But I noticed that our Lord, while stressing the terror of hell with unsparing severity usually emphasizes the idea not of duration but of finality. Consignment to the destroying fire is usually treated as the end of the story--not as the beginning of a new story.

C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain


Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them, in like manner giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Jude 1:7













MISSION STATEMENT This blog is devoted to presenting biblically based evidence which argues for the extinction of the wicked as oppossed to their eternal torment in a place called hell. The usual case for extinction follows a familiar pattern: the wicked will be resurrected, suffer for a time in the lake of fire, then be extinguished. This blog takes a different view. It is the assertion here that all of the language in the Bible that refers to torment is in fact referring to earthly torment endured during the tribulation. The argument proceeds as follows: The Bible teaches a period of earthly torment (Mark 13:19, Rev. 4:10, 1 Thess. 5:2-3, Rev. 9:4-5), from which the just are exempt (Rev. 7:2-3, 9:4-5, 14:9-11), that consists of Christ shutting the door (Gen. 7:16), weeping (Amos 8:10, Zeph. 1:14), fire and brimstone (Rev. 9:18, 9:2, Isaiah 34:9, Malachi 4:1), smoke going up forever (Isaiah 34:8-10), and a form of retributive justice (Jer. 16:18, 17:18, Rev. 18:16, Psalm 69:27-28, 59:13, 83:17), which ends in extinction (Malachi 1:4, Obadiah 1:16, Psalm 37:20, Rev. 20:11-14, Matt. 25:46, Luke 12:48).



















Saturday, January 15, 2011

INFINITE PUNISHMENT

Perhaps the most nagging question arising out of the debate about eternal torment is this: Why the need for it? Why would God have to punish people forever? No remotely logical answer has ever been given. The closest anyone comes is to say that sin against an infinite God requires infinite punishment. One argument for hell is the belief that the Bible teaches degrees of punishment in the after-life. Everlasting death cannot accomplish this purpose; therefore hell must be eternal torment. Do you see the contradiction here? Hell must be infinite to satisfy an infinite God, yet it will vary in intensity from person to person according to their deeds. These two ideas stand in stark contradiction to each other. If God must send people to hell because He's an infinite God, and therefore infinitely offended by all sin, then every sin must by definition require infinite punishment. A child's white lie must offend Him infinitely, thereby demanding the exact same punishment as a mass murder. There's no getting around this by noting that hell is indeed infinite in duration for all who go there even though the intensity may vary. This is no answer to the problem; if God is offended infinitely, then He must punish each sin to the utmost degree possible, which would mean infinite duration and intensity. That means nothing less than to insist that every soul in hell--yes, chidren, too--must endure the most intense agony conceivable for all eternity; they must be cast into the hottest flame, where they will remain, screaming at the top of their lungs, without pause, forever and ever.


No sane person would propose to measure sin without considering the nature of the sinner as well as the one sinned against. Nor does the Bible insist we do so. The Bible indicates that God is mindful of "our frame, that we are but dust," (Psalm 103:14, and that he "remembereth that they were but flesh..." (Psalm 78:39). Moreover, God equates sin against man with sin against Himself. In the book Two Views of Hell, Edward Fudge observes "God demanded that the Jews provide the same justice for every person, regardless of the person's rank or standing in society (Ex 23:3; Lev. 19:15; Deut 1:17). This principle of a single standard applicable to all classes of people found clear expression in the law known as lex talionis--an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth (Lev. 24:19-22)...Furthermore, Israel's laws were meant to elicit praise for the justice of God himself (Deut 4:5-8)."


By proposing degrees of punishment in hell, traditionalists implicitly, if not explicitly, concede that God does in fact consider our frame in accessing the penalty for sin, thereby undercutting their own argument that sin requires infinite punishment based on the fact that it's committed against an infinite God. The fact that an infinite God sets a perfect, inflexible standard does not dictate infinite offense at the failure of finite beings to meet that standard. A father's standard is the same for all his children; his offense at the transgression of that standard varies according to the age and capacities of the child.


God demonstrates His mindfulness of our frame--that we "are but dust"--in decreeing death as the punishment for sin. Man comes from the dust and to dust he returns. The only just punishment for the continued misuse of something--inclusing life--is the revocation of the thing being misused. If a child is misusing a toy, we take it from her; we don't torture her. Other punishments may be necessary, but only to the extent that we don't wish to revoke the toy.

The implications of the infinite-God-requires-infinite-punishment argument are twofold: 1) there cannot be degrees of punishment in hell, and 2) hell must be complete immersion in the hottest flame for all time for all who go there, including children (please, no age of accountability nonsense; that's a bigger crock than purgatory). If the traditionalist can accept this, fine: we may proceed with the debate on other grounds. If not, they must either rethink their rationale for the need for hell, or perhaps consider giving it up entirely.



















Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)