Hell No? A Debate on the Existence of Eternal Punishment

[@RealAtheology]

As an Atheist, I really enjoyed this debate. I really liked the idea of the debaters stating the opposing person's view as well. Well done to both speakers to civil exchange. Not surprisingly, I felt Dr. Wood had the more compelling case, but Matthew had a fine case as well.

[@Thedisciplemike]

Submit to Christ

[@EnglishMike]

@@Thedisciplemike Don't be a dick.

[@cody2901]

@@Thedisciplemike It's okay to just be silent sometimes brother. You should practice it.

[@PaulR-os3po]

I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian. Nonetheless I found this discussion to be quite interesting, as it might be to anyone interested in the history of western thought, which is deeply involved with Christianity and Scripture. It was also encouraging to hear two viewpoints discussed calmly and intelligently. Thanks!

[@OptimistPrime]

0:00 - Introduction 3:22 - Jordan Daniel Wood (JDW) states his opponent's position ("hell is eternal punishment") 8:28 - Matthew Walther (MW) states his opponent's position ("universalism") 18:36 - JDW states his own position 27:54 - MW states his own position 39:06 - JDW responds to MW 47:48 - MW and JDW discuss 59:40 - Q&A Begins

[@sonyastockklausner62]

The question of what we “lose” if we lose ECT is heartbreaking. It seems to imply that people, or even one particular person, is of less worth than church culture and church authority. Considering that Christ considered even one person worth divine death, this seems almost anti-Christian. I would have hoped that we the church would be willing to jettison everything if necessary to see even one soul saved.

[@cleverestx]

Exactly; and I'll tell you what else we lose if we lose hell: Libel toward our creator; shame toward teaching Christ failed for most on the cross, not being the savior of the world as we are told in the NT He is... The reluctant acceptance that Christ does NOT draw (Greek: Drag) ALL to him when He was raised up (Jhn 12:32), The crippling trauma causing child-abuse scaring young minds with irrational terrorizing fear, dread, woe, pain, and hopelessness, ...And a much slower conversion of Agnostics or Atheists to Christians who have more moral sense to know better than most of these Christians even know about what a good God looks like (hint: Jesus Christ) ....those are some things we would lose without eternal hell doctrine.

[@Thedisciplemike]

The Spirit guides the Church, not individual people, into all the truth. Again, its what WE lose, not what God loses.

[@Thedisciplemike]

​@@cleverestx who decides what is moral or not?

[@rickdavies4801]

IF GOD WOULD TORTURE ALL PEOPLE FOR EVER BUT THOSE HE LOVES THEN HE IS TOTAL HARTLESS. ANY ONE WITH A HEART THAT IS NOT INSANE WOULD NEVER DO THAT TO ANYONE

[@jasonegeland1446]

In regard to Matthew's opinion on Universalism being "...appealing", I would agree, but not in a strictly emotional way as he inferred early in the discussion. One has to ask themselves is any punishment that never produces a single good result in anyone beneficial? If justice means to make something right, does torture seem just and right in your mind? Is this a father and creator we can trust and love with all our heart? If not, most of us are in some serious trouble.

[@JohnCarswellJMC]

1:23:26 Jordan's closing statement is so good.

[@JohnCarswellJMC]

39:08 This is a great response, from JDW, calling conservative / traditional Catholics to recognize the complicated mess that is our own epistemological situation when it comes to the development of doctrine over the centuries. Bravo!

[@aisthpaoitht]

Yep, it's the only way out of the labyrinth of teachings the Church has muddled up.

[@Thedisciplemike]

Not muddled up. Contemplated is a better word ​@@aisthpaoitht

[@aisthpaoitht]

@@Thedisciplemike I'll stick with muddled up.

[@Thedisciplemike]

@aisthpaoitht except its not true. Its not like we just threw a bunch of ideas from out of nowhere. Theyve been thought long and hard through

[@aisthpaoitht]

@@Thedisciplemike I never said they were just thrown together. But, for example, there isn't even clarity on something of the utmost importance - mortal sin. What does full knowledge and consent actually mean? How does the Church decide what constitutes a grave matter? And the doctrine of no salvation outside the Church has... developed. Because the Church refuses to admit that it changes its views over time.

