If Hell isnt eternal, how can Heaven be?

Once again, I got into the subject of universal salvation, this time over on the Faith Freaks forum. One of the objections was a popular one that, up until recently, I didn't feel very good at answering; hence I didn't really write a blog strictly pertaining to it until now (whether I am any good at explaining it now, you can be the judge). The objection was,

"If Hell isn't eternal, how can Heaven be eternal?"

This line of thinking comes from verses like Matthew 25:46, which reads,

"And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

And at face value, this verse seems to denote that the coming punishment (Hell) is literally eternal in duration, as well as the coming life (Heaven). But I believe the truth of the matter lies within a Greek word I have talked about long ago on here, which is the word aionios. It is the word in Matthew 25:46 (as well in many verses) that is often translated as "eternal". However, it is not always translated so. In fact, some scholars would argue that it should never be translated as forever or eternal, except perhaps in the case of God. This is because aionios is an adjective, which derives its character from the subject to which it refers. In other words, its time duration is defined by the subject it's attached to.

To clarify further, aionios is kind of like our English word "tall". If I use "tall" in a sentence like,

"There was a tall man at the park, and he even had a tall dog! What a coincidence?" and I say that I think the man was around 6'7", you're probably not going to think that the dog was also 6'7"! That's because the word "tall" in itself has no set height, its only a general term for describing height. What its actual height may be is completely relative to the subject in question. So the dog could have been less than half of the mans height, but still be considered tall for a dog. Such is the same with aionios, except in regards to time. (note: as I'm sure you know, several other English words function this way as well. Such as "big", "great", "long" and "thin")

This dismantles the common objection that aionios must be rendered as eternal, even if used multiple times in the same sentence. There are several Biblical examples in which this is obvious, one such is Romans 16:25-26,

"Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long [aionios]

but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the [aionios] God"

The first aionios obviously does not mean eternal and it appears most Bible translations recognize that (because it makes no sense to say a mystery was kept secret for eternity, but then say it "has now been disclosed". That butchers the meaning of eternity, which is "without end"). However, the second use of aionios is rendered eternal because we understand God to be literally eternal or without end. Gods eternal property is not changed simply because the same word earlier in the sentence does not mean eternal. And I would argue that in the same way, the eternal property of "eternal life" in verses like Mat. 25:46, is not changed by the fact that "eternal punishment" is not literally without end.

Now you may object, and ask as to why I think aionios in the case of life literally means eternal, where as punishment I believe it is only temporary? And I suppose there are several reasons why I think this, many of which I talk about on my blogs here. However, without writing another blogs worth of information, I would simply like to point to how scripture defines the coming punishment. As you may recall, the original punishment decreed by God for sin was "death" (Gen. 2:17). In the new testament, Paul echos this by saying the wages of sin is "death" (Ro. 6:23). And the lake of fire in scripture is called the "second death"(Rev. 21:8). So "death", whatever that entails, is the punishment for sin, the aionion punishment talked about in places such as Matt 25:46. Yet this punishment of "death" (both first, second, third, whatever) cannot possibly be eternal, because we are told in 1 cortinthians 15:26 that "the last enemy to be destroyed is death"

So if a time comes when death is destroyed (both in the physical sense and the spiritual separation sense) what is logically left to partake in? Life! Not just a physical life, but also a spiritual life. This conclusion fits nicely within context because in the following verse it talks of God subjecting all things to Himself, and ends with verse 28 which states that God will be "all in all". And in order for God to be all in all that is subjected to him, the period of punishment and separation must come to an end at some point in the future.

I'm certainly no Greek scholar, as I've said before. and I'm sure there are much wiser people that will disagree. But hopefully this sheds some light of understanding for you, on texts that seem to speak of "eternal" punishment.

The purpose of evil and suffering

I feel like I cover the same ground over and over again, and this topic is pretty on course with what I always seem to blog about(though hopefully you've noticed I've tried to be a tad bit more versatile in subject lately). But I will attempt today, to present things in a slightly fresh manner:

One of the age old questions brought up by atheists and agnostics alike is actually of moral nature. They contend,

How can there be an all-loving God when there is so much evil in the world? How could God allow all the sickness, death and deception that plagues humanity?

They use this to say, that God can not exist because of the evil that is so strong and evident in this life. And while I, nor anyone, possess all the answers...I think the short answer to this is simply "because God has a purpose for it".

