Q. Do you think it is necessary to have a correct view of the afterlife for the wicked in order to have a true salvation doctrines? Would my rejecting or accepting one or other of the doctrines of eternal torment, annihilationism or universalism impede my ability to teach or preach a true doctrine of salvation? I see you quote N.T.Wright a great deal - do you accept his compromise position on this matter?

A. What you are essentially asking is what it is we are supposed to be doing, and how we are supposed to be doing it, as believers in relation to those who are not believers. In effect, you're asking what our commission is. That is very simple and here's what the Saviour told us to do:

"Therefore go and make talmidim (disciples) of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Ruach haQodesh (Holy Spirit), and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age (aeon)" (Matt.28:19-20, NIV).

• 1. Make disciples (talmidim);
• 2. Baptise them - as adults and by immersion; and
• 3. Teach them the mitzvot (commandments) - all of them.

Well, the word English 'disciple' comes the Latin disciplus which Jerome used to render the Hebrew word limmûd and the Greek word mathétés. All of these mean a 'pupil' or 'learner'. In other words, the Saviour commanded us to make people 'pupils' or 'learners', baptise them by immersion in water in the Name of the Father, Son and Ruach haQodesh (Holy Spirit), and teach them to obey everything the Master taught. If you want to know what the Great Commission is, get a red-letter edition of the New Testament and read everything Yah'shua (Jesus) taught. That is what we have been told to do. That's our commission. That's how we're supposed to witness or evangelise. We are to gather around us groups of apprentices or learners, teach them and baptise them.

Two groups of 'learners', 'pupils' or 'talmidim (disciples)' are mentioned in the Messianic Scriptures:

• 1. Those in the general sense who chose to be followers of Yah'shua (Jesus) (Mt.10:42; Lk.6:17; Jn.6:66); and
• 2. The Twelve Apostles who forsook everything to follow Him (Mt.10:1; 11:1).

If I am going to be a faithful witness, I need to know what Yah'shua (Jesus) said on the subject and, in relation to your question, what He said about the wicked, hell, etc.. I take it for granted that you will agree with me that what Yah'shua (Jesus) wanted taught on this subject has been recorded and preserved in the four gospels (primarily - He does speak directly in Acts and Revelation too) and that it is to these we must go as our primary source. What the apostles and others came to subsequently teach must be viewed as amplifications of what the Master taught. Moreover, we must give the original eyewitnesses to what Yah'shua (Jesus) said and did our primary attention after Yah'shua's (Jesus') own 'red-letter' sayings. For Messianic Evangelicals this is the hierarchy of authority that we follow:

• 1. Yah'shua's (Jesus') own words, sayings and teachings;
• 2. The teachings of the apostolic eyewitness - John, Peter, James, Jude); and
• 3. The teachings of the apostolic post-resurrection revelators - Paul.

"Our beloved brother Paul has written to you about all this, according to the wisdom that has been given him, speaking about these things as he does in his letters. There are some things in them which are difficult to understand. Untaught and unstable people twist his words to their own destruction, as they do with the other scriptures" (2 Pet.3:15b-16, KNT).

So what did Yah'shua (Jesus) teach about the fate of the wicked? Actually, very little. In proportion to the rest of his teachings, His teachings about hell or the fate of the wicked were tiny. When Yah'shua (Jesus) warned His hearers about 'hell', He would speak of a literal place on the south-west corner of the old city called Gehenna, Jerusalem's garbage or rubbish tip, in Hebrew, Ge Hinnom. It's still there though it's no longer a waste tip. I've been there. Nothing would surprise you about it today but in New Testament times, when Yah'shua (Jesus) was ministering, it was still a place of smouldering fires as it had been for centuries. If you want to know more about this place, read my extensive introductory essay on the Hell website.

Unfortunately, our use of the word 'hell' today conjures up mental picture gained more from mediaeval Catholic imagery than from the earliest Christian writings. In the Middle Ages Christians were taught to think of hell as a literal underground location full of literal worms and literal fire, what N.T.Wright calls "a kind of torture chamber at the centre of God's castle of heavenly delights" [1]. Thus hell came to be depicted as a kind of mediaeval castle with its dungeon of torture chambers, a false idea that has been ingrained into Western consciousness for centuries and which still lingers on in Protestantism. Suffice to day, this kind of imagery had nothing to do with Yah'shua's (Jesus') world - either that of His own teachings or that of His Hebrew listeners. When you read Yah'shua (Jesus) - and later the apostles - you have to empty your mind of this sort of imagery or you will totally misunderstand the biblical doctrine of hell.

