Will we see hell?

No... I have no idea what he's saying!

     I was studying with a friend the other day when he asked this question with trepidation:  "Will we be able to see people in hell?  Will we see them suffering?"  I had done some research on the topic of eternal damnation in the past;  both because of my own curiosity and due to the hubbub of that handsome heretic Rob Bell and his foray into universalism, "Love Wins".  Also, from an apologetic standpoint, the concept of God's justice and its consequences is among the most revolting to our modern mindset:  if we aren't bothered by our little white lies and adulterous glances (to say nothing of the gargantuan black lies and more substantive acts of sexual immorality), why should God?  Especially if He's soooo forgiving and all!  So if we know the doctrines that will be most offensive to our culture, it behooves us to be able to explain them biblically, accurately and with a spirit of love, first for God and His holiness and then for the person headed for hell right in front of us.
     One of the hell myths I love debunking most is the idea that hell is a New Testament invention, concocted by that meanie Paul, who's also homophobic and a chauvinist, and John for its fear factor in Revelation.  Two O.T. texts mention hell pretty clearly;  when I showed them to my favorite atheist, he immediately switched subjects... that usually means "Wow, you're right and I have no response!"  Dan 12:1-2 and Isa 66:22-24 say:

"At that time shall arise Michael, the great prince who has charge of your people. And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never has been since there was a nation till that time. But at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone whose name shall be found written in the book.  And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.....  For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the LORD, so shall your offspring and your name remain.  From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the LORD.  And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh."

What the Cross felt like...

     It's that latter passage that begins to provide an answer for our title question;  you'll notice that after worshipping, the seed of Israel (which Israel? the elect in Christ!) goes and views the corpses of the damned in what seems to be an eternal object lesson.  I think it's clear from the context that "corpse" is used figuratively... undying worms and fire don't cause much pain to dead people in the local morgue, so Isaiah probably refers to those who are spiritually estranged, incapable of communion with God and on the business end of His wrath as "dead", much like Paul in Eph 2:4, or Jesus in John 11:25.  What could God teach us with such a vivid, grotesque display?   His zeal for His holiness, the consequences of transgressing against Him and instilling and renewing the love, joy and praise we must have when considering where we could have, where we should have ended up.  Most importantly, a vision of hell gives us a better understanding what Christ endured on the Cross:  imagine seeing that place, hearing their screams and smelling the charred flesh... and then looking into the dark brown eyes of Jesus (He is Jewish, after all!) and hearing:  "I took that for you."

"...but bad guys go to hell!"

     The other relevant passage that comes to mind is Luke 16:19-31;  it's a familiar parable, so I won't cite it all; I'll just highlight the relevant points that seem to further reinforce Isa 66.  Though Abraham and Lazarus are in heaven and the rich man in hell, with a "great gulf fixed" between them, they can still see each other... what's more, Abraham and the rich man are even able to converse!  Abraham's didactic "moral of the story", that the earthly status of an individual is no sure measure of his eternal destination, flows along the same current as Isa 66:24, which forces us to consider the eternal consequences of rebellion against God.  The fact that this punishment is often delayed until death, that the godly often are afflicted in this life and the wicked often prosper (Ps. 73:17-23), both causes the elect to trust God instead of conventional wisdom (like the saying "Nice guys finish last!") and seals the doom of those without divinely-given eyes to see and ears to hear God's truth.  Many commentators have noticed that this parable is unique in that Jesus names one of the characters;  all the other individuals in His other object lessons are generic ("men", "bridesmaids", "servants", etc.).  Some speculate that this was because Jesus was using real people in this case... that there was a real beggar named Lazarus who sat at the gate of well-known rich man.  It makes sense to me:  Jesus would have intimate knowledge of the afterlife (having created it and all!), and using actual people known to His audience would add impact to His teaching (e.g. Lk 13:1-5). 
     So what would you say to someone in hell?  More to the point of my friend's question, can you
imagine what it would be like to see people you know in hell?  "Yep, there's Bob, my neighbor (no surprise there with the drinking and domestic violence!), and Janice my secretary, and is that... no!  Darrell!?!  We were in choir together for years!"  Seeing your family, friends, coworkers... people from every walk of life, from every socio-economic category, with one fundamental thing in common:  they hate God and deserve His wrath.  As I pondered that and thought about all the people I know, I was dumbfounded.  The thought of that great crowd...  I remember a great sermon by Paul Washer on Rev. 20, where he evangelistically asked the lost in his audience:  "Did you know you're in the Bible?"  Then he read vs. 12:  "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne... that's you, if you're outside of Christ."  If you're not speaking to people now about their eternal destiny, don't wait until they're in hell to do so.

Photos courtesy of gbrenna, Creativity103, brentbat

Smelly Christianity...