[@PenticostAI]

From my own experience, delving into this topic requires significant reflection and study to grasp the perspective of reconciliationists. Every counterargument you might think of has a compelling response, but it takes time and effort to fully comprehend it. Typically, the viewpoint of infernalists tends to be simplistic, relying on statements like "well, Jesus talked about it, so that settles it," without engaging in deeper exploration. However, a concept as profound as this necessitates thorough study and meaningful conversation, rather than a cursory dismissal, anything less is criminal based on what's at stake for human beings. It's always striking to see how traditionalists can provide contemplative and profound responses to nearly every question about the Bible. Yet, when it comes to this particular topic, their approach often appears shallow and infantile in it's intellectual rigor at best. It's surprising how quickly they dismiss the complexities involved, spending no more than 30 seconds on it. It's disheartening to witness individuals whom I deeply respect and admire for their knowledge and insight across various subjects suddenly seem to struggle when discussing this particular topic. Their responses often feel limited to just a sentence or two, lacking the depth and nuance they typically bring to other discussions. In my opinion its partially brainwashing and a reluctance to actually deal with this, while also a tiny bit of glee at the thought of the people they don't like suffering forever, though they will never consciously admit it.

[@kahnlives]

99% of Christians aren’t even sufficiently catechized. Surface level answers are all you can expect from most people, even trained professionals struggle with these topics.

[@jwhit34]

This is so thoughtfully put. I resonate with you deeply and share in your frustration.

[@thatguyk.5306]

They look like bizarro versions of each other battling it out

[@solomonsvehla7105]

I must say Matthew really took a perplexing and disturbing turn at the last question, where his reply did not even take into account the (admittedly more commonly Eastern Orthodox) position that hell is not a place that came into existence but rather is simply the persons negative encounter with the holy fire of God. A theology that imagines a lost golden age that cannot be returned to is counter to God in Christ being the alpha and omega. Theology must-and in some places already has-detach itself from a crude sequential mode of thinking.

[@MrMosin-sv3xu]

That is not an Eastern orthodox belief. Than is something propounded by Romanides' followers. The EO liturgy itself claims that Hell is a place.

[@Xaloxulu]

Thanks to the organizers, panelists and audience for this important, contentious and yet civil debate!

[@enchantingamerica2100]

If you find yourself here with a final hope for Christianity, Good. It’s a challenge to be “outside the Church” (not aligning with any particular tradition) because the sacrament is so beneficial, but I want you to know, this path is valid if you happen to find yourself on it. It’s a path that is as noble as it is treacherous.

[@jasonegeland1446]

Great discussion! Thanks for putting it together for us!

[@Tatterfield]

Jordan's approach is really helpful on this issue. It is a nice compliment to the more syllogistic accounts.

[@enchantingamerica2100]

I appreciate Matthew’s attempts to cast the less rigorist version of eternal damnation in a greater light, but implicit in the assumption of lagrange for example, that the kingdom of satan must be numerically smaller than the kingdom of God, is the universalist position. If God is infinitely greater than Satan, His kingdom must be infinitely greater in number. God isn’t 1% greater than satan. This position is ridiculous if you think about it for too long. An infernalist would either have to be totally agnostic about the population of hell relative to heaven (could be 99% or could be 1%) , or take the rigorist position.

[@jasonegeland1446]

Cross reference hell from various translations and you'll get sheol, hades, and Gehenna (not an underground torture chamber). The first two reference the grave, and Gehenna was/is a valley.

[@bilbobaggins4403]

A person can't be abstracted only experienced. Nice

[@Chrissiela]

The Shaffer-Herzog Encyclopedia of religious knowledge asserts that the universalist position was the predominant position for the first 500 years of the church, post-Christ. So how does that factor into Church Tradition? I'm also not quite sure why the assertion was made here that its re-emergence didn't take place until the nineteen century. Did I misunderstand that or what is meant (or being referred to) by that? Are we talking within Catholicism only? (As a non-Catholic Christian Universalist, I'm excited to see this conversation taking place even within the RCC.)

[@gordonsavage]

In fact it did not disappear between the 5th and 19th century -- though it most certainly took a low profile to survive, for obvious reasons. Two recent volumes, A Larger Hope?: Universal Salvation from Christian Beginnings to Julian of Norwich (by Ilaria Ramelli), and A Larger Hope? Universal Salvation from the Reformation to the 19th Century (by Robin Parry), nicely fill in the whole history without being overly technical. And implicit in the title of the second volume is the fact that there were many protestants as well. Mr Walther was also mistaken in calling it a minority position among the Fathers.