The same goes for the concept of 'heaven'. Does 'heaven' exist? Yes, of course. Is it the final home of the righteous or saved? No, it is a temporary resting place prior to the physical resurrection. Where do the righteous resurrected live? On a renewed, physical earth - this world, transformed, is our final home. When we are dead, the body is said to metaphorically 'sleep' in the grave while the incorporeal or spiritual part of us - the 'real person' - continues to live in a conscious state in 'Paradise'. (I'll not get into the false doctrine of soul-sleeping here). Here the righteous dead are held firmly within the conscious ahavah (love) of Elohim (God) and the conscious presence of Yah'shua the Messiah (Jesus Christ) while they await the day of resurrection. We know 'heaven' is a place of consciousness because of what Paul said:

"If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labour for me. Yet what shall I choose? I do not know! I am torn between the two: I desire to depart and be with Messiah, which is better by far; but it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body" (Phil.1:22-24, NIV).

Here's the main point. When Yah'shua (Jesus) was warning His hearers about Gehenna he was not, as a general rule, telling them that unless they repented in this life they would burn in the next one. As with the Kingdom of Elohim (God), so with it's opposite ('hell' or the 'Prison' part of Sheol); it is on earth that things matter, not somewhere else, because everywhere else is impermanent.

So what was Yah'shua's (Jesus') message? Unless they turned back from their hopeless and rebellious dreams of establishing Yahweh's Kingdom on their own terms, not least through armed revolt against Rome (which is what the Zealots wanted), then the Roman war machine would do what large, greedy and ruthless empires have always done to smaller countries whose resources they covet or whose strategic location they are anxious to guard. In other words, Rome would turn Jerusalem into a hideous, stinking extension of its own smouldering rubbish heap called 'Gehenna' that contained the worm-infested bodies of dead criminals along with the city's garbage. When Yah'shua (Jesus) said:

"Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them - do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish" (Luke 13:2-5, NIV)

Here's the difficulty...and the danger. When we use our vivid imaginations to try to extrapolate such sayings into asking ourselves what life after death is like in the invisible realm, we are largely guessing. (Don't put too much stock in the reliability or accurancy of the reports made by those who have near-death experiences), There are, however, two parables that Yah'shua (Jesus) tells that appear to address this question directly but remember these are parables and not actual descriptions - you won't be able to draw a map of heaven or hell aftewards as a person viewing it one day will see it. Moreover, Yah'shua (Jesus) doesn't invent new imagery to teach us - He uses classical Judahite/Israelite/Hebrew pictures such as 'Abraham's bosom', not to teach about what happens after death but to insist on justice and mercy within the present life.

Again, do not misunderstand me. None of this is to deny a literal 'heaven' and 'hell' after death. Thus in the parable of of Abraham, the Rich Man ('Dives') and Lazarus are not to be viewed literally. Trying to extract a literal picture of heaven and hell from this parable (Abraham's bosom would be pretty crowded with millions of souls in heaven if it was) is about as nonsensical and impossible as trying to work out the name of the Prodigal Son because neither parable is describing historical people (Abraham excepted). Yah'shua (Jesus) says very little about the future life - ask yourself why, if such is so important to our witness of salvation. What's important is the wicked unbelievers don't want to come under judgment, not what the sentence consists of.

So what was Yah'shua (Jesus) chiefly concerned about? Announcing that the Kingdom of Heaven (God/Elohim) was 'coming in earth as in heaven'. He gave no fresh teaching about the resurrection (He endorsed the Pharisee doctrine) apart from giving hints that was going to happen very soon in front of their eyes to one person ahead of everyone else (Himself). For the rest He was content to simply reinforce the traditional Hebrew picture because that was adequate for the message of salvation. In the same way, He was not at all concerned about giving any new instruction or teaching about the Final Judgment that would come to all, apart from again hinting that it was going to be horribly and dramatically anticipated in one particular way, in space-time history, within a generation - namely, the destruction of Jerusalem and the final expulsion of the Judeans from the land of Israel. That would be a foretaste of what would happen at the end of the age to the whole world.

