Why I Want to Go to Hell

Posted on 12.30.2009

When you tell people you believe (or hope for) universal reconciliation the knee jerk reaction is that you don't believe in hell.

Well, I believe in hell. I believe in hell for two reasons.

First, humans have committed horrific evils and the notion that God's wrath isn't kindled in the face of these atrocities is ludicrous. Universalism isn't some sweet, wishy washy, lovey dovey position. Victims demand justice. Evil needs to be punished. I think it very clear that Jesus speaks about God's moral fury in very harsh eschatological language.

But the second and perhaps more shocking reason I believe in hell is because I want to go to hell. I need to go to hell.

Here's the deal. God hates sin. As do I. Hell is the biblical metaphor for this Divine fury. Consequently, I don't want to be saved from the consequences of my sin. I don't want a get out of jail free card. If I am selfish, petty, or vindictive then I want to be free from those sins, not from their consequences. As the Advent readings told us, Jesus came to set us free from sin. Not from hell. Hell is how we get freed from sin. Hell is a mutual participation between God's wrath and my own, directed at those aspects of my life that are stupid, selfish or shameful. I hate it when I act like a jerk to my children or family or anyone else. And that hatred is a participation in the wrath of God, a participation in hell. And this wrath isn't self-loathing, depressive or neurotic. It's the simple and healthy recognition that I have moral work to do in my life. And anger is a wonderfully motivating emotion. I believe in hell because I need it. We all need it. And the worst thing you could tell me is that I'd be rescued from it.

I don't want to live in eternity as I am right now. I don't want God to see Jesus when he sees me. I want God to see me, honestly, in all my sin and failure. True, God will be upset with that vision. As am I. God's grace is the fact that God won't destroy me for these failures, God will not treat me according to my sin. Jesus died for me, loved me, while I was a sinner. That much is clear. So grace isn't the removal of consequences. It is, rather, the notion that consequences aren't the issue anymore. God is on my side. He always has been. It's unconditional love. With that out of the way this means God and I can get on with the business of fighting the sin in my life. Being perfect as my heavenly Father is perfect. And God and I do this together. That's why hell is a manifestation of God's grace. Hell is a partnership, the hard and often hellish work God and I do together to help me conform to the image of Christ.

This is, obviously, a odd view of hell. But it is simply the logic of the parenting metaphors in the bible, that God is a loving Father. All parents want their children to move from extrinsic to intrinsic motives in their moral development. That is, early in life the threat of pain (e.g., a spanking) keeps me on the straight and narrow. An aversive consequence from the outside motivates me. But, as we all know, if I stay stuck with these external motivations I fail to develop into a decent person. I'll only do good for a reward and I'll only avoid vice because I might get caught. What we want from our children is for them to shift from these extrinsic motivations toward intrinsic motives. We want our children to start doing good for issues associated with identity, character, and joy. We want them to good because they want to, not because they have to.

In my comments about hell above I'm making a similar argument. As long as hell remains an extrinsic motivator, an external consequence, then our moral development remains stagnant. The same goes for heaven. And we all know this. Trying to be good to "go to heaven" always strikes self-reflective people as ridiculous.

In short, we need to move hell from the extrinsic to the intrinsic. I shouldn't fear hell like a child fears a spanking. Rather, as I spiritually grow I internalize hell, I participate in the wrath of God, living by its logic. Further, as a child grows morally his goal isn't to escape punishment but to face the consequences of his choices courageously and with integrity. And, yes, if you've ever faced up to the messes you've made in life, that experience is hell. In AA it's called the 12 Steps.

Is this works-based righteousness? No. I can't do it myself. I need grace. I need hell.

Praise be to God.

This entry was posted by Richard Beck. Bookmark the permalink.

47 thoughts on “Why I Want to Go to Hell”

  2. I have never read a distinction between being free from sin (being perfected) and being free from the consequences of sin (hell) before. That thought, in and of itself, is powerful and really illuminating.

    This is at least the second time I have read something by you where I thought: "yes, that's true, I have experienced that/know that to be true before but I have never heard it/read it articulated before."
    Thx!
    -Deb

  3. One of the seeming paradoxes of the New Testament is that it seems to contain both of these messages:
    - God judges us according to our works
    - God saves us according to his grace

    But what if these are just two sides of the same coin? What if he can and MUST do both? How do things change when we stop playing these ideas off of each other and instead see them as facets of a single act of divine love? That thought (which isn't original with me by any stretch) more than any other has transformed my perspective of grace and condemnation during the last few years.

  5. People are responsible for 'hells", this is true. But, when agendas are put on the back of truth-telling and moral development, then it becomes disgusting. Such was the case with the Catholic Church's sale of indulgences during Luther's day.

