Thanks for this article. It is wonderful to see that some people still are speaking the whole truth.

The closer I have grown to God the more I love His holiness and justice, whereas I used to be scared of His judgement and couldn’t understand how it fit in with a loving God. Something Ray Comfort said in his “Hell’s best-kept secret” teaching (which I recommend) is that because God IS good He has to punish the wicked. Like a judge at court would pronounce punishment on someone who has broken the law. He would have to do this in order to be just. And we know that God cannot deny His nature, which is just and good.

Thanks again,
Belinda Horne

I have no problem with much of what you have to say. Yes we must be humble and prayerful as we interpret Scripture. Yes, none of us have the whole truth. Yes, Scripture can be subject to differing interpretations at times and at places. And yes, we are to use reason and moral sense in our study of Scripture and our relationship with God.

Reason and moral sense do play a role, but so too does the Holy Spirit in guiding us into truth, as the NT speaks about so often. No one will be infallible in their understanding of Scripture, but we must trust that God is able to guide the humble reader by his Spirit.

And as I said before, both reason and the moral sense are fallen because of sin, and so cannot be totally relied upon in and of themselves. Both are quite limited due to our finitude and fallenness, so they must be used carefully and tentatively, and must be squared with Scripture. (Although written more with non-believers in mind, my latest article on this website deals with these issues a bit: www.billmuehlenberg.com/2008/07/20/the-man-delusion-with-apologies-to-the-matrix/ )

We must, in other words, avoid two unbiblical extremes: one, that we can know nothing with certainly about God and his word, and are just left with relativity, uncertainty and doubt; or two, that we can have perfect understanding of all things biblical. Because God has revealed himself in his word, and given us his Spirit to help guide us in understanding it, we can know true truths about God, although not exhaustive truth, to use Schaeffer’s expression.

But recall that this thread began when you appeared to question the biblical doctrine of Hell. According to your “reason and moral sense” you find it unpalatable. Thus in effect you are telling God that he is either wrong or morally inferior to you on this issue. In other words, you seem to be judging God and his word, instead of letting God and his word judge you.

While we all may have questions about the doctrine of eternal punishment, no one reading the Bible in a plain and straightforward fashion can deny that this is the clear teaching of Scripture. And Jesus more than anyone else continually spoke about this truth. So if we are unhappy with what Jesus and the Bible say about this topic, then we seem to be elevating ourselves above God both in terms of wisdom and knowledge, as well as moral ability and discernment. That is a somewhat precarious position to be in I would think.

That is why I mentioned that sometimes we think we can be more compassionate, more loving, or more wise than God on some of these issues. That is not a good place to be in.

Finally, as to authority, you seem to misunderstand my position. When I argue for the importance of authority, I of course refer overwhelmingly to the authority of Scripture, not the authority of any one church or denomination, or Christian leader. Luther and the Reformers were above all seeking to be true to the authority of Scripture. They did not want to break with Rome, but when the teachings of the Catholic Church appeared to conflict with Scripture, then the Reformers insisted upon going with Scripture.

Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

The word ‘interpretation’ in the quote is important too. There are many ways to interpret scripture. ‘The devil can quote Scripture for his own ends’, as the saying goes. How are we to know which interpretations of Scripture to accept and which to reject? How are we to avoid being deceived? Application of reason and moral sense must be part of the answer. They need to be combined with prayer and humility. We need to be, at the same time, prepared to let go of personal opinions and to take an unflinching stand for Principle. This can be difficult and we don’t always get it right.

I know that the concept of ‘authority’ is important to you. I have read your article on it. But think where would we be today if Martin Luther and other protestant reformers had chosen submission to authority over reason and moral sense? The very word ‘Protestant’ denotes a protest against authority.

Mark Harvey

Let me quote from God’s word: “Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” (1 Cor. 1:20) If it comes down to choosing between the authority of God, or the authority of Gandhi, I know which I will line up with.

