Hell - Part Deux

Revisiting the topic. After all, what says Christmas more than hell?

That would be a joke, and yet, I think it is in view here.

Remember the Tim Keller sermon outline? “Without an understanding of the Doctrine of Hell, you can’t fully…”

1. understand your own heart.
2. have peace
3. know the love of God.

II. How can an understanding of Hell provide peace?

One of the most interesting classes I took (come to think of it, I really did attend this one pretty regularly) at UGA was on Eastern European History. It was modern, roughly post WWI and up, and took a look at a lesser known people, given our emphasis on the west. Particularly good, was the study of the Balkans. The professor was this funny socialist, Slavic guy and had roots in Croatia. You might remember the Balkans in the early 20th century being referred to as a “powder keg”. (I just learned there is a film by that name. The title was released in the US under the name, Cabaret Balkan) You might even remember the assasination of Franz Ferdinand by a Serbian nationalistic group as the 'spark' that started WWI. You might have wondered why in the world such insignificant little countries could have any impact at all on Russia, Germany, France, Britain, etc.

There is such a diverse group of people in that region and this diversity is not of the melting pot variety. No, no. This diversity is one in which, you live close together, and you do not like them. Serbs certainly didn't like the WWI-era alliances and annexations by the German/Austrian crowd. These are ancient people groups, read ANY history and the oldest traces of migration seem to go to the Black Sea area. Greeks, Serbs, Croats, Slavs, lots of terms used to describe them. The Croats and Serbs have been in violent conflict forever and it continues to this day. Embedded in the Serbian people is an intense nationality and belief that if Serbs are present, Serbs should rule. (Anyone recall Milosevic?)

Slobodan Milosevic was a master demagogue. In 1989, the 600th anniversary of Serbia’s historic defeat at Kosovo Polje, Milosevic gave a highly provocative speech to one million Serbs, which made reference to the nation's great historic past. Milosevic’s answer to the incompetence of the federal system was to centralize the government. (not Austria this time, of course, but to unify the region of SE Europe into a more powerful and less beareaucratic model) The region was dominated by Serbian influence and their brand of national identity was inherently stronger so the prospect was decidedly Serbian and seen as an excuse for elimination of the Croats. Considering Slovenia and Croatia were looking farther ahead to independence, centralization was considered unacceptable.

At the Yugoslav conference in late 1989 talks broke down. The leaders could not come to an agreement on how to deal with the rotating presidency. Moreover many members were no longer willing to rescue what they saw as a sunken ship. War soon broke out in Slovenia in 1990. After a week, the Slovenes were victorious and the break up of Yugoslavia had begun. Serbia saw themselves as historically persecuted by the Slavs in the region and acted in the 1990s with murderous vengeance. Croats likewise and justifiably, saw their oppressors in the same way and lashed out in response.

All that to introduce to the discussion, Professor Volf Miroslav, a Croatian currently teaching at Yale’s Divinity School. http://www.yale.edu/faith/center/volf.htm Miroslav (and Keller) make the point that this conflict, between Muslim and Christian, Serb and Croat, is rooted in a fundamental lack of belief in God and justice.

Its pretty simple really. One sees themselves as persecuted, one lashes out at the opposition. The Sicilian Cosa Nostra might give another example. But I think Miroslav is better, because he is a Christian (and who better to deny Christianity than a Croat who has seen Christianity at its absolute worst) and he fundamentally affirms the justice of God and Hell as the means of reconciliation. The assertion is, if there is no eternal “rightness”, if God will not, as he promises, set the world right in the end, then we must bring that about ourselves. I think Miroslav’s book title says a lot about his theology: Free of Charge: Giving and Forgiving in a Culture Stripped of Grace. A Culture Stripped of Grace. Wow. And to Give and Forgive in that context is what is asked of Christians. Ultimately, to lash out in violence denies the truth of the judgment of God. Likewise, to give, and forgive in the face of hate and violence ENDS the cycle and brings peace to the world.

I think that perhaps that was in full view when setting forth early US isolationism and might require a thinker to reassess his/her view of the current US as the world’s policeman. Consider Washington’s words in his farewell address, concerning Europe.

“Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.”

This guiding principle of “unentanglement” persists throughout the 19th century, changed (necessarily) during WWI and WWII, and transformed into something very different, approaching the Cold War era. National Security is complicated and made more so as the US has grown to be what it is, but I don't think we can deny a real shift over the course of events.

A fundamental lack of trust in God’s justice? I don’t know exactly how that should cause us to act as a nation but it is certainly worth weighing. Miroslav would say the only force in the world that can bring peace and help reconcile NOT perpetuating the cycle of violence, is the belief in a literal heaven and hell, a God who will, in the end, return all things to their rightful condition.

