|
What
about Heaven and Hell?
Heaven: Our Intended
Destination
Based on Jesus' teachings
and other sources of revelation, Christians believe that
God created human beings to live eternally in fellowship
with him. The future as described in the Bible includes
the resurrection of all people, a judgement, and eternal
life in either heaven or hell.
Christians are not agreed
on the exact details of how this will happen. However the
differences tend to involve details of timing, and other
issues that don't seem worth dealing with here.
The fact that human
beings are created with an eternal destiny should have a
significant impact on our priorities. It often seems that
governments, nations, and other institutions are the
enduring feature of human history, and people are
transient elements. Christianity says that this is
radically wrong. One cannot treat people as disposable
adjuncts to the nation or other institution: ultimately it
is the people who matter.
Note that there is a
subtle difference between resurrection and the existence
of an eternal soul. Many religions have held that human
beings have an immaterial soul, which does not die when
the body does. Christians generally agree with this
(although a small number do not). However the distinctive
Christian doctrine is not the eternal nature of the soul,
but the resurrection of the body. Humans are unified
beings. The body is an essential part of the person. In
heaven there will be some analog of the body.
Judgement
Christians believe that
there will be a judgement. In this, everyone's life will
be evaluated. Those who depend upon Christ for salvation
can be assured that they will pass this judgement. However
the quality of their lives will still become known, and
everything in their lives that was not built on Christ
will be purged. The Bible talks of their work being tested
with fire.
The Bible says that there
are two different outcomes for eternal life: heaven and
hell. There is not a precise description of either heaven
or hell, nor are we told how many people will end up in
each. They are described using terms that seem
metaphorical: a city built of gold in heaven, a lake of
fire for hell.
Accountability
All major Christian
traditions say that in the end everyone will end up in
either heaven or hell. At first glance, it sounds like we
won't be held accountable for what we did, as long as we
manage to meet the minimal criteria for ending up in
heaven. In fact there are several ways of maintaining some
kind of accountability.
Catholics believe in
something called "purgatory". This is a "place" (not
necessarily an actual physical place, of course) where
those who will end up in heaven are purified. Traditional
Catholic theology says that when God forgives sins, he
removes the guilt. However there may still be
consequences. One of those consequences is that "temporal
punishment" is still owed. The goal of this punishment is
to be cleansed, and made fit for heaven.
Note that purgatory only
applies to people who will be admitted into heaven. It is
not part of hell, nor is it some kind of intermediate
state between heaven and hell. It is in a sense the
entranceway into heaven.
Traditionally, Catholics
believe it is appropriate to pray for those that are in
purgatory. These prayers, as well as masses said for them,
etc, may in some way ease their process of purgation. This
is one aspect of the general Catholic concept that those
on earth and those in heaven retain a spiritual connection
with each other. (This is called the "communion of
saints".) Those on earth may ask for intercession from the
saints, and may intercede for those in purgatory.
Protestants do not
normally accept the concept of purgatory. There are
several objections. Among the most important are
The concept was also
discredited by various abuses with which it was surrounded
in the 16th Cent. These made it look like the Church was
selling salvation, or at least release from Purgatory.
Thus Protestants normally
object to anything that looks like Purgatory, as well as
prayers for the dead. It is often said that prayers for
the dead suggest a lack of trust in God, since God will
judge them justly.
You can see the
difference clearly if you attend both Protestant and
Catholic worship services. When someone in the
congregation has died, Catholics will ask for prayers for
them and their family, while Protestants will ask only for
prayers for their family.
Despite the rejection of
Purgatory, many Protestant groups are still concerned to
maintain accountability for what has been done during
life. Many Protestants believe that there will be
different levels of honor in heaven. Many Protestants also
believe that even saved people will go through a process
where their entire lives are reviewed and judged, even
though their final destination is not in doubt. This is
sometimes described as the "bema seat judgement". As a
result of it, Christ's followers will be rewarded
according to the quality of their work. This is contrasted
to the "great white throne" judgement, which determines
whether someone will spend eternity in heaven or hell.
(I should note that the
terms "bema seat judgement" and "great white throne
judgement" are not standard among all Protestants. They
are based on one specific eschatological system.)
Note that Protestants do
believe that those who are in heaven have been freed from
sin. However the way in which this happens is thought of
somewhat differently. For Protestants, our righteousness
comes from Christ, because we are united to him in faith.
When our nature is perfected in heaven, this happens
because our union with Christ is perfected, and his
righteousness fills us fully.
The same difference
occurs here as in the doctrine of justification: Catholic
theology tends to envision the Christian life as due to
the growth of grace in us, while Protestant theology tends
to envision the Christian life as due to an increasing
transparency to the presence of Christ. The doctrine of
Purgatory seems oriented towards the Catholic description.
Why Does Hell Exist?