Yah'shua (Jesus) does not address any of the three questions you raise about the fate of the wicked in the afterlife, whether they will be subject to 'eternal torture', 'annihilation' or 'universal salvation'. Such teachings are starkly absent from His discipling program. Indeed, you will not find any teaching by the Master on whether there really are some who finally reject Yahweh and who, as it were, have that rejection ratified. Why? Because that is not a part of the Good News which He came to announce. Our primary responsibility is not the proclamation of the 'Bad News' - there's plenty enough of that. If we take care of the Good News (Gospel), the Bad News will take care of itself.

Is there 'Bad News' for the wicked? Undoubtedly. Do we need to warn them? Absolutely - we are to call them to repent. But Yah'shua (Jesus) said that He had only come for those who desire to be saved:

"I did not come to judge the world, but to save it" (John 12:47, NIV).

Hell and final judgment are, moreover, not a major topic in the epistles either through when the subject is raised, it is very important, as in Romans 2:

"You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. Now we know that Elohim's (God's) judgment against those who do such things is based on emet (truth). So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape Elohim's (God's) judgment? Or do you show contempt for the riches of His kindness, tolerance and patience, not realising that Elohim's (God's) kindness leads you toward repentance?

"But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of Elohim's (God's) wrath, when His righteous judgment will be revealed. Elohim (God) 'will give to each person according to what he has done.' To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honour and immortality, He will give aeonian life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the emet (truth) and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Judean (Jew), then for the Gentile; glory, honour and shalom (peace) for everyone who does good: first for the Judean (Jew), then for the Gentile. For Elohim (God) does not show favouritism.

"All who sin apart from the Torah (Law) will also perish apart from the Torah (Law), and all who sin under the Torah (Law) will be judged by the Torah (Law). For it is not those who hear the Torah (Law) who are righteous in Elohim's (God's) sight, but it is those who obey the Torah (Law) who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the Torah/Law, do by nature things required by the Torah/Law, they are a torah/law for themselves, even though they do not have the Torah (Law), since they show that the requirements of the Torah (Law) are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) This will take place on the day when Elohim (God) will judge men's secrets through Yah'shua the Messiah (Jesus Christ), as my (Paul's) gospel declares" (Rom.2:1-16, NIV).

Hell isn't mentioned in Acts at all and the vivid pictures toward the end of the book of Revelation, whilst being very important, have always proved among the hardest parts of Scripture to interpret with any certainty which is why you will find the proponents of eternal torment, annhilation and universal salvation all freely citing them as evidence for their particular positions. Why have 2,000 years of scholarship not resolved the issue in favour of one of the positions definitely? Because interpreting symbolic language is notoriously hard. Why has the 'eternal torture' position dominated Christianity for 1½ millennia? Is that because it is right? No, because the doctrine was imposed by force by the monolithic Catholic hegemon and its Protestant successors for so long...until modern times, at least. Remember, Catholics, Calvinists, Lutherans and others were fond of burning at the stake those who held dissenting theological positions. Calvinists are often astonished when they learn that their hero, John Calvin, had Michael Servetus burned at the stake in 1553 for rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity. They're not allowed to do that today but much of the same spirit remains in the more radical of them in condemning dissenters to hell.

The fact that different groups are able to amass collections of scriptures to prove their case without a resolution should warn us against what N.T.Wright calls the "cheerful double dogmatism which has bedevilled discussions on these topics - the dogmatism, that is, both of the person who knows exactly who is and who isn't 'going to hell', and that of the universalist who is absolutely certain that there is no such place, or that if there is it will, at the last, be empty" [2].