Though In my old views I believed God had a purpose for evil (as I do still), it really didnt make sense in the grand scheme of things. Because while most sufferings and atrocities in life are blamed on mankind's rebellion against God(which I would say is not entirely accurate), it all stems back to the fall of Adam that, as I said in the last blog, God allowed. God could have just as easily stopped Adam and eve from partaking of the tree that would damn mankind for all eternity, but he didnt. Better question yet, why even create the object of temptation(the tree) to begin with? Fast forward to the end of the world, and whats the result(according to my old orthodox view)? Most of humanity and creation burning away in suffering as a result of evil being unleashed upon the world! No wonder atheists and the like have a hard time believing a good, loving, all powerful God exists...they're taught that the evil of this life ultimately prevails more than God! What comfort and faith can one really have in a God that is over shadowed by the very evil He knowingly allowed(and I would say, pretty much created)?

So we come back to the question of why God allows evil and its sufferings? My only reasoning, again, is that God has a purpose. And since God is perfect, I will add that this purpose must end with an ultimately positive result for all, whom the evil was unleashed upon (such of which, an eternal punishment would most certainly not fit in...there is nothing positive about unending, unpurposed pain).

A passage that helps illustrate this positive use of suffering, is in Lamentations 3:31-32,

For men are not cast off by the Lord forever.
Though he brings grief, he will show compassion,
So great is his unfailing love.

If the "grief" described here is the sufferings of sin and death in this life, how then will God show compassion if most are doomed to torment for all time as a result of those very things? Not only does that make no sense, but it completely contradicts the prior sentence which says for men are not cast off by the Lord forever! No evil that will ever exist, is outside the power and purpose of God almighty...not even "Hell". 1 Samuel 2:6 is a great example,

The Lord kills and makes alive; He brings down to Sheol [translated as "Hell" often] and brings up

This verse could be interpreted like this(according to my theology): God may allow death, but he will make those people alive again. God may allow people to go to "Hell", but will bring them up from it as well. I think this fits quite nicely with my belief, that all humanity is eventually saved unto God. Because if the result of evil is ultimately and completely overcome by God for his glory and to mans benefit(as I believe), than Gods allowance of evil and the devil is of no moral compromise to me. Its like when a child does something wrong, like touching a hot stove for the first time, even after their father told them not to. The parent may have watched it happen, but only does so, because they know that it will only temporarily harm the child and that the child will learn what not to do because of it. Such I believe is a similar reason(though much more complex and varied), for why God allows evil and its griefs in this life. We can run from sunset to sunset searching for thrills that will only bring us down and cause us destruction, but God allows it knowing that we must (and will) come to understand our need for the perfect thrill, the perfect high that is found only within His presence. From the very moment he called us into existence, he knew all that we would do and all the destruction that would result from it...yet allowed it because the end result would be a loving and lasting relationship with all of His creations.

That is the God I serve and love

Finite sins against an infinite God

In Christianity, you will often hear something like this,

our finite sins deserve infinite punishment, because they are against an infinite God

Though I have already talked a lot about God's Justice in a previous blog, this particular belief continues to boggle my mind. As humans, we can neither physically see, touch, or prove God and/or His truths...yet He supposedly thinks we deserve unending punishments for temporary mess ups? Why would a perfect God be even less understanding than a human?

Were we not born into sin by no fault of our own? If it is anyones fault, it is Adams...but even he was tempted by the Devil that GOD (yes, God) created. So from the very start, our "free" will has been at the mercy of forces and situations completely beyond our control. And all of these things have been allowed by God for some purpose(s), so how would it be sensable for God to hold us, imperfect beings by nature, forever accountable for the situations he placed us in? It makes no sense at all.

And it is curious indeed, that no scripture (that Ive ever come across) teaches such a bleak truth. No where is sin against God described as needing infinite punishment, solely just because God is infinite. The Bible simply describes the penality for sin as "death" (Ro. 6:23). And whether it is a physical or spiritual death described here(I would say both), it doesnt seem to imply the merit of infinite punishment we supposedly deserve.

On a final note, it is often said that Jesus paid the price for our sins, that he took our punishment for us. This goes along with the prophecy in Isaiah 53:5, which says,

But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;

Yet we also say that we all deserve an infinite period of suffering because of our sin. Using the same logic however, we would have to assume that Christ suffered infinitely in order to pay the infinite debt we incurred. But, as any Christian can tell you, Jesus rose again just 3 days after death...he did not experience infinite suffering for one persons sins against God, let alone the whole world's sin!

