Questions about hell
Detailed Answer: To understand what Hell is truly like, it’s essential to consult a reliable source.
The Bible is the only source with credentials enough to trust as reliable on this subject (evidence for this is given in various sections of this website). If you believe you have another reliable source, I’d love to hear about it, what is it, and what reasons do you have to believe it is more reliable than the Bible?
I encourage anyone genuinely interested in this subject to explore the Bible themselves to discover its teachings on Hell, rather than relying on interpretations from works like Dante’s Inferno or other sources, which may not accurately reflect biblical views.
One thing is certain: Hell is a permanent separation from God and all the goodness that comes from Him. There is no worse state of being.
“Hell” is just used to frighten children or control people
Brief Answer: That is simply a claim without support.
What evidence do you have to believe that? On the other hand, there is unprecedented and unmatched evidence supporting the reliability of Jesus’ and the Bible’s claims, and these sources make clear claims that Hell exists.
Detailed Answer: That claim is an error in thinking known as the “genetic fallacy.”
One may be able to find an example of some pathetic parents or leaders, who resort to using “Hell” to aid their weak parenting skills with troublesome kids, or leaders needing fear to support their position. Listening to episode #1366 of the Joe Rogan podcast, starting around the two-minute mark, “hell houses” were discussed, where young children are subjected to teaching to instill fear about hell, which did sound disturbing, even abusive.
So what? Does that mean Hell isn’t true? Of course not. You would be committing an error in thinking, known as the genetic fallacy, if you think just because some people use the idea of Hell in this way it makes the whole concept of Hell not accurate.
Whether Hell exists or not depends on reality, and the facts converging on that reality. When considering the evidence, if, for example, we found, as certain as we can be, that Hell does not exist, then we can start to determine how this false idea got started. But to assume it is false, and the concept came about due to weak parents or religious leaders trying to frighten people, is just a premature guess, made before looking at the facts to determine if this place actually exists.
And, if Hell does exist, then even kids need to know this essential fact of life, but it needs to be done in appropriate times and discussions. Just like other things in life, for example, sexual predators and child traffickers, which are real, terrifying, and need to be appropriately placed in our awareness, and taken seriously.
Found this website coverage of a video by out-spoken atheist Penn Jillette, who is part of the long-standing magic show Penn and Teller. Checked the video to verify the website’s quoting of Jillette, and also found this atheist and I agree regarding evangelism, as Jillette makes a solid argument:
A few years ago, Jillette recorded a short video about someone who came to talk to him after one of his magic shows. He said the guy was about his age and had participated in one of the acts as an audience member.
The man complimented Jillette on the show, then said, “I brought this for you.” The man held up a small book. It was a New Testament with the Psalms, something that could fit in a person’s pocket.
“I wrote in the front of it,” the man said, “and I wanted you to have this.” The man explained he was a businessman and not crazy.
Jillette, moved by the man’s gesture, recalled: “He was kind, and nice, and sane, and looked me in the eyes, and talked to me, and then gave me this Bible.”
“I’ve always said,” Jillette explained, “I don’t respect people who don’t proselytize. I don’t respect that at all. If you believe there is a heaven and hell, and people could be going to hell or not getting eternal life or whatever, and you think it’s not really worth telling them this because it would make it socially awkward.
“How much do you have to hate somebody to not proselytize? How much do you have to hate someone to believe everlasting life is possible and not tell them that?”
Jillette then offered this example to illustrate his point: “If I believed, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that a truck was coming at you, and you didn’t believe it, that that truck was bearing down on you, there’s a certain point that I tackle you, and this is more important than that.”
“This guy was a really good guy. He was polite, honest, and sane, and he cared enough about me to proselytize and give me a Bible.”
Now, Jillette is still an atheist, and he wanted to make that clear: “I know there’s no God, and one polite person living his life right doesn’t change that. But I’ll tell you, he was a very, very, very good man. And that’s really important. And with that kind of goodness, it’s okay to have that deep of a disagreement.
I still think religion does a lot of bad stuff, but, man, that was a good man who gave me that book. That’s all I wanted to say.”
Anyone trying to use Hell to frighten people towards having a relationship with God, is missing an obvious biblical point.
While the seriousness and reality of Hell should be made clear, so people have the information they need to make decisions based on the reality of our situation, God does not want a relationship based on fear. If he did, God would simply expose all people to the reality of his holiness, and our complete dependence on him – but he didn’t – why?