     By way of disclaimer, there is truth in every verse in the Bible, so I don't mean, in hitting on average one verse a chapter, to skip over anything in 2 Corinthians; but at the same time, I'm not a professional exegete, just a busdriver who loves to learn.  So most of what I write is a regurgitation of what other people have said, but if you haven't heard those other people, I can pass on their insight to you.

     In my humble opinion, the best verses in 2 Cor 2 are vss. 15-16: 

"For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life. Who is sufficient for these things?"

     I think there are some fascinating insights and implications in these verses;  I hope to cover some insights in this post, and save the implications for the next.

What does holiness smell like?

     How does Paul communicate the effect of godly saints to others?  Just follow your nose to the answer!  You've likely never encountered a article or blog post on what the Bible says about this overlooked (pun intended) nub of cartilage;  at least I never have!  But I think there's much profitable truth in learning exactly what a Scriptural author is thinking and what imagery he's employing to teach us about the truth of God.  So let me give you a sniff of the theology of the nose;  most of the verses I found fall into several categories:

Biological Reality:  This is the most obvious sense; and it adds a subtle scent of truth to the Scripture.  An essential part of our everyday experience is what we smell, and we can't forget that biblical times were much more aromatic than ours!  When we run across this, we see the biblical authors faithfully recording what they smelled (or were afraid to smell!): "...Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been dead four days." (John 11:39)

Metaphorical:  In likely the most neglected arena of meaning, God chose to first reveal Himself in a much more expressive language than ours;  for example, the Hebrew word for anger ("awph") literally means "nose".  The link is the unconscious, biological response to the emotion:  your nostrils flare when you're steamed!  Also in this category, we find the figurative use of God's nose to describe His miraculous power in creation, deliverance and most understandably, judgment. He wonderfully condescends to our understanding for our benefit (Ex 15:8, 2 Sam 22:9, 16, Job 4:9).

Relations with man:  The Hebrew way of looking at people was truly remarkable, in a way that our compulsively antiseptic society might find revolting:  if you liked someone, they smelled great (SofSol 1:12-13, 2:1, 3:6);  but if not, peeeeeuuuu! (Ex 5:21, 1 Sam 13:4, 27:12, 2 Sam 10:6, 1 Chr 19:6-7)

Relations with God:  No doubt the most important category, our text in 2 Cor is based on the context of the sacrifices under the Levitical system:  "...it is a burnt offering, a food offering with a pleasing aroma to the LORD." (Lev 1:13)  The obvious idea is that our spiritual service wafts up to God in the same way, delighting Him because it is offered with no ulterior motive and in the manner He has established.  We find the same concept behind other NT texts (Rom 12:1, Php 4:18, Eph 5:2, Heb 13:16).

     With this background, I think we can say that the main point behind our text is this:  the appeal of our fragrance (godly words backed up by a godly life) is dependent on the recipient.  If that person has an appetite for righteousness, we will attract them like a magnet.  If God has not graced them with regenerate senses, no amount of persuasion will draw them downwind from us.  This should relieve our burdens regarding the response of others to the gospel... all those nervous thoughts and qualms dissipate in the face of divine work and its symptoms, not our "success" or "failure".  We'll explore the ramifications next time.
 

Photos courtesy of foxypar4

Good suffering?

You gotta get up early for this one...

     I was looking at 2 Corinthians 1 and mulling over a post on suffering... the content of the chapter is pretty straightforward, and many superior expositors to me (in other words, just about everybody!) have profitably dealt with that topic.  But one nugget/connection did pop its head out of the text as I looked, and I thought it worthy of passing on to you...

     "For as we share abundantly in Christ's sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too.  If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation..." (2 Cor 1:5-6)  Paul's immediate meaning in context is the particular struggle/trial he had recently endured (which is unknown to us) and was a rich source of ammunition for his enemies;  their logic was that of many even today:  [good things] happen to good people, and tragedy to the wicked.  So Paul's affliction was, to them, proof positive of his counterfeit calling and authority.  In fact, the opposite was true:  God's sovereign burden of pain on Paul (and on us) only made him more qualified to minister.  He was now tailored to pass on God's comfort to all saints in pain (vss. 6-7), and more exclusively reliant on God's strength, as he was forcefully convinced of his own inadequacy (vss. 8-9).