Currently there is a good
deal of discussion among Christians about the morality of
hell: it is said that a good God would not condemn people
to an eternity of torture. However that has been the
belief of most Christians through most of Christian
history. It seems to be supported by the Biblical account.
The alternative seems about as bad: that God will force
himself on people who do not want him.
Note that it is not
necessary to say that God imposes hell as punishment. It
may be the automatic (indeed logically unavoidable)
consequence of rejecting God. It is not clear that God
makes it intentionally unpleasant. It may be the nature of
the people who are there, and the fact that they are
finally given what they want: freedom from God.
Many criticisms of
judgement suggest that it is arrogant to say that
Christian ideas are true and others are false. "How can
you be so arrogant to believe that Christians will go to
heaven and everyone else will go to hell." As we will see
below, most Christians don't believe this. However the
idea that this is arrogant seems odd. We do not criticize
mathematics teachers for saying that 2 + 2 is always 4,
and that believing sincerely in 5 is not acceptable.
Either there is a God or there isn't. Either Christ died
to save us or he didn't. If he did, it's hard to see how
it can be arrogant to say so. If he didn't, then
Christians are wrong, but not arrogant.
I would say that
ultimately hell is a result of the "hardness" of created
reality. Let me try to explain: Christianity believes that
the universe has a real existence, and that it is distinct
from God. (This is a specific position, which not all
religions and philosophies accept. For some, there isn't a
real distinction between God and the universe.) In order
to provide us with a region in which we can make our own
decisions and take our own actions, God set up a universe
that operates under dependable laws. Possibly there are
other ways he could have worked. But we don't know of any
other way to set things up so that we have real lives of
our own.
The existence of a real
universe with dependable laws has consequences. One of
those consequences is the fact that people can have
incorrect ideas. If they misunderstand the way the
universe works, damage may result. Most of us understand
this in the realm of science and engineering. There is no
reason that theology should be different. If there weren't
any distinction between truth and falsehood, nor any
consequences to error, we would be living in an amorphous
mess (the metaphysical equivalent of "gray goo"). There
would be no way to live sensibly.
The standard Christian
position is that salvation is only available through
Christ. This isn't because God is biased towards
Christians. Rather, it's a consequence of the way the
universe works. Heaven is by definition eternal life with
God. But Christ is God's way of establishing relationships
between human beings and himself. He is the divine logos,
the agent of creation. It is inherently impossible to be
with God without being in Christ. If a human being somehow
managed to be in God's presence bypassing Christ, that
person would be unmade.
The only alternatives I
can see to hell are for God to arrange for everyone to
accept Christ, or for him to destroy everyone who does
not. As you'll see below, each of these alternatives has
its supporters. However most Christians believe that if
everyone ends up choosing God, human existence is a sham:
God loaded the dice to such an extent that there were no
real human decisions. Most Christians also believe that a
part of us is immortal. For God to destroy it would be an
interference in the created order that would seriously
violate its integrity.
Before judging these
issues, I'd ask you to look at some additional
considerations.
Is Hell Unfair?
The standard Christian
position is that anyone who rejects Christ will end up in
hell. Does this mean that only Christians can be saved?
The Catholic church and many Protestant churches don't
think so. They believe it is possible that Christ can come
to someone in an inward and spiritual way, even if they've
never heard of Christ. Thus someone can be an "anonymous
Christian." That is, they can know Christ spiritually
without realizing it it Christ.
Most Christians also
believe that God's judgement will take into account the
sorts of opportunities a person had to learn the truth. A
person who has never heard the Gospel can't be said to
have rejected Christ. An even worse situation occurs when
Christians have persecuted other groups. A person who sees
Christ as a persecutor has hardly had a real exposure to
the Gospel.
[Historical note: It's
worth noting that two major classical Protestant writers
thought it was possible for non-Christians to be saved:
Zwingli and Wesley. Calvin did not.]
Alternatives to Hell?
There is a substantial
minority view, which says that God will find some way to
reach everyone. This is called "universalism". A few 20th
Cent thinkers have also suggested that those who are not
destined for heaven are simply destroyed. This is called "annihilationism".
Most Christians think
that both of these alternative views are ruled out by
teachings in the Bible. Jesus himself speaks of judgement,
and of "Gehenna" and "the outer darkness".
While most Christians
reject universalism and annihilationism as doctrines, many
orthodox Christians hold positions that are very close.
Let's look at them briefly:
There is no statement in
the Bible about how many will be damned. When someone asks
Jesus this, he deflects the question. He does say that the
way to salvation is narrow, and that many follow the road
to destruction. However we can still hope that in the end
God will deflect those on the easy road to destruction. I
believe universalism as a doctrine is unorthodox, but hope
for all is possible.
