions of persons—especially those who have lived in ignorance—with eternal torments. Yet, our appreciation for the universalists’ concern to uphold the triumph of God’s love and to justly refute the unbiblical concept of eternal suffering must not blind us to the fact that this doctrine is a serious distortion of Biblical teaching.
First of all, the "universalist passages" declare the scope of God’s universal saving purpose, but not the fact of universal salvation for every human being. For example, in Colossians 1:19-23, God’s plan "to reconcile to himself all things" is said to include the Colossian believers, "provided that you continue in the faith."
Similarly, in 1 Timothy 2:4, God’s desire for "all men to be saved" is expressed together with the fact of a final judgment that will bring "ruin and destruction" to the unfaithful (1 Tim 6:9-10; cf. 5:24; 4:8). God extends to all the provision of salvation, but He respects the freedom of those who reject His offer even though it causes Him utmost anguish.
Second, the argument that God ultimately will save all because the doctrine of everlasting torment for the unsaved is impossible to accept, inasmuch as it negates any sense of divine justice as well as the very peace and joy of paradise, is a valid argument. However, such an argument, as we have shown, rests upon an erroneous interpretation of the Biblical teaching about the nature of the final punishment of the wicked. Universal salvation cannot be right just because eternal suffering is wrong.
Third, the notion of a remedial punishment, or of gradual transformation after death, is totally foreign to the Scripture. The destiny of each person is firmly fixed at death. This principle is explicitly expressed by Christ in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-21). In Hebrews 9:27, also, it is clearly stated that "it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment." For the impenitent sinners,"the prospect of judgment" is a "fearful" one, because they will experience not universal salvation but "a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries" (Heb 10:26-27).
Fourth, regarding the challenge of those who had no opportunity to learn and to respond to the message of Christ, it is not necessary either to surrender the belief in salvation solely through Jesus Christ or to consign all the non-Christians to everlasting torment. The less privileged may find salvation on the basis of their trusting response to what they have known of God. Paul mentions that the Gentiles who do not know the law will be judged according to the law which is "written in their hearts" (Rom 2:14-16).
Universalism, though attractive at first sight, is erroneous because it fails to recognize that God’s love for mankind is manifested not by glossing over sins, nor by limiting human freedom, but rather by providing salvation and freedom to accept it. This truth is aptly expressed in the best-known text about God’s love and the danger involved in rejecting it:"For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life" (John 3:16).
Conclusion. Both the metaphorical and universalistic views of hell represent worthy attempts "to take the hell out of hell." Unfortunately, they fail to do justice to the Biblical data and thus they ultimately misrepresent the Biblical doctrine of the final punishment of the unsaved. The sensible solution to the problems of the traditionalist view is to be found, not by lowering or eliminating the pain quotient of a literal hell but, by accepting hell for what it is, the final punishment and permanent annihilation of the wicked. As the Bible says: "The wicked will be no more" (Ps 37:10) because "their end is destruction" (Phil 3:19).
from HELL: ETERNAL TORMENT OR ANNIHILATION?
by Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D., Andrews University
URL: http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/books/immortality_resurrection/6.htm
accessed 19/4/2011
No comments:
Post a Comment