    You speak in a religious language what nations and diplomats seek to do everyday, reconcile, or bring peace to the world.

    What is so disgusting is using religious language at all. Be frank about political agendas, don't spiritualize them. Otherwise, the ones touting the need to "repent" are themselves in need of repentence.

  6. I was just trying to have this very conversation with a friend who didn't see how Universalism could encompass justice the other day. The way you say things is just so perfect though. I so want to go to hell. See you there.

  7. Yes, most view Univeralism as some sort of cosmic "getting away with it". On the contrary, as you indicate, it is rather the acknowledgement that God is on our side... as any good father would be. His discipline is instructional and redemptive, instead of vindictive... as with any good father. We are not to fear his judgement, but to welcome it... the correcting discipline of a father who is developing us into responsible sons and daughters.

  8. I have no problem with a pedagogical God, raising and instructing us like a good parent. I have no problem with a "refiner's fire" helping in productive ways to cleanse me and perfect me. But I don't think these things can be conflated with Hell.

    First of all, I don't think Hell is really "the Biblical metaphor for divine fury". Hell is a doctrine, constructed no doubt with Biblical support, but there is no clear and singular "hell" in the Bible. There are a variety of words which mean different things. The Bible doesn't give us a clear picture of the afterlife, but the doctrine of Hell as the church has usually expressed it is crystal clear: Hell is a destination for the reprobate after death.

    The doctrine of Hell isn't helpful and is better jettisoned because it promotes a picture of God which is incorrect - an unjust torturer tyrant. It promotes an anthropology which is incorrect - disembodied eternal souls. It promotes laughably incorrect metaphysics - a supernatural realm under the earth where all the dead reside?

    Hell is a bad idea. But the Bible clearly does talk about God's wrath and it uses a lot of different metaphors, and some of those metaphors when expressed through a loving petagogic lens can be fruitfully put to the purpose you are describing here. Some suffering in this life is educational. Perhaps the same is true after death. Who knows?

    However, not all suffering in this life is educational and I strongly resist the temptation to say that all bad stuff comes from God as a lesson to sinful humans. That way lies crazy talk. God sent Katrina to punish New Orleans for Mardi Gras don't you know?

    It is true, for example, in the 12 steps, that the process of redemption involves some suffering. But it is not true that an alcoholic inflicting suffering on themself and their family absent the move toward redemption (ie: outside the 12 steps/falling off the wagon) is being instructed in holiness. The first kind of suffering is part of sanctification. The second kind, the meaningless kind of suffering, is what we usually mean by Hell. From Hell we just need to be rescued.

    I think the Orthodox get it right in their icons of Jesus rising from the grave - taking Adam and Eve out of Hell. Hell is not a productive place. Hell is genocide in the Sudan. Hell is heroine addiction. Hell is the cycle of domestic violence. People in Hell need a savior, not a teacher. People on the other side of Hell can, with time, benefit from a teacher, but not while they're in it.

  9. Hell is not just natural disaster and genocide, but also the jealousy of Saul, which sent David into a type of hell of escape....

    All of us need to be attuned to our weaknesses, but one person's weakness is another's strength. We must not generalize, but allow enough roon for the individuals to come to tersm with their own passion and convictions, as to the "good", and what "virtue" may look like. Otherwise, we tyrannize because of our own focus.

  10. Angie,

    I confess I don't see what either of your comments thus far have had to do with Dr. Beck's post, but in response to your allusion to Saul & David... sure if David's exile because of Saul was a kind of Hell then read his psalms - he prays for deliverance, not insight. My point remains the same.

  11. Like Mark Weathers says, I'll need to process this further as well, but what stands out for me is that no one needs God, Devil;, Heaven or Hell to want to do good for their fellow man. One simply needs empathy and drive. Also I personally find the 12 steps program encourages people to not take a personal responsibility for their actions in becoming an addict when they are having to say "Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity." Furthered by having God remove their defects as opposed to empowering the individual with having changed themselves through their own hard work and effort.

  12. Richard,

    I'm a little confused about what you actually think. Do you believe that you will go to a post-mortem hell for a little while before you are freed from your sins (not just the consequences of those sins)? Or are you equating the human experience of hell with God's disciplinary work in you, here and now? Different parts of your post point to both these interpretations. Example:

    'Hell is a partnership, the hard and often hellish work God and I do together to help me conform to the image of Christ.'

