
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
- It implies that Christ's death for us isn't enough.
- The Bible says in several places that any interaction with
the dead is forbidden.
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).

Next: Why do Christians believe this?