The problem with Gandhi’s position is that he does not take seriously the biblical truth that both human reason and our moral sense are fallen due to sin. Both our mind and heart are contaminated by sin, thus we do see things as God wants us to see them. Part of that fallen reasoning and morality is to say that I am OK, I am not a sinner, there is no hell, and Jesus died in vain.

And it is not just that we are fallen, finite and lacking in true perspective. There is also spiritual deception going on as well. “The god of this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God (2 Cor. 4:4).

We either let God be God, and take his word about these matters, or we pretend that we are God, and tell the creator of the universe what is true and false, right and wrong. That is really the choice we all must make.

Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

Let me quote from Gandhi: “I decline to be bound by any interpretation [of Scripture], however learned it may be, if it is repugnant to reason or moral sense.” (Collected Works, 21, p 246).

How could God expect us to do otherwise?

Mark Harvey

The short answer to your concerns is this: we either believe what Jesus and the Bible have to say about these matters, or we don’t. A Biblical Christian does not tell God what is right and wrong. I do not know where you are coming from as to your religious position, but Jesus and Scripture are absolutely clear that there is a hell, that people will be going there, and that it will involve suffering and torment of some kind.

A Biblical Christian is one who follows and obeys Jesus. Jesus spoke more about the reality of hell than anyone else in the Bible. And Jesus is the most loving, kind, merciful, gracious and forgiving person around. So we cannot be more loving or more gracious than Jesus. Yet he affirmed the reality of hell. So for us to pretend to be more loving than Jesus, in our rejection of hell, just does not cut it.

Those who have a problem with hell tend to have a very weak view of sin. Those who have a weak view of sin tend to have a very weak view of the holiness, righteousness and majesty of God. We trivialise hell because we trivialise sin because we trivialise the nature and character of God.

As to the biblical doctrine of the presence of God, or his omnipresence, we must allow Scripture to speak here in all its fullness and richness. There are different senses of God’s presence described in the Bible. He is present with his believing followers in a way that he is not with unbelievers. See passages such as: Psalm 34:18 and Is. 57:15. He is close to his own but afar from those who are not.

Those who do not love God are said to be outside of God’s presence, and hell is described as being outside of the presence of God. See for example: Gen 4:16; Lev 22:3 ; Psalm 5:5 ; Psalm 101:7; Prov 15:29; Jer 23:39 ; 2 Thess 1:9, etc.

Thus distinctions must be made in terms of God’s moral presence, his ontological presence, and so on.

Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

I was wondering: What do you think of the idea of hell as portrayed in Dante’s Inferno? A place where demons inflict excruciating tortures on the damned. Where the different intensities and methods of torture are divised to reflect the particular sins of the victims.

I accept that rejection of love, good, purity, kindness, unselfisness etc must ultimately lead to suffering. But I have long had problems with the concept of God as creating and upholding a system that in any way involves torture. How could any Christian be happy in heaven knowing that other people, in many cases their loved ones, were in the most terrible torment? Wouldn’t we have Christians choosing to go to hell so they could give comfort to the suffering ones?

Another question: If one rejects God eternally, then one must suffer the consequences eternally – hell. But if, after suffering for a period of time, one repents, the experience of hell must end, – perhaps gradually. There must be a way out of hell.

If God is omnipresent, separation from God is impossible. Psalm 139:8 states:’If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.’ This idea is echoed in Romans 8:35 to 39 ‘…nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.’

If real separation from God is impossible, the only separation must be illusory. As we yield to the truth of the ever-present reality of God, love, good, and strive to live accordingly, the experience of hell must fall away. This is my understanding of grace.

I believe that everyone must ultimately come to God, and suffering is often the way in which we are forced to do so. The longer we resist, the longer we suffer. If we don’t repent and turn to God in this life, we will have to do it in next life or the one after that. It is the concept of sin that is eternally damned to hell, not persons.

Mark Harvey

You’re right, it has no physical properties. It defies materialism.

Michael Mifsud

I posted the clip here.

Regarding your other comment, all I am claiming here is that consciousness has no physical properties. Where does that contradict a Christian framework?

Duane Proud