No one takes joy in the doctrine of hell, not even God. Jesus said his Father doesn’t want any children to perish (Matt. 18:14). He wants all to repent and find themselves in him (2 Pet. 3:9). But people still have a free will. They can choose not to repent and follow God. And Scripture is clear about the eternal consequence of that decision—despite its ugliness and terror. Based on that same free will, people can choose to reject the doctrine of hell. The problem is twofold. One is the ripple effect. The other is that many Christians have lost all sense of authority beyond the self, and that’s precisely where they’ve given way to secular culture, which prioritizes self above all else.
Beliefs ripple. But we make a concerted effort to ignore that. Especially within the system of Christian faith, people can be tempted to pick and choose which doctrines they are “okay with” and which ones they leave behind. The problem lies in the ripples. Christians don’t always see how disbelief in one thing affects belief in another. In this article, I want to use disbelief in the existence of hell as an example. Universalism has made a comeback, especially since the work of people like Rob Bell. Maybe the initial conservative horror at what he said in Love Wins has worn off after a decade. Maybe some Christians are favoring moral practicality or inner feelings over the authority of God’s Word. I don’t know.
But what I set out below leads to a troubling conclusion: as a Christian, if you don’t believe in hell, there’s a very good chance you’re lost and having a hard time identifying both who God is and who you are. And you may be drifting towards that ever-growing “religious-nones” category.
Rippling Doctrines
In a recent podcast series, Kevin DeYoung and David Briones talked about liberal Christianity of the early 20th century and its relation to what’s commonly called “progressive Christianity” today. DeYoung made a passing observation that doesn’t get near enough attention. In referring to the doctrine of hell as a staple of orthodox Christian faith, he noted how rejecting that doctrine requires that you redefine every other doctrine, too. This is what we might call the ripple effect of belief. And if people knew about this, I don’t know that they’d be as quick to dismiss a biblical doctrine that has guided and steered the faith of the church for over two thousand years.
Here’s what the ripple effect looks like. If there’s no hell, then you have to revisit the doctrine of sin, since not repenting of sin is what lands people in hell (Matt. 7:23; 25:41; Mark 9:43; 2 Thess. 1:9). But then you have to look at the doctrine of Christ, since Christ came to “save” the world from sin (Matt. 1:21; John 1:29; Acts 2:38; Rom. 3:23; 5:8; 6:23; 1 John 1:7; 2:2). And if sin doesn’t actually put anyone in hell, because hell doesn’t exist, then why did Christ come? What did we need saving from if not sin? Or—dare you think it—did we even need saving.
The ripples keep coming. If we redefine Christ’s mission, and Christ is the Son of God, then we have to redefine our doctrine of God, especially the notion of God’s holiness. Who is this God that sent himself to a humanity that didn’t need saving from a hell that doesn’t exist? If holiness isn’t an attribute of God, then what can we say about who God is? And if we’re leaving behind Scripture as the authority on who God is, do we simply associate God with anything that we feel is loving, beautiful, or mysterious?
And lest you thought this was all speculation about supernatural ideas, we also have to revisit the doctrine of man, of who we are. If we were formerly understood as creatures made in God’s image (Gen. 1:27), but we no longer have a clear understanding of who God is in terms of holiness, then who are we? What makes a human a human? As Christians, we can’t answer that question without an understanding of who God is. The doctrines of God and man are inextricably linked; whatever you believe about one has direct implications for the other. That is, if you’re still claiming to be a Christian. (More on that in a moment).
The ripple effect should be evident now.