You asked about N.T.Wright and his position and whether I agree with it. Well, Wright is not a universalist for one thing and we have some major disagreement on this topic. He has his reasons for believing as he does, and I respect those reasons. But they, like the three positions already mentioned (he takes a fourth, entirely of his own), all depend on interpretation, extrapolation, and a heafty dollup of imagination. And though there are those who will swear blind that all the Scriptures 'clearly' support their position, they are usually either ill-informed or dishonest. I personally have no idea how it will all play out, as I am not privy to that kind of information or revelation. All I know is that there are very clear universalist passages in sufficient numbers in the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) which cannot be accommodated to the other two positions, whereas the passages chiefly cited by the two other positions can be accommodated by universalism...at least of the particular form that Messianic Evangelicals subscribe to, namely, Universal Graded Salvation which, in contradiction to other universalist teachings, meaintains that:

• 1. Only those who trust in Messiah in this life are saved to Messiah in the next life; and
• 2. Those who do not, or who are rebellious, will at some point be 'saved' through the corrective punishment from hell but not necessarily to Messiah.

It's here we partly resonate with Wright vision. We, along with all conservative Christians and Messianics, agree with him that "God must condemn evil if He is a good God and that those who who love God must endorse that condemnation" - we are definitely not like the more liberal universalists whose position ours is unfortunately sometimes confused with. Indeed, in some respects we are more like the traditionalists who believe in hell only we believe it has an end-point and that the wicked released therefrom do not inherit the salvation of those who trusted in mortality.

I will let N.T.Wright state his position for himself and then you can agree or disagree with him as you will:

"...when human beings give the heart-felt allegiance and worship to that which is not of God, they progressively cease to reflect the image of God. One of the primary laws of human life is that you become like what you worship; what's more, you reflect what you worship, not only back to the object itself but outwards to the world around. Those who worship money increasingly define themselves in terms of it, and increasingly treat people as creditors, debtors, partners or customers rather than as human beings. Those who worship sex define themselves in terms of it (their preferences, their practices, their past histories), and increasingly treat other people as actual or potential sexual objects. Those who worship power define themselves in terms of it, and treat other people as either collaborators, competitors or pawns. These and many other forms of idolatry combine in a thousand ways, all of them damaging to the image-bearing quality of the people concerned and of those whose lives they touch. My suggestion is that it is possible for human beings so to continue down this road, so as to refuse all whisperings of good news, all glimmers of the true light, all promptings to turn and go the other way, all signposts to the love of God, that after death they become at last, by their own effective choice, beings that once were human but are now not, creatures that have ceased to bear the divine image at all. With the death of that body in which they inhabited God's good world, in which the flickering flame of goodness had not been completely snuffed out, they pass simultaneously not only beyond hope but also beyond pity. There is no concentration camp in the beautiful countryside, no torture chamber in the palace of delight. Those creatures that still exist in an ex-human state, no longer reflecting their maker in any meaningful sense, can no longer excite, in themselves or others, the natural sympathy some feel even for the hardenmed criminal" [3]

Funnily enough, Wright does seem to hint of an alternative reality for the wicked but doesn't for some reason incorporate these ideas into his final summary. His conclusions, like those of all of us, contain large dollups of imagination. And that's OK so long as we don't insist on it becoming dogma or condemn those who hold honestly held contrarian positions. We're entitled to speculate and hold personal opinions until more emet (truth) forces us to refine or abandon our current models. We are to love such people even if we disagree with them. It should not be an impediment to fellowship if they truly accept and promote the 'Good News'. I have not the slightest doubt N.T.Wright is an authentic believer. For Messianic Evangelicals, anyone who accepts the Apostles' Creed and has been born again is a brother or sister in Messiah.

One thing Messianic Evangelicals are certain and adamant about is that the traditional view that those who spurn Yahweh's salvation and who refuse to turn from idolatry and wickedness, are held forever in conscious torment. Sometimes this obnoxious doctrine is sharpened up by over-enthusaistic preachers and teachers who claim to know precisely which sorts of behaviour are bound to lead to hell and which, though reprehensible, are still forgiveable, especially those Calvinists who believe in 'once saved, always saved'. Apparently this predestined-to-salvation crowd can do almost anything wickedness might conceive provided they were at some point 'saved' before they descended into abject idolatry. The traditional picture is, at any rate, clear: such human beings will continue to be, in some sense, human beings, and they will be punished in an endless time. Eternity's castle will have its happy throng with his horrendous dungeon nearby.

I think not.

