Nothing is perhaps more intrusive, ridiculous, and morally offensive in the Western world than the Christian claim that salvation is found in Christ, and for those who like Reformation-echoing language, in Christ alone. The shadow side of the claim to salvation in Christ is an explanation of what happens to those are not saved in Christ. In the history of the Christian tradition, the shadow side is called hell.
The two most influential presentations of the shadow side of salvation are Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy and Jonathan Edwards’s sermons Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God. Like them or not, they have shaped what many Christians have, and still do, believe about hell.
But many find this view of God and this view of life and this view of eternity unacceptable and morally intolerable. I will not today attempt to resolve this tension. Instead, I want to turn to a recent discussion of the problem.
Adam Hamilton, in his book Wrestling with Doubt, Finding Faith, asks and then probes an answer to this question: “Are All Non-Christians Going to Hell?” In the last decade a New York Times bestselling author wrote a book about world religions, reserving one word for each religion, and for Christianity he called it a religion of salvation. He’s right in this: Christianity’s message is one of salvation, though one can use other terms to scope it out, like redemption and even liberation. For there to be salvation, there must be something from which humans need to be saved. There again, different terms are used for a similar problem. That is, sin or judgment or damnation.
At the core of the Christian religion then remain two final alternatives: the light of salvation and the shadow side of salvation, final separation from God.
What does Adam Hamilton propose? Hamilton is a pastor who is asked thousands of questions a year. One of his friends asked him this question: “I cannot accept that a good, kind, loving, gracious, just God would send a kind, caring, loving, faithful Hindu to hell simply because they didn't accept Jesus. That literally makes no sense to me.” I remember when a student of mine, in describing a non-Christian boss for whom she worked and whom she trusted and honored, said to me something like this: “I can't believe our God would send my boss to hell. He's a better Christian than I am.” She was right about this: many non-Christians are “better Christians” than many Christians we all know. Of course, this begs the question of what a Christian is. But I think you understand the sentiment behind that expression.
Now Hamilton: there is no “hell” in the Hebrew Bible or the Old Testament. He does admit Daniel 12:2 gets close. It reads, “many of those who sleep in the dusty land will wake up – some to eternal life, others to shame and eternal disgrace.” That is at least a darkening approximating the shadow side. Also not to be found in the Old Testament is a pervasive sense of personal salvation. Hamilton: “what we don't find in the Old Testament is the idea that God will condemn all non-Jews or non-Israelites to an eternal torment for not having accepted the faith of the Israelite people.”
But the New Testament mentions hell, he claims, 13x. He’s referring to 12 instances of Gehenna and one of Tartarus. Noticeably, “All twelve New Testament references to Gehenna hell are on the lips of Jesus.” Yes, Gehenna is a valley south and southwest of Jerusalem. Homes are found in the valley today. Who will go to Gehenna for Jesus? Those who in anger call people fools, those who lost after a woman in their hearts, those who succumb to temptation, and those who are religious hypocrites. Jesus uses other images like outer darkness and the weeping and mashing of teeth, but he is pointing at those who fail to live as God's people or who fail to bear fruit. “What we do not find is Jesus teaching that all the people of the world who worshipped other gods would be eternally tormented in hell, though … there are a handful of passages that point to Jesus as the only savior of the world, and salvation being found only in him.”
Matthew 25:31-46 is for him the clearest scene of a final judgment, and all the nations are gathered before God’s judgment. The victors, if I may, are those who care for those who suffer; the victims, if I may, are those who don’t care for those who suffer. Hamilton emphasizes that they are judged on the basis of how they lived, not on the basis of what they believed. Note, too, 2 Cor 5:10 and John 5:28-29. The gospel message deals with sin and salvation, and that sin is remedied and salvation obtained by Jesus. “One thing is clear in the New Testament, what Christ did to save sinners was accomplished once and for all in his life, death, and resurrection. Forgiveness, salvation, and redemption are a fait accompli.”
Three views are then described by Adam Hamilton:
Christian Exclusivism: “unless someone personally accepts Christ and the salvation he offers, they continue to be ‘dead in their sins,’ and, of necessity, alienated from God.” Thus exclusivists believe one must personally, intentionally accept salvation in Christ to be finally saved. Not all exclusivists are alike, but this gives the general picture.
Universalism: “Christian Universalism claims that Christ is the only savior of the world, and that God's intention is to save all people. And since God intends to save all people, God ultimately will save all people.” A key verse is Romans 5:18, and I want to provide it here because many don’t read it carefully: “therefore just as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all.” Take note, too, of 1 Timothy 2:3-6, another verse used by universalists.
Christian Inclusivism: “it affirms that Christ is the only savior of the world. Salvation is found in no one else.” But here is the expansiveness of inclusivism: “a just, merciful, loving, and compassionate God would not condemn to hell those who had no real ability to hear, understand, and respond to the good news of Jesus, to accept his saving grace.” Hamilton’s question: “Might God see the faith of those of other religions, and the way they sought to live their lives, and understand that their prayers, worship, trust, and actions were intended for him even if the individual did not understand or embrace the Christian gospel?” That is the inclusivist question at its core. Many people struggle with the gospel claims. “Inclusivists, in varying degrees, believe that God loves each of these people, that God is more understanding and compassionate than we are, and that God would not eternally torment such people in hell, but instead wants them to be saved.” And “I believe God is still seeking these folks out.”
“Unlike the Christian Universalist, however, the Inclusivist believes that God will not force anyone to heaven, and that Christ gives us the freedom to reject his grace to the end.” He asks, “What if hell is a place for the narcissists, the self-absorbed, the users and abusers, the cruel and unjust, those who love the darkness more than the light, those who prefer self-love to selfless love for those who to the end refuse God's grace? Jesus rightly described this as a place of outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.” The essence of the inclusivist viewpoint is that they reject the idea that only those who have intentionally and consciously responded to Jesus Christ will be saved. They believe in a wideness in God's mercy.
His reason for evangelism then? “I share my faith in Christ with others not because I believe God will eternally torment them if they don't accept Christ, but because I believe that in Jesus God came to us, to show us the way, the truth, and the life. I believe from him we have the clearest picture of who God is, and who God calls us to be. I tell others about Christ because my faith in him has changed my life for the better, because in him I find God's love. I am passionate about sharing the good news of Jesus Christ with others because in it we find the purpose for which we were made, God's answer to the deepest longings of our hearts, the road map for how we are meant to live, hope in the face of despair, and God's love, mercy, and grace incarnated in him.”
The descriptions and definitions are summaries of what the author himself wrote.
Thank you, Scot. I appreciate this discussion. I’m deconstructing, having left the (white) conservative American evangelical subculture to better follow Jesus.