Chapter 2: HELL – and Its Other Side

2016

The doctrines of hell and the existence of God seem to pose a formidable paradox for both Christianity and Islam. The paradox can be stated as follows: Given that God is perfect in every sense, how can he allow any of his creatures to suffer eternal perdition? In this paper, I undertake a critical examination of the arguments for and against the doctrine of hell and conclude that on balance, arguments against the existence of hell heavily outweigh those for its existence. This calls for a radical revision of the traditional doctrine of hell. I contend that what is needed is a gentler and more sinner-friendly theology of hell that recognizes God’s mercy and infinite patience. Nevertheless, belief in hell can serve the social function of deterring potential sinners from sinning.

Justice That Transforms: Volume Three, 2018

Studying theology at Regent College (1974 – 1976; 1981) on the University of British Columbia (Vancouver Canada) campus strongly urged that we students make it a life work to apply theology to our vocation. I took that urging seriously, and indeed have tried to apply it ever since. In that my entire career in criminal justice actually began while a student at Regent, it was natural to begin the process right away. In turning one’s attention to issues of crime and punishment, it is inevitable to come up rather immediately against the dominant Western view of Divine Punishment: a literal Hell of eternal conscious torment. All my instincts, by the time of completing an initial two years of study at the seminary, rebelled against the kind of “god” who, à la Four Spiritual Laws, “loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life”, but if one does not buy in. “god hates you, and has a horrible plan for your afterlife!” And the further along the trajectory of understanding God’s justice as invariably restorative, the more impossible it became to accept the traditional dominant Western theological view of hell – or of war or punishment/prisons. As it turns out, such profoundly troubling misgivings put me in very good company. Kevin Miller, writer, film maker – and so talented at so many things – produced a documentary in 2012 entitled “Hellbound?” (2012). His follow-up was a book he edited entitled “Hellrazed?” (2017). Several of us put in our two cents worth, all challenging a view of god about which a yesteryear newspaper columnist, Matt Miller, did an ironic riff on Evangelicals’ all-time favourite verse, John 3:16: For God so loved the world that he temporarily died to save it from himself. But none of that really matters because most people will be tortured for eternity anyways. As you will see further on, I also raise questions about an arcane footnote/exception-clause theology of John 3:16 – and more generally of “Evangelicals” by extension. The first part of the chapter below was originally a movie review; the second part a book review. I eventually joined the two into what you may now read. The chapter that follows is explicit about a trilogy of linked justice issues – with “just deserts” rounding out that trilogy.

2003

It is the conviction of the writer of this paper that the evidence presented from both the New Testament and its conservative scholar’s exhibits that the doctrine of the eternal conscious punishment of the wicked held by orthodox Christians for over 2000 years is the only option for a conservative Bible-believing Christian. Some may mock at the idea that humans often need contrasts to learn and to be grateful for the blessing they have received. Nevertheless, often it is only when one sees that someone else did not receive a blessing which he has received is he able to view things from a perspective of thankfulness. When Scripture has its proper place as the final authority for faith and practice, many issues can be resolved. Likewise, how the Holy Spirit assisted orthodox exegetes to interpret texts over the last 2,000 years can also assist Bible students in not wandering into the error of many American based cults.

2015

This problem of hell is a specific form of the problem of evil. The possibility that perhaps a great number of people will end up in an eternal hell is a problem for the Christian who also confesses faith in an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God. In this paper, I shall introduce issuantist views of hell and show that the basic formulations of this perspective do not provide an adequate answer to the problem of hell. Issuantist scholars themselves, however, recognize this weakness and add a wide range of possible supplements to their basic perspective. Some of these supplemented versions succeed in presenting reasonable answers to the problem of hell. One of the key reasons for the shift in interpretations of hell is a perceived failure on the part of other interpretations of hell to give adequate answers to the problem of hell. It is my conclusion, however, that with the addition of some of the same supplements, versions of annihilationism/ conditionalism and hell as ete...

The Blackwell Companion to the Problem of Evil, 2014

1. Introduction While accounts of the nature of hell vary within and between religious traditions, formulations of the traditional doctrine include at least the following five elements. E1 Some persons do or will reside in hell and will be there for an infinite period of time. E2 Hell is the residence of those persons who have failed to satisfy some condition(s) dictated by God as necessary to avoid hell and enjoy heaven. E3 The cumulative well-being and well-being at any moment of any resident of hell is negative. E4 Those in hell are blocked from leaving. E5 Those in hell are consigned to hell as punishment for either failing to satisfy the condition(s) God requires for one to avoid hell or for actual sins committed or both. In this essay we explain why the doctrine of hell poses a problem of evil for traditional theists in the Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) and how some have responded to the problem. Our focus is entirely on recent work in analytic philosophical theology. Given that the recent philosophical debates over hell have largely transpired within the context of the Christian theistic tradition, Christian theism provides the backdrop for how we frame the problem and some of the responses in much of what follows. However, this should not be taken as an indication of the problem as unique to traditional Christianity or even that the responses to the problem considered are only available to those who are working from within the Christian tradition. In what follows, we first summarize the case for why the doctrine of hell poses a problem of evil. Next, we consider recent traditionalist responses to the problem. Finally, we examine some non-traditionalist strategies that involve dispensing with one or more of the five elements of the traditional view. 2. The Problem Stated Some philosophers have argued that the conception of hell that follows from (E1)-(E5) is inconsistent with the traditional conception of God. In particular, it poses a problem for theists who (a) believe in an afterlife and (b) believe that some persons will reside in hell forever. Such theists affirm the following two theses: (i) God exists, and is essentially omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good. 1 Similar reasoning can be found in Adams (1975), Hick (1978, chapter XVI), and Talbott (1990). 2 We are not using the same numbering as Adams and we have substituted 'God' where Adams has 'He'.