Great question. Being born into Christianity (in a Christian culture), and being raised as a Christian, doesn't make anyone a Christian any more than being in a garage makes anyone a car. The Bible is clear that devotion to Christ (and therefore, being a Christian) must be decided and chosen. If someone is born into a Christian family, is raised as a Christian, and regularly goes to church, they are still not a Christian. They are not Christian until they make a decision to turn from sin, they pledge their allegiance to Christ, they make a commitment to live a life of love and obedience to Jesus, and then they actually follow through with that and do it. Matthew 7.21-23 is clear.

> since fire doesn't have degrees of punishment

Although if I were to be really obtuse I could argue that it does, I understand (and lean towards agreeing with) your view that it makes more sense to use the images of hell in the Bible as metaphorical pictures to show the severity rather than literal descriptions of what exactly it will look like. Ultimately, I don't think it is possible for us to know exactly what hell (or heaven) is like physically. My guess is that both will be so different from our lives on Earth as to be completely alien to us, and so what is written in the Bible is meant to serve as a descriptor of how bad hell is.

Going back to a previous comment, do you think that those who are only really Christian because it is what they were born into will be treated the same way on Judgement Day as those who were born into Islam/Hinduism/Atheism/etc, even if both parties have genuine belief, but had no real part in choosing it? Surely they have both acted identically, yet one just happened to be born into a different circumstance.

Thanks for the reply. I believe that most alleged contradictions in the Bible are the result of misunderstanding, and can be explained. There are a few things in the Bible that are very difficult to understand, and I'm not sure they're understood yet, so I'm not sure they can be explained.

The main word picture the Bible uses of hell is fire, but it's not the only one, which makes me question whether or not it's literal fire. But since fire doesn't have degrees of punishment, which I see as a teaching of the Bible, I opt for the severity of the image but not the literalness of its picture.

The Bible uses five main pictures to speak of hell

1. Darkness (Mt. 8.12; Jude 13) and separation (Lk. 13.27-28; 2 Thes. 1.7-9)

2. Suffering and Remorse
- Weeping and gnashing of teeth (Mt. 8.12; 22.13; 25.30; Lk. 13.28)
- fire (Mt. 13.42, 50)
- cut to pieces (Mt. 24.51)

3. Punishment (Mt. 25.46; Rev. 14.11)

4. Fire (Jude 7; Luke 16.24)

5. Death and destruction (2 Thes. 1.7-9; Rev. 20.14)

> Revelation 20.13-15. Let's break it down.

In v. 13, "Sea," "death," and "Hades" are three broad places thought to contain the dead. The emphasis is on the universality of judgment. No matter who you are, how you died, or what eternity holds for you, you will stand before Christ for judgment. That's the point of the text.

As far as "each being judged according to what he had done," this is a consistent biblical teaching, found in many texts, such as Romans 2.6 & 2 Cor. 5.10. The point, again, is not "one fire fits all," but each will be judged fairly. We all know that true justice doesn't treat everyone the same, but is giving to each one what is fairly due to them in accordance with their nature, their knowledge, and their deeds.

Rev. 20.14 and the Lake of Fire: Of all the commentaries I have, none of them think this is literal fire. Mounce says it's either stern punishment or full and final defeat. Robertson considers it to be the end of the threat of death. Jewish commentators and Jensen say it could be referring to annihilation and extinction. Keener regards it as an image of the torment of separation from God.

> How do you reconcile what appear to be contradictions within the Bible (eg claims in some places that hell is eternal and in other places verses that support the belief that it's not)

Hell is a difficult doctrine to sort out. Without a doubt there are verses that talk about eternal punishment, but they don't necessarily include all of those who are separated from God. There are verses that talk about God reconciling all things to himself (Rom. 11.15; 2 Cor. 5.19; Col. 1.20), and so some theologians think that God will continue his work of reconciliation even into eternity, such that those who "serve their time" will at a later date be reconciled with God ("reconciliationism"). There is another position called "semi-restorationism" where, after appropriate punishment, those who desire a relationship with God will be partially restored, and those who do not, even after punishment, will opt to remain separated. So hell is eternal, but not necessarily eternal for everyone. The point is that, consistent with everything else the Bible teaches, a person's relegation to hell will be something the person will choose ("I don't WANT to be with God!") rather than a destination forced upon one against their will. While the Bible speaks about eternity, possibly only those who stay eternally defiant will be eternally punished. Some even believe in annihilation. It's hard to know.

My bottom line is this: Those who turn away from God will be separated from the life of God. Though we can't be sure about the form or duration of that separation, this we can be sure of: it will be a horrible experience, and God will be fair about the form and duration of it. If you reject God, you take your chances.

Revelation 20:13-15 says: 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire."

Do you think that this is a literal description of what will happen (I'm guessing not since you don't think that hell = fire), and if not, why did you include it in your proof? I'm guessing you believe the bit about people being judged proportionately according to what they've done, but that it won't literally happen as described in the passage.

How do you reconcile what appear to be contradictions within the Bible (e.g., claims in some places that hell is eternal and in other places verses that support the belief that it's not)? Do you accept that there may be contradictions in the Bible, or believe that all contradictions can be explained?