Therefore, if you are a Christian and want to encourage someone to the unfathomable good coming with a relationship with Jesus, focus on that good. Informing of the reality of Hell is fine, just don’t make it as though fire insurance is of greater importance and impact than a relationship with our God.
Would I follow Christ just to avoid Hell, no doubt, but then it would be a relationship of obligation through fear, which is a substandard relationship, and I would always hope to find something better. Yet, this is not a substandard God, and relationship with this Father is so far beyond the standard of good we have become accustomed to.
Does God send a person to Hell just because they do not believe?
Brief answer: No, that’s not why.
Detailed Answer: God doesn’t send people to Hell, people send themselves.
One is not sent to Hell for not believing, they send themself with chosen behavior, which naturally separates them from Heaven.
As noted in the introduction to this topic, humility is needed because maybe we don’t know enough to judge how reality should be.
For example, the Bible often refers to God as “holy,” and “sin” not as simply a moral lapse, but what amounts to a crime against a holy God. Now “holiness” and “sin” are two of those religious words not often used otherwise, meaning people may not understand what these words entail.
We do not need a comprehensive definition of “holy,” and I couldn’t fully understand it anyway as I certainly do not have the basic aspects of holiness on my own, such as being morally perfect or set apart from any “sin.” But even without being able to wrap our mind entirely around what it means to be holy, if God by his nature is holy, and Heaven is a holy place, then “sin” is not just a simple, insignificant moral mistake, it is something that will by its nature be separated from a holy God, and a holy Heaven.
When you think of what naturally comes with God: love, light, relationship, goodness, purity, creation, and other inherent attributes of God, then separation from all that will be incredibly harsh. Sin requires justice, and that separation is part of it.
If Heaven just let someone like me in, as is, then it will be just like it is here, and I definitely don’t want an eternity of that. And while hearing sin goes against the nature of God, probably doesn’t sound like a big deal to most of us, the Bible notes we have lost an understanding of how serious sin is, and what is required to deal with it.
But, consider this, if the cross Christ endured was what was needed to deal with our sin, then it shows how serious even the “little sins” are to a holy God.
And honestly, if all our actions and thoughts, all our selfishness, condescension, lust, pride, etc., were shown on a movie screen for all to see, we’d go running out covering our eyes and ears. As the comedian Steven Wright observed, “A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory.”
People’s memes against Christianity can be quite funny and/or provocative, such as the one shown here. But whoever produced this meme, displayed their lack of understanding about what they are criticizing.
People don’t go to Hell because we don’t believe in or worship God, people go to Hell due to their sin and the natural consequence of being separated from what is Holy. And then, deciding to go our own way, instead of trusting the way God knows and provides to safety. Lacking the forgiveness Jesus Christ offers, our guilt stays in our account.
We all choose not to trust God when we violate his will for us and sin, but we are pardoned when we choose to trust and follow God through what was personally communicated and then accomplished in Jesus. Not trusting God in that, and instead coming up with our own way to be “good enough,” is what leaves us in the separated position. Dr. Greg Koukl provided a helpful example:
Without Christ’s forgiveness, we are guilty. It’s like being sick with a curable disease and refusing to see a doctor. When we die, we cannot blame the doctor for our death. We also don’t say that the doctor killed us. It was instead the disease that killed us, and it is our own fault for not accepting the doctors help and curing us. In the same way, we are guilty and have to go to God to be forgiven. Those that reject God’s help cannot blame him. It is a free gift that is offered to every person, yet many reject it. When we reject God’s love, then we will face his justice.
One does not go to Hell because of not believing (trusting the physician), one goes to Hell from crimes (the cancer) against the holiness of God, and the natural consequences that follow.
I’m a “good” person, good people will not be sent to Hell.
Greg Koukl, The Story of Reality, 162
Brief Answer: It’s not really about you – it’s about what has been done for you – the Cross does what we could not do.
Detailed Answer: Such a belief system, which I’ll call “good-personism,” sounds great, but what evidence do you have to believe it’s true?
As far as I am aware, every belief system, aside from Christianity, claims a person must earn a good after-life, and I hear you, such a belief sounds nice to me too, but why do you believe that? Why that standard? What evidence do you have that that God of good-personism exists, and will use such a standard to determine your eternity?