    This could be taken in the both the ways that I've mentioned above, and I think both interpretations have their issues. If you believe that you, as a sinner, will endure some amount of post-mortem 'refinement' in hell before being redeemed, then presumably everybody will do the same, and I would have questions as to what room is left for Christ's redeeming sacrifice. If you are equating hell with the knowledge that you fall awfully, horribly short of God's standards, and with the process of being disciplined by God in the present, then I would be unsure as to whether you actually do believe in 'hell'.

    Am loving your blog by the way.

  13. A few clarifications for anyone puzzled by the post.

    The post is less an argument than an imaginative exercise, an attempt to knock some well wore associations about hell out of a deep rut in an effort to provoke thought about those associations and assumptions.

    Here are a couple of things I'm thinking through in the post:

    1) Most conversations about hell (and heaven) boil down to issues of consequence. The claim is that you need to believe in Jesus so you don't "go to hell." This focus on hell-as-consequence,from moral development perspective, has a host of problems. We know this when we talk of heaven. Any mature Christian knows that a reward-based notion of salvation ("I get to go to heaven") is a pretty thin and shallow view. Heaven needs to become about character formation rather than about getting a reward. And if that is true for heaven then would not that same logic hold for hell?

    2) The post floats the following idea: If everything God does is an act of grace and love then even God's wrath is an act of love. Parents already know this.

    3) There is something wrong, from a moral standpoint, about how classical views of justification remove the consequences of sin but leave sin intact. I'm saved from hell but I am still a jerk. But what if the goal of salvation was less about hell and more about saving me from being a jerk? What if we made sin the focus on salvation? What if we focus on causes rather than effects?

    4) I'm just as angry as God is about the sin in my life. We are completely on the same page. In short, rather than fearing God's wrath I welcome it, I participate with it. I don't hide from God's wrath. I want to move into it. Why? Because I'm just as wrathful. The wrath is a shared partnership. If God is wrathful with you and you move away or hide then that's a problem. You become fearful and neurotic.

    5) I'm pushing against the notion of imputed righteousness. I want God to see me, not Jesus. If God sees Jesus then am I really known? Wouldn't it just be a kind of shell game, sneaking me into heaven? And would Jesus forever act as a screen, fogging up God's vision when he looks at me? But if God sees me honestly and transparently, as I think he must, then he will know that I still have sin in my heart when I die. So how are we going to deal with that sin in heaven? Pretend it's not there? Or continue working on it? I think I'll continue to work on it. And that notion, at root, is the universalist vision.

  16. I love the concept of wrath as defined by Wayne Jacobsen: "the full weight of God’s anger coming against that which would destroy the object of His affection," namely sin. I like the concept the desert fathers had of sin as being "bad thinking" rather than simply the evidences of the bad thinking.

    Great post. I am very much in agreement with you. I think there are all sorts of hells. I've been in one for some sort or another for the past 10 *(#^T#! years. Must be an awful lot of sin that needs refining out of me :)

  17. One has to define ones' agenda, via God and "sin" to come up with the "goal" of sinlessness, or perfection, or "moral improvement'. That, I find a little disturbing.

    Does one project their own images of sin, God and goal, or does one look to another authority to do that for them? That is the stick in the mud for me...

    If the authority is the Church then the Church has the authority to determine what is beneficial for me and discipline me, but does the Church have an agenda? Yes, and THAT is the problem.

    If the Church is doing what psychologists do anyway, then why the Church? And if they have other agenda about a life, then that intrudes upon a person'a choice, value and place in the world, which is immoral, itself. And instead of being honest and direct about the agenda, they use "god" as the bomb-shell to manipulate.

    If the authority is Scripture, then, one has to ask how one goes about interpreting the texts, as there are as many diverse viewpoints about what the text may mean, even in areas where the Church agrees (communion, baptism, marriage, membership, etc.). And it is all based upon someone's imaginative understanding of the transcendant...

    Responsibility must be owned by the individual apart from authority, if one believes in a free society. Tyranny is borne on the heels of authoritative governments, authorities, and views. Diversity of opinion, view, conviction, value, and commitment terrorize those that like authority, because of their own authoritative personalities.

  18. I think Aric Clark's perspective basically sums up mine. I know Richard means this passage a little more experimentally and metaphorically than literally but I don't see that "Hell" is necessary or desirable any more than I see physical or emotional *punishment* as the best way to move my child from "extrinsic to intrinsic" morality. Quite the opposite. Hell and punishment are definitionally extrinsic forms of conscience formation, and darned bad ones if current parenting books and personal experience is any example.

    I don't lead my children through the threat of punishment but rather through a (proto buddhist? kinda socratic?) method of explanation, exploration, discussion, argument, and reflection on the role of common humanity in everyday interactions. I could, of course, shut them in a closet and shriek instructions at them, or force them to memorize a strict set of rules and beat them when they can't figure out how to apply them to a specific set of circumstances. But I don't find that very helpful. If there is a god, I doubt he does either.