Panning the river of God's Word

     So where's the nugget?  I was struck at the equivalency between Christ and Paul, and thus Christ and us...  Christ suffered to benefit others.  The character of His pain was sacrificial, and while He did have God's glory as His primary motivation, our "comfort and salvation" took precedence over His.  The upshot, I believe, is that as a key component of our "being transformed into the same image" (2 Cor 3:18) of Christ, God wills that we suffer for the benefit of others.  This conforming suffering can take many forms, even in our modern world:  the typical joys of parenting (placing midnight feedings and nightmares above a good night's sleep for you!), the good but hard discipling that should take place in our church body, the quiet patience displayed in the face of abuse and scorn.  It is fitting that God makes us, just like He did with Christ, perfect through suffering (Heb 2:10).  Thus if we adopt Christ's mindset as ours, and meditate on the end result of our predestined pain (our sanctification and joy in Christ supremely), then we enjoy the comfort He did, even on the Cross, namely the Person of the Holy Spirit... He isn't called "the Comforter" for nothing!  This is what Paul experienced, and what how he blessed the Corinthians;  may we be forged into beneficial sufferers.

Are you "dedicated to God"?

     Don't answer too quickly....I hesitated to write this post, because I was concerned (and still am to some extent) that I was getting into deep water, into a language and theological concepts that are "too wonderful for me" (Ps. 139:6).  So by way of disclaimer, please be gentle and take these words from an uneducated, unfaithful man as a dim glimpse of the fullness of God's truth.
     The language is, of course, Hebrew, and the daunting and deep concept in Lev. 27 is (cue the suspenseful music!)... dedication, the action of setting a person or object aside solely for the Lord's use, and how that something/one could be redeemed (literally "to buy back").  This probably seems a bit anticlimactic:  even today, we have people (mostly elders/pastors), websites, radio stations and last but not least, huge buildings reserved for religious use, so it's not particularly shocking to read about the technical restrictions on redeeming something/one already dedicated to God.  So the kicker is in these verses:

Death from above?

"But no devoted thing that a man devotes to the LORD, of anything that he has, whether man or beast, or of his inherited field, shall be sold or redeemed; every devoted thing is most holy to the LORD.  No one devoted, who is to be devoted for destruction from mankind, shall be ransomed; he shall surely be put to death." (Lev. 27:28-29)

     So here we move from the wading pool to the diving board:  in ancient Israel, there were 2 purposes for persons/objects dedicated to God.  The first is well-publicized:  for worship, in a special ceremony or daily use.  But the 2nd is the shocker, offensive right from the first syllable:  God desired and commanded that His people mark out special objects and certain people for the sole, express purpose of destroying them.  No other use was permitted for these "holy" things (meaning "separated unto God and His declared use"), so no redemption was possible for these spoken-for items.
     A specific proof text is in order:  famously, the first king of Israel, Saul, is commanded to "go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey." (I Sam 15:3)  Saul obeys partially, but in classic reassignment contrary to God's law, Saul decides that some of the livestock would be better dedicated to God through sacrifice (15:15;  notice Saul doesn't even try to justify keeping Agag the king alive!).  The same word in our text in Lev. is found again in vss. 21-22 ('cherem' with that Yiddish "ch" deep in the throat!): 

But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the best of the things devoted to destruction, to sacrifice to the LORD your God in Gilgal.  And Samuel said, "Has the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams."

No, the other barbarian!

     So as grotesque and barbaric as it may seem, to be consistent, we have to submit to God's right to do what He wants with what's His (Rom 9:21).  But how do we apply this for today... surely that's just in the Old Testament, right? Just for those bloodthirsty, violent Semites who butchered animals (and people) left and right?  The good news is Christians are not given license to slit throats for God's glory;  but the same brutal, violent language is found in the New Testament... with a different target:

"For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.... Put to death therefore what is earthly in you..." (Rom 8:13, Col 3:5)

     In a vivid analogy, the physical in the O.T. teaches us the spiritual reality:  while the specific people in the O.T. really did deserve what they got, the most important thing we can learn is not how bad they were, but how bad we are, and what our attitude toward sin (our sin first!) must be if we are to have the mind of Christ.  So to curb any latent self-righteousness, let's close with a favorite movie reference: 

Clint Eastwood: “It’s a helluva thing, killing a man.  You take away all he’s got, and all he’ll ever have.”    

Forgotten Extra:  “Well, at least he had it comin’.”   

Clint:  “Kid, we all got it comin.”

Why do bad things happen to bad people?

     Our title question is a bit silly, isn't it?  "Ummm... because they're bad!"  So it makes perfect sense to us that there is an equivalency between a person's actions and their fortune/misfortune, so that "whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap".  How do we go wrong from there?
     Our main text today is one of the few (less than 5, I think) narrative passages in Leviticus, 24:11-16,23:

"And the son of an Israelite woman, whose father was an Egyptian, went out among the children of Israel: and this son of the Israelite woman and a man of Israel strove together in the camp; And the Israelite woman's son blasphemed the name of the LORD, and cursed. And they brought him unto Moses: (and his mother's name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan:)  And they put him in prison, that the mind of the LORD might be shown unto them. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,  Bring forth him that has cursed outside the camp; and let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head, and let all the congregation stone him.  And you shall speak unto the children of Israel, saying, Whosoever curses his God shall bear his sin.  And he that blasphemes the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemes the name of the LORD, shall be put to death... And Moses spake to the children of Israel, that they should bring forth him that had cursed out of the camp, and stone him with stones. And the children of Israel did as the LORD commanded Moses."