The biblical God, who does come with the comprehensive evidence supporting his claims, entirely contradicts the idea of us being able to earn our way to heaven by our good works. Do you think you will stand before God and say, “Thanks, but no thanks for what you did Jesus, I have it covered”? As Morgan Freeman’s character succinctly let his doubts be known in The Dark Knight, when someone was so sure of the rightness of their own plan, he responded, “Good Luck.”
You are making assumptions not only on what “good” is, but also that God grades on a curve.
Dr. Turek lets me use the image above to illustrate how people often view being “good” and “bad”, and where the line is between those who will be brought into Heaven or not.
Most people place someone like Hitler at the far right (bad end), someone like Mother Theresa at the far left (good end), a co-worker they don’t like to the left of Hitler, themself to the right of Mother Theresa, and the cut-off between Heaven and Hell somewhere in the middle between themselves and the nasty co-worker. Assuming Heaven operates like some horizontal scale, just taking the “good” people to the left of some vague line.
People often confuse “good” with being a nice person, but why do you assume being nice is what makes a soul fit for heaven? If the Bible is providing knowledge from God regarding how reality actually works, then this source does not define being “good” as being “nice,” but being wholly without sin, morally pure. There is no horizontal comparison, there is just an absolute pass/fail standard, and you need an A+ on that test. God doesn’t grade on a curve – there is an absolute standard.
The standard is being “righteous”, without sin, which none of us meet. God will be separated from all unrighteousness by his nature. Further, if Heaven allowed someone like me in, then it wouldn’t be what it was meant to be, but would be like it is here, stained by immoral behavior. Even I wouldn’t want that as I had enough of it here.
So, while the “good-personism” belief sounds nice, and every other belief system not founded on the Bible follows the idea we earn salvation by the “good” we do out-weighing and excusing our bad, why would I bet my never-ending existence on something with no evidence verses the biblical God, the authority and reality of which is established with evidence in every area of study?
And that God has an absolute standard of goodness, yet removes all unrighteousness from our account and credits Jesus’ pure account to ours, if we choose to accept this pardon.
Therefore, it is not really about you – it’s about what has been done for you – the Cross does what we could not do.
Why would a loving God create Hell?
A loving God would not send anyone to such a place.
Brief Answer: Why would you believe that?
The only God we have evidence for is the God of the Bible, who clearly demonstrated love, and who clearly warns about the reality of Hell.
Detailed Answer: Far from being incompatible with God, the goodness of God requires Hell.
The goodness of God includes BOTH justice and love, and if God is perfectly “Just,” then wrongdoing cannot be ignored or given a pass, and all evil and unholiness must be permanently removed at some point. Yet, if God is perfectly loving then how will his care for us also be shown? Look at how other belief systems try to answer this, and you will find either a failure of justice, or a failure of love.
Sin” is anything against the moral law, or holy nature, of God. If you are unsure what religious terms like “sin,” “righteous,” “holy” or “salvation” mean, they are covered under the question: 5.1.4 Why would God create Hell?
Romans 3:23 NIV – for all have sinned and fall short of – Bible Gateway; also see “5.1.5 Why would Jesus have to die for me?”
This concept is not unfamiliar to us. Every kingdom has laws and standards with authority to exercise over its subjects. If not counting the years up to age 10, and after 50, if we average 10 bad thoughts or actions a day against the nature of God, that would be 182,500 acts against God; no judge would let that go. Or, consider the horrific abusers throughout history, who had the power or coincidence to avoid any justice.
There is something in all of us shouting for justice, which is globally demonstrated in audience reactions to almost every movie or story. There are people who choose to hurt others in the worst ways, and who will have entirely escaped justice, if there is no Authority beyond man. Would you want such a reality?
An authority is only “just” if wrongs are punished (and we all want justice and evil punished). Yet, this Authority, over any other authority, also shows love in that while the bad news is we all are guilty of failing to meet the standard of holiness, the good news (or Gospel) is the love was demonstrated as God took the penalty to offer us full pardon.
It is just as difficult to ask, “How could an all-just-God send people to Heaven?” Yet, people never ask or worry about that question. Love and compassion demand reconciliation and forgiveness, but justice requires punishment for rightly deserved wrongdoing. Only Christianity provides a personal and checkable answer. The love and justice of God come together at the cross as God’s wrath was poured out on sin, but his love absorbed all the wrath on himself. Love and justice cross at the cross.