We could go on another tangent here on personal vengeance and how we misappropriate that and why that is forbidden to us but this is already long and I’m still on the first point.

In sum, a trust in the Creator God to provide a Hell for those who deserve it, (and justice even in the present) can and does bring about peace in the world. A weird statement, but one with real personal and political applications. Keller goes on to tell his sophisticated American and NYC audience, if you don’t see that as a powerful resource for peace, you have lived a very sheltered life from the world in which the vast majority of historical peoples have lived.

III. How can an understanding of Hell show us the Love of God?

Actually, it seems to show us the exact opposite, doesn’t it? I think maybe the question could be, if you are God, how can you really show your people that you love them? And the answer would be, hell. I'll try to explain.

First of all, love is what gets us there. It is God’s love that saves us and demonstrates and turns our own hearts toward Him. It is not…

Fear. Fear doesn’t change your heart. It only causes one to act in a self-serving way, to maybe buy some “fire insurance” and to help guard against things happening to self. So, the Scripture passage says http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2016:19-31;&version=31; the rich guy’s brothers will not be convinced to come to Christ out of fear, once they know about hell. Nor will we, nor others. Perhaps a starting point for some, but I don’t think one legitimate conversion has come from someone fearing hell and thinking, I must say this prayer, I don’t want to go to that awful place. I don’t think that is real. I don’t think that is repentance.

Selfishness. Using God to not only get out of hell, but to provide a means to get blessings. If I pray hard, I’ll get rich, I’ll be healed, etc. Is this really asking God, using God to feed our addictions? Hmmm. I’m consumed with self, not God’s will, and so I fixate on these things even though I’ll consider them in a “spiritual” way. So, I focus on external, meet my needs, sure, and there’s nothing wrong with asking God do take care of us. But that is in addition to what we should be focused on. God, help me to serve you better. Give me a love for you. Show me Your Kingdom. Make my view of myself to be Your view, not the other way around. And I think that is what is meant by, “See ye first the Kingdom”. I think that is PRECISELY what is meant. Because without seeking God, without seeking Him because you love Him, because you want to please Him, your heart will not change, and you’re merely using God for your own physical gain.

It is Love. Uncommon, radical love that only comes from God and is only granted to us from God. It changes us. It drives us to be better followers. It is the focal point for getting through the Christian life and the means by which we can be holy and pleasing to the Lord.

Keller tells the story about a guy who comes home and a friend says, “While you were out, a guy came by and had a bill that you owed. So, I paid it for you.” How grateful are you? Well, that depends. Did he pay the postage due? Shake his hand and say thank you. Did he pay an amount that you could never pay? Get down on your knees and kiss his feet.

We’ll never know how much He loves us without an understanding of Hell. Christ experienced the isolation, the disconnection, many times to the degree we experience, for us. Infinitely more, actually. How do we know this?

I remember as a kid, the large scale Christmas productions around town, that seem to be a thing of the past, at least in my circles. Invariably, you could go and see three basic parts.

I. Fun, ‘Secular’ Christmas stuff. Family songs, traditions, the lighter side
II. The Bethlehem story. Emphasis on the child in the manger, usually a slant, either from the innkeeper’s point of view, Mary’s, Joseph’s.
III. The later ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus

Subconsciously and sometimes consciously, I wondered why do all of this? Isn’t Christmas just the story of Christ’s birth? The gift of the Christ child, right? I assumed that the decision was made to just make this thing as big as we can and include the whole gospel story, but it never seemed quite right to me. Let’s save that for Easter.

Well, I think regardless of the motivation, including Christ’s death in this story is absolutely essential to “getting” Christmas. Because from birth, the mission of Christ is clear. Ultimately, his mission is to die. In a wonderful Christmas message entitled, “Bearing the Cup”, RC Sproul talks about this very thing. Again, I initially thought, a strange message for Christmas, but let us not forget what is going on. The significance of Jesus’ humanity (and some of you have discussed this with me in great length and with differing opinions) must be emphasized. I don’t think any of us can say for sure what the human nature of Jesus really meant and what the God nature of Jesus meant and we could ask hypotheticals all day to that issue. But we can agree on this: that at some point, Jesus knew what was going to happen to him. Perhaps not as a child, perhaps the Father had a special way of slowly revealing what was happening.

I don’t have a basis for this except intuition but I think Jesus, himself, might’ve been surprised as an adolescent at what was happening. I think he came to realize it in stages. I don’t think God was in his ear the whole time and Christ was just following very explicit instruction. It doesn’t really matter, but the humanity rings more valid to me if Christ was coming to terms with all this as he developed. This uncommon knowledge, a supreme connection with the Father leading to an understanding of what was happening and what was going to happen. Clearly, when Christ talked of Himself as the Messiah, he knew it all and must’ve known the fullness of his mission. This culminates in the story in the Garden. Christ knows the fullness of the physical pain that was ahead. But, c’mon, that doesn’t even scratch the surface. He looked into the cup and contemplated taking on the sins of the world. And this is something I’m trying to get my arms around.