A number of orthodox 20th
Century writers point out that those who are in hell are
not the same kind of people as those in heaven. Human
beings are designed to live with God. In heaven our
humanity is perfected. Hell is not described in any detail
in the Bible. The descriptions that most people hear are
based on speculative fiction, such as Dante's. However if
humanity is created to be with God, then it is reasonable
to believe that those who are finally separated from God
in hell are less than fully human. Several writers refer
to them as equivalent to "ashes", the remnants of what
used to be a human life. Thus we may not have two groups
of people living next to each other, with the saved
watching the damned living in torture. Hell, whatever it
is, has less reality than heaven. This is suggested by
Jesus' most common way of referring to it. He calls it
Gehenna. This was the garbage pit outside of Jerusalem,
although the term also was used in discussions of the last
judgement.
Could Hitler end up in
Heaven?
Heaven and hell are not a
matter of totaling up good deeds and bad deeds and seeing
which predominates. From the Christian perspective, if it
comes to merit, no one merits heaven, and we've all done
enough bad for hell to be justified. However God doesn't
want anyone to end up in hell. Anyone who depends upon him
for rescue will be saved from hell.
There are several
questions that are asked so commonly that I think they're
work looking at here. Here are two examples:
-
Could Hitler end up in
heaven if he repented at the last minute?
-
It seems unfair for
God to save people just because they are Christians.
There are lots of rotten Christians and lots of good
non-Christians.
I'm going to try to deal
with that whole class of questions here. Note that in
doing so I'm going to make my own opinions a bit more
obvious than I do elsewhere in these essays. I am quite
sure that there are answers from Catholic and Orthodox
perspectives, but I'm not in a position to argue
convincingly from those viewpoints.
First, the Bible doesn't
give us precise information as to who will end up in
heaven or hell. We are warned particularly not to judge
other people (except to the extent that we have specific
responsibilities for church discipline or as officials
involved with the legal system). This means that
discussing specific people such as Hitler is dangerous. We
don't know what is going on with individuals. Hitler looks
particularly evil. But someone completely unremarkable may
be just as evil, but may not have had enough political
power to have the terrible effect that Hitler did. Perhaps
Hitler was completely insane, and not responsible for his
actions. (I seriously doubt it, but we don't know for sure
what was going on in his heart.)
However more important, I
need to warn you that heaven isn't a reward for being
good. The basic Protestant model for salvation is as
follows:
-
God chooses us
-
We respond with faith,
which basically means that we rely on God for salvation
-
God forgives us, and
simultaneously starts renewing us and getting rid of our
sin
There is certainly a
connection between faith and being good: Faith is our side
of the bond that connects us to God. God will use that
connection to regenerate us and get rid of our sin. The
process isn't finished in this life, but it certainly is
started. Christians should be better than if they weren't
Christians. Jesus said that you will know his followers by
the fruit that they bear.
It would be nice if we
could say that the best half (or whatever) of mankind are
Christians and the worst half are non-Christians.
Unfortunately, I'm afraid it isn't going to be quite that
neat. Some people become Christians late in their life,
and so the process has only started when they die. Some
Christians may be in more dangerous positions than
non-Christians. Some Christians may have been born with
really bad tempers, etc, which makes them look more evil
than they actually are.
So I'd say that there
should be real evidence of regeneration operating in the
lives of Christians, but you shouldn't expect that all the
people who look good are Christians and all those who look
bad are non-Christians.
Here's one thing to think
about: What happens to someone who is relatively good in
this life, but who does not have faith? Unfortunately, he
may end up in hell. In theory this person could be the
best person who ever lived (except Jesus, who was without
sin). The problem is that by not having faith, they do not
have the connection through which God will take care of
their remaining sin. Even though there aren't very many
visible problems, they (and the underlying addiction to
sin of which they are symptoms) can't be dealt with. Thus
this person can't be made fit for heaven.
Now the obvious response
to this is: so why shouldn't people just go ahead and be
evil, if heaven isn't based on being good? While heaven
isn't a reward for reaching a certain quota of good acts,
you won't get in unless you have a relationship with God
through which you can be renewed. Someone who says "let me
be evil for my whole life, and repent at the last minute"
almost certainly isn't going to be capable of repenting in
any way that does him any good. In having that intention,
he has already rejected the kind of faith that is needed
for salvation.
Strictly speaking, heaven
isn't even a reward for having faith. It's not that God is
rewarding you for faith and punishing you for not having
faith. Rather, it's that God uses a certain kind of
relationship in order to make you fit for heaven. Faith is
a key part of that relationship. If you're sloppy about
building a bridge it may fall down. Nature isn't
consciously punishing you. It's just the way the universe
is built. In my view, one of the spiritual laws of the
universe is that in order to end up in heaven, you have to
have justifying faith (not just intellectual belief in the
Trinity -- justifying faith means that you rely on and
commit yourself to God as your savior).
|