Therefore, Hell shows we are dealing with a just God. The claim of God being cruel or unfair if Hell were true, has to bow down at the cross and is confronted with the question: Why would an uncaring, or unfair Authority go through such sacrifice and pain in Jesus, more than you will likely ever go through, to achieve for us what we failed to do, and give us full access to Heaven by just trusting him?
The Bible repeatedly makes clear our situation, noted here by philosopher Dr. William Lane Craig:
Here God literally pleads with people to turn back from their self-destructive course of action and be saved. Thus, in a sense, the biblical God does not send any person to Hell. His desire is that everyone be saved, and He seeks to draw all persons to Himself. If we make a free and well-informed decision to reject Christ’s sacrifice for our sin, then God has no choice but to give us what we deserve. God will not send us to Hell—but we shall send ourselves. Our eternal destiny thus lies in our own hands. It is a matter of our free choice where we shall spend eternity. The lost, therefore, are self-condemned; they separate themselves from God despite God’s will and every effort to save them, and God grieves over their loss.
Perfect love was required to take on personally the wrath of justice on our behalf. And because love requires free will, for those choosing to trust Jesus’ saving work on the Cross enough to bring God into their life, the unholiness on our account is forever replaced by the holiness accredited to our account by Jesus.
https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/christianity-other-faiths/how-can-christ-be-the-only-way-to-god/
For those who choose to trust in themselves, or some other way to get the best out of life and what may come after, then their account only contains what they put in it, and the One who knows reality better than we do stated it will never be enough for what reality demands.
If you think there is some other way, what is it? And how do you know, what comprehensive case of supportive evidence do you have?
While it would be nice to think there are other ways, especially ways I may be more comfortable with, reality doesn’t care what I think. This is where the comprehensive case of evidence, which set the biblical answers on a wholly separate level from all other belief systems, is important.
And it will always be your choice. It’s not just a matter of mentally agreeing, saying, “Okay, I see the evidence, so I know Jesus died for me.” God doesn’t care if you believe the fact of Jesus, he wants us to trust in Jesus and bring him into your life. This is a relationship of trust. How do you know you have this relationship? Read the Bible, it will make it clear.
There is a warning sign you are on the wrong track though, if you claim to accept Jesus, but your life is no different than when you didn’t, then good likelihood you are not in a relationship with him as that relationship will cause changes.
The parent waiting for you, and you don’t come … except for money
Picture a loving parent (some of you sadly have not experienced such a loving relationship, but imagine it for now, and you have the opportunity for an even better loving relationship in God), who always waits in their favorite chair in the living room, waiting for you to get up in the morning so they can spend time with you. Yet, you always just walk on by, and go out and do your thing. This parent supplies your needs, sacrifices to protect and support you, yet every day you walk past them in the morning, and when you return to your room at the end of the day.
The only time this parent ever hears, or is acknowledged by you, is when a serious need arises, “Hey, can I have the car keys? Thanks.” And that’s it. Never any care, concern, thought, aid, or even time given to anyone else in the family during their self-centered living. Thankfully, the loving parent had love and trust from other children in the house.
When the parent passes away, should the child expect to receive any inheritance? If that was my kid, I would say to the kid, “I love you. But, you were a Symington in name only, and clearly wanted nothing to do with us, so have it your way.”
There are a lot of people who are “Christians” in name only. I probably know more Christians than most, so I have a large dataset to work with. There are a percentage of people, who may believe Jesus was who he claimed to be, may go to church, pray, and talk a good religious game, but in every other way are indistinguishable from people who have nothing to do with Jesus.
Because in reality, they are playing the religious game for their own reasons and on their own terms, without an actual trusting relationship with Jesus. The Bible speaks of these people (Matthew 7:21-23), and while they may believe Jesus is what he claimed and may even use Jesus’ name for benefit in life, when they are face to face with their Father in Heaven, it will be like the example of the parent given earlier, and God will say, “I never knew you, depart from me.”
Why didn’t God make a perfect world, where there is no sin?
In order to really think about this, we have to go to an interesting place. We have to go back before the beginning of the universe. How would God set up this universe?