When he contemplated taking the sins of the world, several thoughts must be running through his head. Chiefly, that sin is a foreign concept to him and to the Father. Did either really KNOW what it feels like to disappoint, to be guilty, to feel ashamed, to feel worthless, to feel righteous hatred, to know what it feels like to be sinful? I don’t think they could know. Like I don’t know what it would be like to be buried alive, but I’m pretty sure it would be horrible, and if I knew it was going to happen to me tomorrow, I’d be … I don’t know what I’d be.

1. I know that this sin thing, in all its manifestations is coming upon me tomorrow.
2. I have seen the physical and spiritual anguish sin causes.
3. I know that even one sin is enough to be condemned by my Father.
4. I know that it is my destiny, and yet, I don’t know if I can go through with it.

Believe it, these thoughts were beyond any mere crucifixion. Those words don’t typically go together, but in light of the real bearing that Christ was sent to do, the crucifixion is puny. The spiritual crucifixion is beyond comprehension. More speculation:

The Apostles Creed says, “He descended into Hell”. Christ is taking on the sins of the world, but is he aware of His relationship with God anymore? I think the punishment must’ve been so severe that Christ endured, in Spirit, ultimate isolation, doubt, all the ramifications of every sin, condensed and concentrated in moments of unspeakable spiritual anguish. I think we must allow for the possibility that Christ doubted his effectiveness, He perhaps doubted his identity, He might’ve come to believe that this was an eternal state, that maybe His mind had played tricks on Him, that He wasn’t the Son, He was delusional, and now would suffer forever because of it. He was suffering the consequences of sin in full, and these thoughts are all a big part of it.

So, Christ, and God Himself, while they knew no sin in committing sin, they could now say to each of us, they know. They know what it is like. Christ walked a mile in our shoes, and in fact, He did so much more. Then the Father. In a way, how much more difficult? To reward His son for having endured the world, who cursed Him and hated Him with … ultimate condemnation!? To so desecrate His own nature of justice, so that He could give us injustice on the flip side? He bruised His son, and how He bruised His own self by doing that. I know God’s sovereignty and time and place is not a consideration for Him but I can’t help but think that while it was happening, God was pleased, yet must’ve wanted to undo it. I know that is not the case but it just seems so hard. My own understanding of God’s love in full is so affected by this.

As if God wanted to show us Love, by making it a two way street. They’ll never really know how much I love them unless I go through it. Unless, I suffer, too. Unless, I suffer more. This is it, this is showing them! I’ll create indescribable pain, and experience it myself, in order that they know. They’ll know, and they’ll love too.

So, when I think of the gift of the Christ-child, I don’t think merely of the manger and the wise men, wait until April and then we'll talk about Easter. I think of the miraculous birth, of course, but the gift, THE GIFT, is taking every debt another owes, and paying it. Imagine! The curse of sin, powerful enough to cast a dark shadow over all creation, has been lifted. A power, so ultimate, so over-coming, and so GOOD, to combat the bad, that it yields an overwhelming, victorious result. You were losing terribly, and this gift wins the game. You owed more than you could pay and now you’re wealthy beyond measure. No analogy does this gift justice.

One of the verses of Joy to the World has got to me my favorite all time Christmas lyric.

No more let sins and sorrows grow,
Nor thorns infest the ground;
He comes to make His blessings flow
Far as the curse is found,
Far as the curse is found,
Far as, far as, the curse is found.

Just how powerful is this baby? This baby’s power reaches every dark and sinful corner of the globe, and then some. If sin can be there, then so can the power of the child. As far as the CURSE is found, so can be found the saving redemption of the Christ child. This is the gift. This is the measure of Love the Father has given us in the manger.

People who try and reconcile away the reality of hell are trying to make God more loving. First of all, they can't, but their argument makes Him less so. Tough question here: If God loves us, but it doesn't cost Him at all, isn't that a bit hard to get real appreciative? Thanks, God, I really appreciate it. You know? Back to the debt thing. A guy agrees to pay your debt. He says, "here take my ATM card, go get what you need." I'm appreciative, don't get me wrong. But to owe and the only way to pay is through some terrible stuff and God takes that away and endures the terrible. That's a greater Love.

I've heard the analagy many times about the judge who stands before the guilty and offers grace. That needs to be tweaked. The King made the law, you broke the law, the King is the judge, you are an enemy and stand guilty, the King tells you to go to the palace and live, and he takes off his robe, his crown, puts away the jewels and the scepter, descends the throne, and marches himself off to the gallows in your place. Both a more powerful and accurate image of the reality of the gospel and what God does for us.