The 'conditionalists' or 'annihilationists' propose a doctrone of 'conditional mortality - those who persistently refuse Elohim's (God's) ahavah (love) and His way of life in the present world (including those universalists like myself who reject their doctrine) will simply 'cease to exist'. Immortality, they point out, is not an innate human characteristic - it is something, as Paul says, only Elohim (God) possesses as of right, and hence it is a gift which Elohim (God) can choose to bestow or withhold. According to this theory, Yahweh will simply not confer immortality on those who, in this life, have continued without repentance to worship idols and thereby to destroy their own right to continue to exist. It does not seem to trouble the proponents of this theory that in order to first judge these idolaters Elohim (God) must first resurrect them which would mean making them immortal since an immortal being cannot cease to exist without Yahweh contradicting His own order and rendering His own Davar (Word) void. But that is one of many contradictions in the annihilationist doctrine.

I do feel sorry for those who feel the need to add ever more rings of exclusion around themselves every time they come to a conclusion about a doctrine they think is salvational (when it isn't necessarily so) that other believers reject. A lack of unity is very, very sad to be sure, but that is no excuse to abuse people. Jehovah's Witnesses and Amish shunning their own family members, Catholics and others burning 'heretics' at the stake, Mormons claiming every system outside their own is an 'abomination in the eyes of God', all bespeak a deep-seated mediaeval-like terror of the fleshy man to accept people where they are. We can firmly hold to what we believe without turning off the light of ahavah (love) and becoming glassy-eyed religious fanatics. I admire a zealously held opinion but zeal without wisdom can so easily rip a believer from his moorings in Messiah and lead him (or her) into a very egotistically-tainted pseudo-gospel that repels rather than attracts. Others may shun and condemn but I shall continue to reach out in whatever way I can. That is why I continue to write and preach that per chance some souls will soften their hearts and become more open to examining their passionately-held convictions more critically. The emet (truth) will defend itself - we need never fear it. I am at peace about what I believe in.

I count as my friends and brethren in Messiah many lovely people who sincerely believe in eternal torment or annihilation. I also know many believers who believe in eternal torment and annhilation who are quite obnoxious and devoid of the Ruach (Spirit). And I now know several universalists some of whom I consider to be true believers and others who I absolutely do not consider to be believers. Doctrine is important but doctrine alone does not make for a right heart. Even more amazingly - or perhaps not so (you become less surprised the older you get) - there are those who have lovely hearts who are doctrinally quite messed up. So I am wary of putting people into doctrinal categories.

What I want to know is whether they have met and are trusting in Yah'shua (Jesus) as the incarnate Son of Elohim (God) and believe in the physical resurrection. I think people coming that far is a miracle all in itself given the inky darkness in this world, the corrupt preachers, the false traditions and the many 'iffy' Bible translations. There are so many layers of lies to peel away. How, if I met him today, would I treat the 'me' before I was first saved in 1977 or shortly thereafter? I am a very different person to the unsaved heathen I was and I am yet a very different person - at least theologically - to the one who converted that year and indeed to the one who claimed to be a believer for several years afterwards. But there is one thing I do recognise about that early me was my heart, and what it sought and desired, because it hasn't substantially changed, at least not in direction. I wanted ahavah (love), emet (truth) and shalom (peace) and I still want that - more of it, at any rate. I wanted - and want even more - to love, serve and be with my Redeemer in the aeons to come.

I think we need to stop viewing each other as concrete theological monuments and instead see one another as living streams. The important thing is to what we are connected. Are you connected to the River of the Water of Chayim (Life) (Rev.21:6; 22:1,17) or to something else? That's what marks the real difference between the saved and the unsaved. I want to know about the characteristics of that river far more than I do about the intellectual theological networks and mental meme-making factories of men and women still in the making. I want to know what makes a little child safe, confident and loving because it is to be Yahweh's children that we have been called. I know in Whom and what I trust. Do you?

Endnotes

[1] Tom Wright, Surprised by Hope (SPCK, London: 2011), p.187
[2] Ibid., p.190
[3] Ibid., pp.194-195

This page was created on 17 December 2018 Last updated on 21 December 2018

Copyright © 1987-2018 NCAY - All Rights Reserved