It’s not like we have no idea where to start considering this, if the Bible is a reliable source, it provides some important knowledge as a starting point.
First, if God just wanted goldfish, then keeping us fed and our environment comfortable should be expected, but if wanting something more profound than a relationship to goldfish, something more profound is required. If setting out to allow the most beautiful and impactful experience of love for us, we would have to be given free will to choose to love or not.
Some assume referring to God as “almighty” means God can do anything. This is not what the Bible claims. God being almighty does not mean God can do all things, it simply means this Being is maximal in power. God cannot create a world with the superior property of free will without the possibility of people choosing to go against God’s nature and sin. It is simply not possible to make all people freely choose to always do good and to love, as we would be robots and the capability of love is lost.
If God grants people the dignity of genuine freedom in their choices, then God cannot guarantee the choices made in that world will not include sin and evil.
Second, while God is something beyond our experience or complete understanding, we do know some characteristics of God’s nature, noted recurrently through the Bible, including: loving (1 John 4:8), gracious (Exodus 33:19, 1 Peter 2:1-3), merciful (Exodus 34:6, James 5:11), and at the same time holy (Psalms 77:130), just (Psalms 5:5-6, Nehemiah 9:33, 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7, Matthew 25:45-46), and unchanging (Malachi 3:6, James 1:17), and maximal (highest level possible) in these attributes noted.
Third, the biblical God knew we would sin with our free will, and the resulting evil will be part of the universe and, at some point, will need to be removed.
Therefore, here is the situation: (1) free will, love and personal growth are goals, (2) with free will, God was aware sin and evil will result, and (3) there is something inherent, or part of God’s nature, that must bring justice and eventual and permanent removal of sin, and concurrently be perfectly loving and merciful. So how do you think this could all be achieved?
Some have argued: “God encourages us to show unconditional love, so God should just forgive all sins and bring everyone to Heaven (except maybe the really horrible people).” But this is not a possibility. If God is to be maximally just and holy, then sins cannot be simply winked at and ignored. Justice must be administered, and evil must be dealt with.
Yet, somehow, God must concurrently show perfect mercy and love! From my own experience, I would have had no idea how to solve this seemingly contrary mixing of perfect justice with perfect love. I like revenge movies too much, so no one would want to see how I would handle justice, and I’m a “nice” guy.
Based upon the 3 things noted above, one can see why God may have created our universe and Heaven and Hell.
You would have to have a limited space and time where free will can operate. This would allow evil and injustice, which is necessary for those created to have the opportunity to wrap their souls around the understanding of good (holiness) and evil (unholiness), and choose to either love and trust God’s way, or go another way.
So, the creation of the universe and earth was required, as a stage limited in three-dimensions of space and one-dimension of time, where all this can play out. Both sin and evil, and this universe have a limited use and limited timeframe.
Once the specific purposes mentioned above have reached their conclusion, the universe can cease to be, being replaced by Heaven and Hell. Leading to God acting justly towards sin and evil, by separating those who trusted and accepted the grace God provided to remove sin from their account, which allows us to have the relationship with God we chose, and those who also marked themselves with sin, yet decided to deal with it in their own way, and thereby, remain in debt for the crimes against holiness and face the natural consequence of being separated from the God they rejected.
As Greg Koukl noted in The Story of Reality, “Hell is not an example of God’s love. It is an example of his justice. His love is demonstrated by his free offer of pardon from hell, which many decline. But they will not be able to decline his justice.”
If God doesn’t want anyone to be in Hell, God should make everyone accept him?
Brief Answer:
No, then our free will, and the possibility of love is removed.
Detailed Answer:
To allow for the possibility of love, free will must exist, and if free will exists, then it is not logically possible to ensure all people choose to accept God. This world may be the one, out of all the possibilities, with the maximal amount of people who choose to accept God, and the minimal number who do not.
Greg Koukl, The Story of Reality,
Should God just focus on making a world where the least amount go to Hell? Who knows what such a world would be like, and how many will then be saved? And why should others be denied the gift of existence and eternity with God, just because of the ones who choose to go their own way away from God?
C.S. Lewis adds, “There are two kinds of people in the end: those who say to GOD, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom GOD says, in the end, ‘Thy will be done.'”