[@Chrissiela]

@gordonsavage I've had those books on my wish list for awhile now. May need to move them to the top. 👍

[@EnglishMike]

I guess 1500 years is better than 500 years...? 🤷‍♀

[@thanevakarian9762]

This was good. Something I’ve been contemplating is if God wishes all to be saved or non to perish, and he will restore the cosmos, then how does the incense of their burning please him unless the burning is a restorative process? If it’s just pleasing to him cause he’s happy the wicked are burning and suffering then does that mean his hatred of evil and sin override his love for his creation? If so what does that imply about him allowing things to come to that point? A lot is going to depend on your view on free will, Calvinists don’t even worry about it you guys believe something entirely different from every other Christian just about, but for everyone else it’s something to contemplate in regards to apokatstasis being correct or not.

[@dubbelkastrull]

1:24:19 bookmark

[@Chriliman]

Apparently Gods wrath is what creates hell forever. So god is angry with sinners forever. Kind of makes me feel bad for god to have be angry forever. He can’t turn off his omnipresence either, so he’s there in hell with them being mad at them forever. Although, revelation says gods wrath is completed, so somethings not quite adding up here.

[@Thedisciplemike]

God doesn't get "angry". God is not passible

[@Chriliman]

@@Thedisciplemike where do you get that info from?

[@Thedisciplemike]

@Chriliman its the tradition of the Church, deduced from simple philosophy and taught by the saints of the Church. We believe in something called Divine Simplicity, in which the First Cause of the universe cannot be passible.

[@89bavaro89]

I thought it was Voltaire that said "Hell is other people"?

[@jackolyte]

That was Sartre

[@89bavaro89]

@@jackolyte guess I've been misquoting for years.

[@jhq9064]

For more Jordan Daniel Wood, a one on one interview: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/gZytaqxnbs16fJI

[@anthonymccarthy4164]

It's worth having hell so Milton could be right? That has to be one of the lamest arguments for eternal damnation I've ever heard, especially from a Catholic. Certainly those old guys who constitute another part of the infernalist argument believed Milton was damned because he was not only a Calvinist but one who argued for divorce and remarriage. .

[@EnglishMike]

I guess it comes from the fear that authority of the Church would be undermined if it was determined that the core doctrines of hell and salvation needed to be significantly altered after over a thousand years of proclaiming they are the arbiters of truth. Not a good luck...

[@JoBo301]

Why should we love our enemies when God tortures his enemies??

[@Quirkyhndl]

Awesome debate. I really think that Matthew's case lacks the foundational weight that he thinks it does. You can't use a made up modern term like "hell" that has been forced onto other words, like Gehenna, and then say that it means what you want it to. Sure, maybe that term does, but that word isn't actually in the original language of the Bible. So what does Scripture actually say?

[@fieldhousebrewing]

Good job jordan

[@donafuller1590]

What about following what Jesus said✝️

[@somethingyousaid5059]

For all we know, the worst case scenario is actually the case. The default existence of a perfect evil.

[@kristenswensen6451]

St.Maximus on Ninevah! There, there it is.

[@happycat0411]

What people do not understand is they are created in God's own image > an eternal spirit! However, since there is an unseen battle between Good and Evil on this planet, whoever (God or Satan) and whatever souls God or Satan is able to claim, that soul will belong to them for eternity! In other words, those souls that God saves becomes God's souls in Heaven for eternity. Those souls that Satan wins over will belong to Satan for eternity....!

[@阳明子]

It seems once you get passed the superficial infernalist talking points about 'respecting tradition/scripture more than universalists' it seems their main argument is they WANT eternal conscious torment to be true.

[@aisthpaoitht]

It's like they don't understand that we should do good for the sake of good,. because good is our true nature. They believe that they must be merited for their good behavior.

[@james-cq3mi]

(Mysteries that are hidden in plain sight) We have been led to believe about a future judgment of nonbelievers, of hell and eternal torment. Jesus said “if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.” No where did Jesus condemn anyone to a hell with eternal torment, for non-belief. That all changed by the Roman influence by Augustine in 380 with the introduction of eternal conscious torment in hell, to keep the illiterate masses under control. He did not believe in universal reconciliation, which was the dominant belief in that day by the early church fathers. The Bible teaches that this (Gehenna) hell was an actual place forsaken by God, with a beginning and an ending.

