Hell to Pay? The Blasphemous Absurdity of Damnationism
Author
David Favager is a very learned author, with a BA in History, a PhD in Education, a Licence in Theology and a MA and ThD in Biblical Archaeology. David was a school teacher for over 28 years, but now works as an educational travel manager. He is also a member of the Anglican community on Wirral.
Content
The book is structured around four pillars that support the case for universalism: scripture, morality, atonement and theodicy. These chapters are preceded by a lengthy introduction, which outlines the ground to be covered, together with some preliminary conclusions. As well as the further sections outlined below, there is also a useful glossary and a bibliography that includes hyperlinks.
Introduction
This details how damnationists envisage hell and the afterlife, and considers the problem of babies going to hell for ever. It then briefly considers the position of different religions and theologies before touching on the arguments for and against universalism. The author’s two initial conclusions are that: (a) the Bible is not clear or inerrant; and, (b) the case for universalism can only be proven on ‘the balance of probability’.
Chapter 1 - The Scriptures
This goes through many key texts for and against universalism. It argues that the case for universalism is stronger than damnationism or annihilationism, but concludes that the Bible ‘is ambiguous and contains passages which are irreconcilable’ (page 117).
Chapter 2 - Morality
This maintains that God is the Father of all, Who loves everyone and Who would not stop seeking our redemption at an arbitrary point in time, i.e., death. It argues that infinite punishments are disproportionate and therefore unjust. It considers various attempts to justify traditional teaching, including: hell not being that bad; it being a human choice; and, God’s morality being inscrutably different from our own. The effect of eternal hell on the saved is also considered, together with the concepts of irresistible grace and the issues relating to free will. On the latter the author concludes that, ‘humans are not free to determine their final destinies’ (p 176), as God ensures we do not make eternally damaging choices.
Chapter 3 – Atonement
This firstly considers the Calvinistic view of limited atonement, which, it is argued, does no justice to scriptures that say Jesus’s death took away the sin of the world. There is also a discussion of the apparent conflict between determinism and free will. As regards Arminianism, this is said to contradict the doctrine that we are saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8). The chapter closes by considering the idea of ‘penal substitution’. This is rejected as unjust, but it is acknowledged that universalists do not have a clear position on how Christ’s atonement elicited God’s forgiveness.
Chapter 4 – Theodicy
This considers the existence of evil (suffering and moral) in the world. Explanations considered include: God not being omnipotent or entirely good; suffering being illusory; evil being the unavoidable cost of free will; evil being an essential part of our ‘soul building’ redemptive process; and, the need for God to reach us by suffering alongside us in Christ’s atoning death. It is argued that only universalism can be reconciled with sin and suffering, as universalism at least offers an eternal compensation for our temporary tribulations.
Conclusions
This addresses some remaining objections to universalism, including: church tradition; universalism’s adverse effect on evangelism; the lack of consensus among universalists; and, the argument that universalism is a dubiously motivated theology.
Appendices
The first covers various creeds, including those used by universalists. The second appendix is about the underlying principles of conservative evangelism and why these are in conflict with key doctrines. The following appendix seeks to show that the Bible is not inerrant. There is then a lengthy review of atonement and why no conservative explanations work. Finally, there is a summary of the key points in favour of universalism.
Thoughts
This is a lengthy and erudite book, with a large number of interesting points and quotations. The title must be one of the best, shining a bright light on the fact that saying a God of love would torture people for ever must be the most hideous distortion of His good name.
As with the title, the book is written in a refreshingly emotive way, and the author’s admirable lucidity makes it accessible to all, despite the level of detail in which the reader is immersed. There are also very useful summaries at the end of each chapter.
In terms of its overall impact, the author’s rejection of scripture as the word of God clearly undermines the arguments in favour of universalism, as all of our core beliefs about Christ and God’s nature come from the scriptures. And the author’s conclusion that we have ‘no idea how atonement works’ (p 397), further weakens the impact of his third pillar.
The sections on theodicy and morality do not explore the apparent inequalities in human suffering or the precise meaning of free will; the latter is not even a defined term in the glossary. It appears, however, that 'free will' here requires us to believe that there is no causal link between our wills and how God created us. Given this, it is unclear why the saved might not fall from grace, like Satan, after they have gone to heaven.
The author’s view of free will is also not considered in relation to God. Does He have free will? If not, does that make Him an automaton? If He has free will, however, might He change from being a God of love to being evil? It would certainly be a worry if the statement that, ‘love is not real unless one has the ability to not love’ (p 228) applied to God as well as us!