Another way to expose the problem with the claim, “God should make everyone accept him,” is to provide an example to make the answer hit home, and I like one from a lecture by Dr. Frank Turek, who posed a question to the female attendees, which went something like this:
Ladies, is there anyone in here, who has had a man pursuing you, and you did not want that guy to pursue you? A lot of you are like “Yeah, in fact he is sitting next to me, right now, he won’t leave me alone!”
Suppose he continues and continues to pursue, and you say to him “I like you, but only as a friend.” Ooooh, that is the knife going in, many of us have been there.
Okay, ladies, what if he continues and gets to the point where he says, “I love you so much I am going to force you to love me.” Aside from the creepiness of that, can he do that?
No, he can’t do that, love by definition has to be freely chosen. If he truly loved you, what would he do? He would allow you to make your choice.
The people who want God to bring everyone to Heaven will likely contradict this with another of their wants.
The belief everyone will eventually be brought to Heaven by a loving God (regardless of what they believe or what they do in life) is a belief called “Universalism”. It sounds nice, but think further. If you expect God will bring all to Heaven, no matter what, what about those who don’t want to be with God?
Universalists love the idea of free will to reject God, or the single path God has provided, conversely, do they accept loss of free will as God forces them to one exclusive destination, united with Him forever?
Instead, God gives us the dignity of true free will, and honors the free choice of each of us to either be united with him or not.
C.S. Lewis, The Great Divorce (1946, Harper Collins edition 2001) 75
I’d rather there was no Hell, we should just not exist anymore after we die.
There are many problems with this. First, what you want, doesn’t matter, it only matters what the reality actually is.
Second, maybe you’d like that, but others do not, including myself. I excitedly look forward to something beyond this life, where evil is permanently removed, and the creator of the universe is able to provide relationship and an environment beyond the good we can imagine here.
Third, I don’t want evil to get a pass. I’m angry over some horrific things I have personally observed, or have heard about. The Bible also has recorded that there are angels who went against God’s plan and expressed hatred through terrible work against humans. I want justice done. This is globally felt as evidenced by the standard emotions displayed when a story, movie, or other situation shows justice being delivered.
If there is no Hell, then the greatest injustices you can think of may never meet justice. Consider this horrific story a colleague presented at a talk. A man approached this speaker after a presentation, and recounted how a supposed friend of his had molested his daughter from the age of four to fourteen. The distraught man was doing his best to help his daughter heal, but was asking what to say to his sons, who in anger, had turned the blame on, and turned away from, God.
The man can correctly ask his sons if the situation changes any of the evidence about God’s existence or goodness, which is doesn’t. But, the more grabbing point my friend told the father was to make sure the sons understand: if God truly did not exist, then what that man did to your sister is not really wrong, just your opinions of his actions against the man’s opinions!
This is true, because if there is no standard beyond humanity of true goodness, then there is no standard to judge between different opinions, and there is no objective, real, or true right and wrong (this is covered in more detail in questions and blogs about “Morality”).
Currently, the abuser is free from prison. Why? Every time court is set up, the girl becomes emotionally unable to go. If there is no God, and no afterlife, then the man who did this to your sister will never get justice. Do you really think this is how the universe works? The very reason you are so upset is you inherently realize great injustice has been done, great evil, yet injustice can only exist, and reach ultimate justice, if the Authority you are trying to deny also exists.
Hell is too harsh, “sin” is not serious enough for that?
God is just angry and wrathful.
Brief Answer: How do you know that?
How do you validate your view of how reality works?
Detailed Answer: God is not angry, he is not even in a bad mood.
My cousin made the statement above at a funeral for his dad, when referencing the fact: all the wrath God has against injustice (we have a glimpse of this as we experience “righteous anger” over some act seeming horrific to us) was taken on himself, for us, on the cross, so all that is left is his love toward us.
God loves all and doesn’t want anyone to be separated from him in Hell. Those who choose to disregard the gift of redemption God offers, God loves still, but will separate that person from Heaven.
Is it possible you may not understand enough, or under-estimate the significance of “sin”? I understand how one’s first thought about Hell is: “It’s too harsh for simple moral failings, the little sins I do.” However, when wading through deep issues, first thoughts are not where your thinking should end.
Thinking more . . . “sins” may not seem serious enough to warrant the consequences, but who am I? Am I certain I know enough, and in a position to judge?