[@kristenswensen6451]

Thoughtful Universalism does not reject the experience of Hell (outside of God) just its stated "purpose" - as a punishment - "God's damnation". Horrible teaching. Rather, if scripture points to it at all, the experience is part of the process of reconciliation. The purifying fire. My repentance being the voluntary casting of that dead thing I am into "the abyss" - to willingly mount the cross. Then, Glory!Sanctification, Resurrection in Christ. Love how, Jordon here, reminds how scripture actually emphasises this as the nature of God's salvation. Its been my effort for 40+ years to articulate this reading of scripture. "Eternaty" viewed through a temporal lens (as without "end") is error. Eternaty AS God must be something altogether different from that!

[@ready1fire1aim1]

(1) Yahweh, blind chief of the false Elohim from Genesis 2-3, doesn't even exist after death. Kinda makes his promises of heaven and threats of hell seem empty: Psalm 115 Names of God Bible 17 Those who are dead do not praise Yah, nor do those who go into the silence of the grave. Psalm 116 Names of God Bible 9 I will walk in Yahweh’s presence in this world of the living. (2) Yahweh is merely an up-jumped Elohim (adopted) whose followers are decieved enough to think is El: Exodus 15 Names of God Bible 2 Yah is my strength and my song. He is my Savior. This is my El, and I will praise him, my father’s Elohim, and I will honor him. (3) The LORD = Baal: 2 Samuel 5 Names of God Bible 20 So David went to Baal Perazim and defeated the Philistines there. He said, “Yahweh has overwhelmed my enemies in front of me like an overwhelming flood.” That is why that place is called Baal Perazim [The LORD Overwhelms]. Hosea 2 Names of God Bible 16 “On that day she will call me her Ish,” declares Yahweh. “She will no longer call me her Baal. 17 I won’t allow her to say the names of other gods called Baal. She will never again call out their names. (4) The anger of the Yahweh = Satan: Compare the following two verses: 2 Samuel 24 Names of God Bible 1 Again the anger of the Yahweh burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go and take a census of Israel and Judah.” and 1 Chronicles 21 Names of God Bible 1 Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel. (5) The LORD of flies: Isaiah 7 Names of God Bible 17 “Yahweh will bring on you, your people, and your ancestor’s family a time unlike any since Ephraim broke away from Judah. He will bring the king of Assyria. 18 On that day Yahweh will whistle for the flies that are at the distant branches of the Nile River in Egypt and for the bees that are in Assyria. 19 All of them will come and settle in the deep valleys, in the cracks in the cliffs, on all the thornbushes, and at all the water holes. Pre-Babylonian captivity: El = God Elohim = sons of El Post-Babylonian captivity: El = God Elohim = God That's called "syncretization" and, if allowed, makes the Bible near-unsolvable. Generates a lot of contradictions and the Bible won't make sense. Elohim needs the original meaning so you can tell true Elohim from false Elohim. Note how in verse 3 the Ruach Elohim says there's a true Elohim. Which means there's false Elohim. Spoiler Alert: Yahweh Elohim from Genesis 2-3 are the false Elohim. 2 Chronicles 15: 1-7 Names of God Bible 15 The Ruach Elohim came to Azariah, son of Oded. 2 Azariah went to Asa and said to him, “Listen to me, Asa and all you men from Judah and Benjamin. Yahweh is with you when you are with him. If you will dedicate your lives to serving him, he will accept you. But if you abandon him, he will abandon you. 3 For a long time Israel was without the true Elohim, without a priest who taught correctly, and without Moses’ Teachings. 4 But when they were in trouble, they turned to Yahweh Elohim of Israel. When they searched for him, he let them find him. 5 At those times no one could come and go in peace, because everyone living in the land had a lot of turmoil. 6 One nation crushed another nation; one city crushed another. Elohim had tormented them with every kind of trouble. 7 But you must remain strong and not become discouraged. Your actions will be rewarded.”

[@lukegaier9490]

I think the major Universalist assumption is that God's greatest goal in creation is to be with us. It's not. His greatest goal is to destroy sin and bring all things under His authority. A big part of this is that He has set an ultimatum. He will not strive with man forever. He has set a day in our future where He will put an end to sin and establish His kingdom. We are welcomed into His kingdom, and He would love to have us there, but we are not required to be there. Whether He could do this or that and make someone believe is irrelevant. He's given us every opportunity to repent now, but a time is coming where we will no longer have the opportunity, He will take His judgment off hold, and He will move His remaining creation into whatever He has planned for it.