I happen to be convinced hell is not literally fire, but the agony of true separation from God. I say that because fire doesn't have degrees of punishment, but hell does. Degrees of separation makes more sense to me than degrees of being burned. I believe hell is degrees of punishment, based on the sin (though not levels of hell, as in Dante. Ironically, though, even Dante said hell is an endless, hopeless conversation with oneself). Here's my proof:

Mt. 11.22-24 – "more tolerable"
Mt. 23.14 – "greater condemnation"
Rev. 20.13 – "each in proportion to his works"
Lk. 10.12 – "it will be more bearable for Sodom than for that town"
Lk. 12.47-48 – beaten with few blows or more blows

Four of these five references are the words of Jesus.

It's interesting to hear about the idea of different levels of punishment in hell (which, it seems to me, would fit with the idea of God being just) - as far as I was aware, the Bible (particularly Jesus) supports the view that hell is eternal ("eternal fire", "everlasting destruction", "eternal punishment", etc), so I would be interested in looking at any other interpretations - although admittedly I'd be sceptical that they were a case of people not forming their opinion based on a systematic review of all the evidence, but instead picking the evidence that suits the view they want. I guess at the end of the day we're never going to know everything, and so all definite beliefs require a bit of faith at some point, but if many people are to be believed, the stakes are high, so it's definitely worth investigating!

I honestly agree with you about some people searching, others following without thinking too much, and others following without pretty much thinking at all. And others, we have to admit, have been taught and tainted so strongly we'd call them brainwashed.

The Bible teaches a principal of reasonable accountability. According to Romans 5.13, people are not held accountable for what they had no possibility of knowing or knowing about. In Deuteronomy 1.39, the children who were too young to make a realistic decision are not judged, but are shown mercy; their level of accountability was directly related to their moral awareness. Isa. 7.15-16 teaches the same thing: God deals differently with people based on their knowledge. So we're getting a sense of the fairness of God, and that he takes many things into consideration as he makes his perfect decisions: opportunities, intellect, motives, behavior, and environment. Any judge worth his salt gives weight to these things.

We also know that in Jn. 14.6 Jesus says, "No one comes to the Father except through me." I don't downplay that at all. C.S. Lewis wisely said: "We do know that no person can be saved except through Christ; we do not know that only those who know Him can be saved by Him."

People will be judged on the basis of what they know and what they did with it. Many people think that the existence of the world is evidence of theism, and their knowledge of having a conscience speaks to an objective morality. Some people think that their thoughts and personality, as different from their physical bodies, is an indication of a "soul". Some people feel that they see evidences of spiritual realities around them.

Nowadays, of course, the Internet and technology have changed life radically. Just about everyone has heard something about Jesus, and the Internet allows them an opportunity to investigate.

There are also degrees of punishment in hell; it's not "One Fire Fits All." People can be punished worse or less based on their lives and what they deserve. There are also many theories from thinking Christians that possibly hell is not eternal for everyone there, but there may be future opportunities for some to be reconciled to God after appropriate punishment and as they continue to make spiritual choices.

My bottom line is this: Those who turn away from God will be separated from the life of God. Though we can't be sure about the form or duration of that separation, this we can be sure of: it will be a horrible experience, and God will be fair about the form and duration of it. If you reject God, you take your chances.

I think, to address your struggle though, and there at least 5 reasons why a thoughtful person would investigate Christianity:

1. It's testable. Far different than Hinduism, Buddhism, and even Islam, Christianity relies on objective events: historical, miracles, and historical people. It can all be investigated.

2. Salvation is taught as a free gift. Christianity is the only religion where you don't have to earn your own way. That makes it worth a look, because it's not based on one's own personal efforts or achieved goodness. Phew.

3. Christianity's picture of life matches what we see: Suffering is real, people are both noble and cruel, cause and effect is real, there is order and purpose in the universe and life, evil exists, history matters, reason exists, and people have meaning.

4. Christianity, lived obediently, is transformative. Our bodies can be instruments of worship, our minds can be redeemed. Life can be changed.

5. Christianity has Jesus at the center. Buddhists claim Jesus was an enlightened teacher; Hindus teaches Jesus is an avatar of Vishnu; Muslims teach Jesus was a great prophet, even greater than Mohammad. Everybody wants to associate with Jesus. It's worth finding out why.

I think one of the main issues I struggle with with regards to Christianity (and most belief systems really) is that in my experience, while some people (like evidently yourself) investigate things to a great degree, many others will need less evidence to be convinced of the prevailing view, while others simply go along with what everyone else does without really considering any other possibilities. It's clear that more people raised as Christians (or Muslims, or Mormons, or Atheists, etc.) will grow up to retain the beliefs they were brought up with than the overall proportion of people who hold that belief (i.e., more people raised as Christians will end up Christian than people raised Muslim - sorry if that doesn't make sense). This makes me think that, for the majority of people, if not for everyone, their upbringing and culture will be a much greater factor in determining their beliefs than a systematic review of all the evidence. I suppose you could say that this is because the information/evidence that people have access to will vary depending on when/where they were brought up - if this is the case, surely it's unfair that some people are (through no choice or fault of their own) basically born into Christianity (i.e., a very Christian upbringing where hardly anyone has any other beliefs), while other people, again through no choice or fault of their own, are born into times and places where Christianity is unheard of - are they going to be eternally punished effectively because of where they were born, an event they had no control over?