“Sin” is one of those religious words, which some may be unfamiliar with, so let’s get a working definition. Sin is just going against God’s law (or nature). The way God is (his nature, or way of being) sets the standard of morality. You may not like religious descriptions, may not understand why acting against God’s nature is a problem, or may think God is wrong to judge us.
Holiness is a state of being sacred or “set apart” from other things, on a whole other level of goodness, purity, or even perfection. Therefore, sin is a crime against the holiness or nature of God, who created us for something better. Even with all my study and churchin’, do I totally understand the concept of holiness? No. On my own I am far from holy, I have seen selfishness, cruelty, lust, pride, etc., in my thoughts and/or actions.
However, humility becomes significant here as maybe we don’t have the full grasp of, or understand all the parameters. Under-appreciating the seriousness of sin is under-appreciating God’s nature, like holiness and his naturally being separated from what is not. Pure moral goodness and holiness are part of God’s nature, and if God simply let people like me, sinners, into Heaven, then Heaven would be corrupted, just like here. I wouldn’t want that. Instead, God keeps Heaven holy, and what is not will be separated from God, and that separation is Hell.
There may also be a lack of appreciation of the magnitude of God’s authority or character. Cold case detective, J. Warner Wallace, illustrates this:
If your sister catches you lying about your income last year, you might lose her respect. If the IRS catches you lying about your income last year, the resulting punishment will be far more painful. What’s the difference here? It certainly isn’t the crime. Instead, we recognize the more authoritative the source of the code, rule or law, the greater the punishment for those who are in violation. If God is the Highest Authority, we should expect that violations of His “laws” would result in significant punishment(s).
2 Peter 3:9: The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish (“perish” here means spiritual death and separation from God eternally), but everyone to come to repentance.
Why should Hell be for endless time, for mistakes made over the course of 80 years?
While eternal separation from all the good God provides seems a torment too much for the mistakes during our short period in life, who says the time involved has to be equivalent?
It may only take ten minutes to disregard others and the law and drive drunk, which has led to a lifetime of consequences, even death. A two second act of murder can carry a lifelong sentence or death.
Detective Jim Warner Wallace observes:
If someone embezzles $5.00 a week from their employer’s cash register they will have stolen $260.00 over the course of a year. If they’re caught at the end of this time, they would still only be guilty of a misdemeanor in the State of California (based on the total amount of loss). Although the crime took a year to commit, the perpetrator wouldn’t spend much (if any) time in jail. On the other hand, a murder can take place in the blink of an eye and the resulting punishment will be life in prison (or perhaps the death penalty). The duration of the crime clearly has little or nothing to do with the duration of the penalty.
And, what about the flip-side? Why would God give us infinite reward for our limited devotion? Funny how no one questions the truth of that, and if that is true, then by the same reasoning, why would you have a problem accepting the opposite also being true? Why should reward and punishment be treated differently?
Further, as noted by philosophers J.P. Moreland and William Lane Craig:
Why think that every sin [we do should] have only a finite punishment? We could agree that sins like theft, lying, adultery, and so forth, are only of finite consequence and so only deserve a finite punishment. But, in a sense, these sins are not what separates someone from God. For Christ has died for those sins; the penalty for those sins has been paid. One has only to accept Christ as Savior to be completely free and clean of those sins. But the refusal to accept Christ and his sacrifice seems to be a sin of a different order altogether. For this sin repudiates God’s provision for sin and so decisively separates one from God and His salvation. To reject Christ is to reject God Himself. And in light of who God is, this is a sin of infinite gravity and proportion and therefore plausibly deserves infinite punishment.
Wallace, J.W.: http://coldcasechristianity.com/2017/why-would-god-punish-finite-temporal-crimes-in-an-eternal-hell/
I can understand a person not thinking it is fair, but who are you? If there is evidence there is a God, with a much better position to know and the authority to back it up, wisdom would be having the humility to accept you may not know enough to judge accurately against this God.
If you are firm in your conviction God is wrong, or there must not be a Hell, you have the free will to choose whatever you want. If you don’t have better reasons than those supporting God, why do you think it will work out well for you? If you’re convinced of your reasons, or just don’t care, then reality will at some point bring you and I into very different consequences as we both founded our life decisions, and possible eternity, very differently. I am confident and very comfortable with my choice, and I do this work in the hope you will reach the same confidence and peace.