[@emersonb.5399]

I think most Christian universalists would agree with your initial premise. The destruction of sin and the authority of God are crucial to the theology of universal reconciliation. The difference lies in what we believe must be done to accomplish this goal. As a universalist I believe the destruction of sin means its complete eradication. God will not allow any sin to remain anywhere in His creation. I don’t understand the concept of God “destroying” sin by quarantining it in hell. I agree that God will not strive with man forever, but not because He will call it quits at some point, but because He will accomplish what He set out to do. I don’t think God has set a time limit for His goal, nor do I think that would make sense in the context of a God who is outside of time as we know it.

[@lukegaier9490]

@emersonb.5399 I agree that God will not quarantine sin in Hell, and that is why I don't hold to the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment. I hold to Conditional Immortality, which states that only believers will be granted eternal life, and all non-believers (those who reject Christ) will be destroyed in the Lake of Fire. The Bible refers to this as "the second death". To your second point, Acts 17:30-31 makes it clear when it says "The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now He commands all people everywhere to repent, because He has fixed a day on which He will judge the world...” God may be outside of time as we know it, but He certainly acts within time to bring about His plan and purpose.

[@emersonb.5399]

⁠@@lukegaier9490 Ah, I see. I do think there’s a better argument to be made for conditional immortality than for eternal conscious torment. Nowhere does it say the day of judgement spoken of in Acts is the end of God’s work. If God desires all people to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4) then it seems to me He would allow for however much time would be required to accomplish that. He’s the one in control after all. If He set His own deadline for His own work, knowing it would not be met, He would effectively be thwarting His own plan.

[@EnglishMike]

God is supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent. Any sin that has ever existed is by his express consent and foreknowledge, and he can rid his creation of it at any time without "waiting for man" and without destroying man either. You have such a blinkered view of reality. The fact that around 99% of all adult Christians were raised in a Christian family and/or community speaks volumes to the immorality and iniquity of the idea that only Christians will be saved. You are only a Christian because you were fortunate enough to be raised as one. People raised as Hindus and Muslims are just as inoculated by their childhood education against Christianity as you are against Hinduism and Islam. There are exceptions, but they are extremely rare and almost certainly no more than 1 in every 100 Christians alive today around the world. I'd wager you couldn't even find more than 1 in 100 salvation testimonies on social media that involve conversion from a different faith entirely -- the vast majority being raised in Christian homes and communities and merely walking away from the familiar faith of their childhood for a season. If you want to believe in a capricious, vindictive God that punishes billions for being indoctrinated as children in a different faith and never feeling any need to explore outside it later in life (or in most cases, never even having the opportunity) then go ahead, that's your choice, but you can count me out.

[@EnglishMike]

@@emersonb.5399 Annihilation is infinitely better than ETC, but it's still infinitely worse than universalism.

[@richdorak1547]

What debate ? Jesus spoke way more about hell than Heaven .

[@kevink5866]

Are you sure? Jesus never used the word ‘hell,’ as typically thought of by later Christians. He spoke of Gehenna, which gets translated as hell, but there are strong arguments to be made that nearly all of his uses of Gehenna are speaking of a temporal, this-world punishment, which came to fruition in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem. The matter is not nearly so simple as first appears. Even if you assume all of his references to Gehenna are meant to describe a place of alferlife punishment, how many of them promise that place punishment has no end? We read eternality into the text where it often isn’t, because we assume eternal hell from the outset. ‘Her Gates Will Never Be Shut’ is a great place to start exploring these issues, by Brad Jersak, an Eastern Orthodox writer.

[@camerondavis5337]

This is false. 60 Gospel verses could be interpreted as referring to hell or damnation. 192 verses could be interpreted as referring to heaven or salvation. I'm not sure where this well-circulated claim originated, but it is easily disproven by simply reading through the gospels and tallying mentions.

[@jhq9064]

Bullshit!

[@rickdavies4801]

​@@jhq9064WHAT do you mean bull shit

[@jhq9064]

@@rickdavies4801 I am aware a lot of radio pastors say that and it gets echoed alot as i probably said it, but it isn't true.