So there is apparently a big hole in our theology

God's "justice" vs. Man's "justice"

For those of you tired of hearing me rant about topics from a Universalistic point of view, I will apologize in advance. Because I am about to embark on yet another, though, I feel like this is a crucial issue to talk about(as usual but still). And its also nice to have some in depth arguments typed out as I learn these things myself, and try to show others where Im coming from:

An argument I have heard frequently in opposition to the Christian Universalist, is like the one below that I pasted from an actual Christian forum post:

" it's not YOUR heaven, God is not subject to YOUR interpretations or YOUR rules or YOUR fallacious opinions...God is not obligated to let [anyone] into HIS kingdom. If that idea makes you 'boo-hoo,' with all respect, get over it."

While this poster presented the argument in an extremely brief, bogus and heartless way, I will admit that he and others have a point. Because I agree, God is not subject to merely what we think is right and "just" as humans. We are not entitled to anything on our own(why do you think Christ died to begin with?). What God has made He most certainly has the right to do with however He so chooses under whatever conditions he deems. For as I've said before, our finite minds can only grasp so much at that which is God and His ways.

But the argument is still...only half-baked, to say the least. And heres why...

This argument assumes that Gods idea of "justice" must be completely at odds with the typical ideals of human justice, in order for God to be...well...God.
But here's the thing though...if what WE think is Gods "fair and perfect justice" is that people will be tormented infinitely for not understanding the correct views of God by an un-given due date...than what does that say about our own ideals of "justice"? Can we truly call our ideals of right and wrong, fair and unfair, true "justice"...if that perception be true?

Suppose I'm principal of a new elementary school, and I try to establish the ground rules through some brief conversation to the kids in classroom A (lets assume there's 27 classrooms total). The kiddies in classroom A eventually proceed to construct a "rule book" based as closely as they can off what I told them a few weeks earlier and tries to be "good" lil students and follow it. Now the other 26 classrooms have no idea about what I told classroom A, and they are all running around, terrorizing the teachers, having food fights and erecting statues of Bart Simpson. Classroom A then goes out and tries to teach the other classrooms about my rules from their "rule book".
"HEY GUYS WE GOT THE RULEBOOK ON HOW THE PRINCIPAL WANTS US TO ACT!!!"

Lets say classrooms B, C, and D accepts the message of the "rule book" as truth because lets say I write them a note and say,
"Yes these are pretty much the school rules"
and thus classrooms A through D tries to follow it and tell other classrooms...but are unable to convince the others that the "rule book' is actually based on what I, the princapal of the school, said. And since the "rule book" following classrooms cannot prove as fact that the rulebook does in fact, contain my rules, the other classrooms refuse to follow. Then one day after a month of this I decide to come down from my office and forever expel from school all the little bad, food fighting terrorist kiddies because they didn't follow the rulebook that classroom A wrote about my rules.

Now, regardless of the fact no school is run like that (though here in America I wouldn't be too surprised), could we honestly say that, I, the Principal, executed "justice" and "fairness" at its finest by forever expelling kids for not following rules that were never proven to all to be mine? Would their parents no less expect that I have mercy and common sense, and make my decisions according to the situations and not merely just the actions? I think its safe to say that, though they need to be punished, a "everlasting" and "unchangeable" expulsion would not only be unfair to the children, but completely ludicrous.

Why then do we assume that God, the pinnacle of all that is "just" and "fair", will execute "justice" towards humanity, in an even more gruesome and unfair way than the principal did to the school children? It cant be only the "Christian Universalist" that sees the injustice presented by mainstream theology. And I feel the only reason that many people (including myself for many years) stomach this contradicting idea is because they've been taught that that is the ONLY conclusion one can draw from the Bible. Therefore the typical Christian allows this moral piracy to invade their beliefs because they feel to question this particular interpretation of the Bible, is to question the Bible and/or the motives of God himself...but I would argue that it is not. I would argue we owe it to God to test and refine our understanding of Him and His ways the best we can in this life. And I feel it is unfair to hardheadedly presume that God's perception of justice is somehow less merciful and fair than our own gut feelings, and then scapegoat it as just some weird "mystery of God!"that for some reason...cant be examined or investigated without God frowning down at us. God should not be below or matching our ideal judge, but be far greater.

So then what would we as humans generally conceive as (at least ideally) a"just" or "fair" judge? Consider the following:
-A just human judge would first of all, have to be unbiased and impartial.
The Bible says that God does not show partiality (Col. 3:25).