Hell is just a myth, it won’t matter if I just ignore this silly idea.
Brief Answer: What evidence supports your claim?
The same Bible and Jesus, both of which have reliability supported by comprehensive evidence on a level no other source throughout history has approached, clearly indicate Hell exists.
If you think otherwise, what supports the reliability of your claim at a greater level?
Detailed Answer: A person can try to rationalize away why sin or hell isn’t serious – but rationalizations do not change or make reality.
Reality is shown by the evidence, whether we like it, or understand it, or not.
I had a very in-depth discussion about heaven and hell with a visiting doctor at our center, who was one of the most intelligent people I have ever met. He also knew his intellect and knowledge were far above mine, which was part of the reason he seemed dejected when realizing his arguments against God simply couldn’t support the weight of the evidence Christianity provides. After his support fell away, he resorted to, “Well if I do face a God, who will reject me just because I didn’t believe in him, then I would just say, fine, I would rather be apart from a horrible monster like you anyway.”
I ignored the misunderstanding he just displayed about God, and went right to what started our conversation. He had claimed all his decisions were made with logic and rational thinking. Yet, he just exposed how much emotion can dominate his thinking, when considering God.
We just discussed the evidence, and when good reasoning didn’t go the way he expected, he claims he will just tell God off! Think rationally, if you were standing before an almighty God, all logic and rational thought says you will be on your face in abject terror, not talking trash.
Moreland, J.P., William Lane Craig, Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview, Intervarsity Press, 2003, p. 620
The lesson is: we all can let personal wants, emotions, expectations and rationalizations make decisions for us, but these just make us more blind and vulnerable to the inevitable reality and consequences that will follow.
How can people enjoy Heaven knowing their loved ones are in Hell?
I don’t know how.
I do know the same Bible, whose authority and understanding of reality dwarfs anything man has produced, says every tear will be wiped away as we enter.
Therefore, I know Heaven will have pure joy on levels unimagined on earth, and while I do not understand how we would not be tormented by loved ones not in relationship with us in Heaven, I know we won’t be tormented because I trust the reliability of the Bible better than I trust myself, or any other teacher, preacher, “expert”, etc.
Why would the earth and humanity be cursed by the sins of the first couple?
Christians, if they have actually searched their belief and Bible, know Genesis chapter three shows sin entering the world through choices made by humanity’s first couple. When sin entered, it became part of this world and part of humanity, placing us in a “fallen” state (fallen from God’s purpose and now subject to things that should not have been). As far as why are we held responsible for what Adam and Eve started, I have a great answer for that – I don’t know.
I don’t really understand why one person’s fall tainted the Earth and led to something impacting me, but I do know the following:
(a) I have more than enough to answer to by my own choices. If all my thoughts and actions were put up on a movie screen for others to see, I would burn that theater down.
(b) That same God that seems to allow original sin to impact me, also demonstrated the highest level of love by suffering for me and others, even while we were in a fallen state, and personally paid the price for that original sin. So, while it came in by the poor choice of one person, it is paid for and removed by the love of one (Jesus), and that one wasn’t me either.
(c) Also, this was not all done in a vacuum, I have had time and experiences to show me I can trust this authority. When my dad asked me to jump into the scary deep end of the pool, before I could swim, I trusted him because I had a background of reasons: he was a lifeguard, he cared for me, and he has been right before when I doubted him. And as awful as I am with authority (been fully punched in the head by two teachers and a principal, had serious situations with bosses, a judge, etc.), God is an authority I will not win against, and am thankful this authority shows more love and wisdom than I have seen anywhere else.
I’ve already experienced hell, so bring it on!
Brief answer: If you are on Earth while making this claim, then no, you are not in Hell yet.
This is a claim based in ignorance or arrogance. All the time we hear people invoke “Hell” to describe a terrible situation: “war is hell,” “I’m in hell,” “Hell is for children” (an ahead of its time song by Pat Benetar), even I joke in comparing Detroit to Hell.
Be clear on this – not taking a single bit away from the horror of what may be involved in any of those situations – but, calling them “hell” can only be done in complete ignorance.
Without knowing or personally experiencing actual Hell, you are ignorant of the terror it involves. You don’t want any piece of it. However, if not accepting the provision Jesus provided for you, you won’t just get a piece, Hell will get all of you. If you think this is a scare tactic, see the answers above.