     To properly frame the error we want to highlight today, yesterday my niece asked me our title question in the way most people do:  "Why do bad things happen to good people?"  Our text today brought me back to my answer then:  there are 2 assumptions possible behind our question, 2 perspectives: a biblical one and an unbiblical one.  Let's do the latter first, and apply it to our passage...
     This man, half Egyptian by birth, could have been thought by his family, friends, coworkers, etc. a real stand up guy.  He could have been polite and friendly, and helped little old ladies across the oxcart path.  He could have been considered moral and upright in almost all of the laws given to Israel.  If so, was it really so bad if he let a naughty word slip out?  We can even try to recreate the most heroic scenario possible for our text:  I bet those 2 guys were fighting because the 2nd guy (not the half Egyptian) insulted the 1st's mother, and while defending her honor, the 1st guy was kicked between the legs by the 2nd; and so, surprised by this low blow and in horrible pain, the half Egyptian's guard was totally down and just like Ralphie in that Christmas movie, the forbidden word(s) came out almost of their own accord!
     I belabor the point for this reason:  this is the mental process of every person on earth when trying to justify our sin.  We play up our perceived virtues and downplay our faults, and in the final analysis, we are good people, who deserve good things from God.  The only problem with this irresistible fixation is that it's completely contrary to the teaching of the Bible.
     The Biblical perspective is much more straightforward and much more depressing:  there's only been one good Person in the history of the world, and you're not Him.  Neither was this half-Egyptian guy good:  even if our more-than-slightly-riduculous scenario was factual, his "noble" actions were motivated by self-righteousness and moral superiority, just like the Pharisees Jesus decried so harshly.  And so the climactic sin of his life, blasphemy, really was that bad... he really did deserve the death penalty.  Just like us:  we are a people who curse like sailors;  we see them on TV, in movies, and even the Musak at the grocery store has songs that have to be censored.  The Lord's name is not holy to us... we profane it with its 3 letter abbreviation (o.m...) a billion times a day.  Instead of slandering God by questioning His law, we must thank Him continually He doesn't destroy us:

"He does not deal with us according to our sins, nor repay us according to our iniquities." (Ps 103:10)

Mentally abused every Sunday!

     Wouldn't be interesting if the next time you went to church, you were met by sharply dressed men carrying clipboards, whose primary duty was to ensure you signed something like the following before being admitted into the service:

"Initial here, here and here..."

"I, the undersigned, do freely and legally agree to release V.F.* Community Church from all liability for any mental and psychological stress that could result from the following service.  I acknowledge that I have been warned of possible negative side effects which can include, but are not limited to:  low self-esteem, conviction of sin by a Supernatural Being, extreme anxiety regarding a place of eternal punishment, feelings of guilt, humiliation, inferiority and/or inadequacy.  I also understand prolonged exposure to biblical content (without an internal transformation) can lead to narcissism masquerading as depression, acute hardening to and hostility towards Christians and additional content, and a hypersensitivity to rebuke over wrongdoing, real or perceived.  This religious institution is not liable for these or other effects resulting from observation of, conversation with or instruction by individuals with higher moral standards than myself."

      Are you aware that much of the "biblical content" we proclaim can be (and/or most certainly will be) classified as "toxic and abusive"?  Most of you have heard the recent comments of Bill Nye, pleading with Christians not to raise their children with the same backwater, obscurantist denial that they daily operate under.  I've got an atheist coworker who, based on his acceptance of views by the late Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, has accused me of child abuse by religiously instructing my offspring.  And the existence of an eternal punishment likely ranks as the most egregious psychological offense that Christians afflict upon their fellow men.
     So what to do?  Halt these mental assaults immediately?  Obviously to do so would amount to a total compromise and utter uselessness for the kingdom of God;  instead, let's take a deep breath and remind ourselves Who causes us to differ from another (I Cor 4:7).  There's nothing in us that makes us more receptive towards biblical truth... it is God who opens some eyes and shuts others.  Next, don't be shocked by such opposition:  "If they have called the Master of the house Beelzebub (or even child abusers!), how much more shall they call them of his household?" (Matt 10:25).  The proper attitude is profound gratitude to suffer for Christ (I Pet 4:14) and careful introspection to ensure any offense originates from the content, not its couriers.

*:  I thought Vanity Fair would be an appropriate locale for all the John Bunyan fans out there!