
After a recent essay about grace and Karma, I was asked a challenging question:
I was taught that hell is a place of eternal conscious torment, a nice euphemism for a torture chamber. Do you believe that those of us who fail to accept grace will be tortured? If not, why not? Augustine and Calvin seemed to believe it.
Sometimes people ask the damnedest things…
I been sitting on this one for some time, because, well, the subject of eternal damnation is not exactly the most delightful topic on which to expound. But, hey, anyone can tackle the easy ones, so what the hell…
The topic of hell has never been a popular subject — for reasons not terribly difficult to discern. Yet belief in hell is both ancient and widespread, comprising an important doctrine in some form or other of many of the world’s great religions, especially Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, each manifested by belief in a personal God. In our secular, postmodern age, however, it has become something of a quaint superstition, widely perceived to be a tool for manipulation of the ignorant and gullible by the religious patriarchy. It has long faded from the lexicon of contemporary culture and conversation, and is rarely mentioned even in religious contexts, much less in secular. The death of hell has been quiet, almost unnoticed, like the slow starvation of some hideous child left in the wilderness to die.
If hell does not exist, men would be wise to invent it. If it does exist, we are fools to deny it.
The premise of hell rests solidly on certain metaphysical pillars. It begins with the conviction that there is an immaterial, spiritual aspect to man which makes him unique among living creatures, not only in intellectual and behavioral aspects of our nature, but by touching and communicating with something outside the self which is transcendent, moral, eternal, and personal. The notion of eternal consequence points to an absolute, a fixed and immutable truth, a standard beyond ourselves, against which our thoughts and actions are judged, forming the very foundation of the moral ramifications of our life and behavior. The premise of hell rests also on the conviction of a divine Being, whose knowledge and power are infinite, who gives rise to the absolute standards against which we are measured. Such a deity ideally embodies pure goodness, with neither malice, revenge, nor capriciousness, perfect in justice and wise in its administration. Being both eternal and personal in nature, and having engendered beings in some measure like himself — possessed of intellect, free will, and transcendent spirit, and therefore capable of good or evil — this God must measure those choices for good or evil against the absolute standard of goodness embodied in himself.
But if these things be true — if there exists a God of pure goodness and perfect justice, applying the moral absolutes necessary for his creation to rightly relate to Him, seeking eternal friendship for those of creation who seek His perfect goodness — then surely the rejection of this relationship, this perfect goodness, brings consequences of eternal nature which by necessity are entirely dark and devoid of goodness.
Whatever particulars such a bleak destiny might entail; whatever standards must be met to avoid it; whatever grace and mercy might be available for those who do not measure up — these details, while critical and often confusing, should not distract us from the reality of eternal consequence. The idea of heaven — a place of eternal peace, happiness, and rest after death — figures prominently in the hopes of man, who alone among living creatures ponders the inevitability of his demise. Yet in a moral universe, heaven and hell are inseparable, opposite poles of the magnet which draw us toward or repel us from our Creator and source of life.
To deny the reality of hell after death is to guarantee its incarnation in life.
At least that is my hope, to be tackled next.