-A just human judge would not let crime "off the hook" without punishment, but would propose a fair punishment to fit the crime. The Bible tells us that God renders to EACH according to his deeds (Ro. 2:5-6), therefore a generic "infinite" punishment would make no sense because the measure by which God would punish us would be the same for everyone regardless, and not tailored to the "crimes" themselves.

-A just human judge would do what he could to seek the correction of the culprit, to show them right from wrong and what wrong gets you. Not just to "avenge" those that were wronged to begin with. The Bible tells us that people will learn "righteousness" from Gods judgments(Is. 26:9), but how would they learn or benefit from the learning of what is right, if all they're doing is being BBQ'd for all eternity in Hell? How does that add up to God's purposes for judgment?

-A just human judge would consider all the variables involved in what caused the criminal to act as they did(if they indeed did), including their mental health and age. Most Christians do not believe that the mentally handicapped or small children undergo infinite punishment in Hell, because the state of their mind keeps them from being capable of fully comprehending right from wrong and what Jesus did for them...but doesn't every person have something(s) that keep them from understanding those things with absolute clarity? Hasn't God allowed us all to be afflicted with sin, the very thing that pulls us from His truth? Did God merely allow man to fall into sin, with no intention to take such a "disease" and "mental insanity" into account on the day of judgment? The Bible tells us that God has more compassion and mercy than that, for what He allowed knowingly(La 3:31-33). I don't believe God will merely turn a "blind-eye" to that which caused us(the "sane")to make our flaws in belief and action, because we too posses a type of "insanity" of the soul, and a blindness of the heart and mind that only Jesus Christ can clean away from us at His appointed times.

Looking at these verses, can we AT LEAST agree that God could be no less a judge than any good human judge or authority? So back on point...would His justice then really be at such complete odds with our own, as mainstream Christianity subtly suggests? You may say
"Well Gods ways are not our own!"
And that is true, but looking at the above statements and verses, I think its safe to say His idea of justice is NOT so far removed from ours, as is taught in the mainstream. It appears instead to me that while the "justice" of God should not be directly proportional to man's, it is a perfect and unfailing projection of that which we idealize as true "justice". God is transcendent and greater,wiser and more loving and forgiving than us in every respect. But at the same time, He made us in His "likeness and image"(Gen. 1:26), so we can expect that the things He essentially instilled in us as "justice", "love" and "mercy" are spitting images of Gods own concepts of them...not completely different(and conflicting) ideas all together. He is the very source of these concepts...so we can only belittle them, not amplify them beyond God's own versions.

So lets go back to the school/principal analogy, and lets say I, the Principal, come to a different verdict. Lets say I don't FOREVER expel the bad kiddies for not understanding the unproven rules, but instead allow them their due punishments, while taking into account what they did not understand and why. And once their punishment runs its course and they understand with absolute clarity what they did wrong and why its bad, allow them to come back to school. Could we agree that this is overall pretty just? Could we agree that the whole reason that I implemented the rules to begin with was to show them what is the good and proper way to act? And wouldn't the punishments not be so much about "getting back at them" or "avenging the teachers that had to put up with them" as much as it was hoping for their overall betterment, in hopes that they one day become very successful and productive members of society? (Okay so maybe I'm romanticizing the principals intentions a wee bit too much, but I think you get the point).

The idea above is called "rehabilitative" justice. It is punishment that seeks the overall improvement of the individual, to aid in turning a "doer of evil" into a "doer of good". And based on what we can generally conceive as justice, and the above scenario...would we expect God to act any less "just" and "purpose-driven" with His own creations? Could His ultimate judgments be not so much the supposed "retained wrath of God now unleashed!" and more so Gods "cleaning up" method of the messes Satan has caused humans to make, and getting the rest of His kids back on track? Wouldn't that be what not only a good, just judge would do, but a loving father...as God is both of those things in their perfection? I propose Gods judgments are not at such great odds with ours, but is rather more analogous and to the very ideas own "perfection" beyond which we can even comprehend. And rather than subjecting us to eternal, un-purposed, punishment...will instead direct correction upon us until the point at which justice is satisfied and we ALL feel the need to turn our whole hearts to Him. For He is not angry forever...but instead wants to gladly give us all mercy(Mic. 7:18)! And I believe He will in due time.

I will let you draw your own conclusion here, but hopefully even if you disagree or find fault with my argument, you can at least better understand what it is your disagreeing with...which is really my ultimate intent with any of these "religious themed" blogs. You cant really understand what you don't agree with if you don't understand whats truly being argued in the first place.

Shalom