    Of course there's evil and evil acts in the world--its seems to me to trivialize that evil by even comparing it to momentary lapses in good judgement, or tiny selfishneses (like raising your voice to your children, or pocketing an extra piece of candy without sharing). But either you believe that each of those sinning/evil souls can be brought to better understanding or you don't. Why is your god so limited that all he can do is shriek and lock those souls in a closet? He neither intervenes when the sin is committed (staying the hand of the mass murderer?) and is helpless to educate the sinner through dialogue, confrontation, explication, and love? That seems very unparental as well as very tiny of this god. I don't believe in the existence of god, but I doubt if this singular life/singular hell of christianity can encompass any god worth believing in.

    aimai

  19. Richard,

    I'd like to address your points.

    1) Most conversations about hell (and heaven) boil down to issues of consequence. The claim is that you need to believe in Jesus so you don't "go to hell." This focus on hell-as-consequence,from moral development perspective, has a host of problems. We know this when we talk of heaven. Any mature Christian knows that a reward-based notion of salvation ("I get to go to heaven") is a pretty thin and shallow view. Heaven needs to become about character formation rather than about getting a reward. And if that is true for heaven then would not that same logic hold for hell?

    I don't think the Bible supports Heaven/Hell as reward/punishment in the afterlife. I think orthodox Christianity is about heaven coming to earth and so heaven isn't about character formation its about world-changing. The same is true of hell in reverse. Hell is on earth now, but being defeated and banished by Christ.

    2) The post floats the following idea: If everything God does is an act of grace and love then even God's wrath is an act of love. Parents already know this.

    Agreed, but then what God's "wrath" looks like is nothing like Hell. Because there is no parental value in torture. If you are looking to redefine Hell to such a point that it no longer looks like hell, but rather a parental mode of instruction then what metaphor do we use for truly horrific evil and suffering?

    3) There is something wrong, from a moral standpoint, about how classical views of justification remove the consequences of sin but leave sin intact. I'm saved from hell but I am still a jerk. But what if the goal of salvation was less about hell and more about saving me from being a jerk? What if we made sin the focus on salvation? What if we focus on causes rather than effects?

    I would say the Gospel doesn't have anything to do with being saved from hell. Rather Jesus saves us from death (and the fear of it) so that we won't go about creating hell on earth anymore, but can start working with him to bring heaven to earth. So, sure, Jesus is trying to save you from being a jerk, but Hell is not the way to do that. Hell is torture. Torture doesn't "correct" criminals it creates demons.

    To be continued...

  20. 4) I'm just as angry as God is about the sin in my life. We are completely on the same page. In short, rather than fearing God's wrath I welcome it, I participate with it. I don't hide from God's wrath. I want to move into it. Why? Because I'm just as wrathful. The wrath is a shared partnership. If God is wrathful with you and you move away or hide then that's a problem. You become fearful and neurotic.

    Agreed, but what does God's wrath look like? Certainly not Hell. I am a parent. I have boundaries and rules and I punish my children from time to time when they break those rules. But in no way shape or form does that even approximate what "hell" is. Or if you want to say that this is what "hell" is, then what do we say about kids stuck in abusive households? You'll end up taking a metaphor we use to describe really horrible suffering and applying it to mild, mundane discomfort leaving us nothing to use for the actually bad stuff.

    5) I'm pushing against the notion of imputed righteousness. I want God to see me, not Jesus. If God sees Jesus then am I really known? Wouldn't it just be a kind of shell game, sneaking me into heaven? And would Jesus forever act as a screen, fogging up God's vision when he looks at me? But if God sees me honestly and transparently, as I think he must, then he will know that I still have sin in my heart when I die. So how are we going to deal with that sin in heaven? Pretend it's not there? Or continue working on it? I think I'll continue to work on it. And that notion, at root, is the universalist vision.

    I feel you on this one. "Imputed righteousness" is a strange old Hebrew idea. But I think that it may be you are missing a key component which is identification with the victim, the "suffering servant". That is you think of yourself as a separate entity from Jesus. Jesus was good. You are not. If Jesus' righteousness is imputed to you then it is a kind of cheat. I believe the point of a "sacrificial" atonement is that Jesus isn't actually separate from you in the way you imagine. In an important way he is you - the you which God created and intended. Being a Christian is about being baptised into Christ, grafted into Christ, subsumed into Christ to such an extent that you suffer with those who are victims as Christ was a victim. You don't get out of being crucified, you ARE crucified with Christ. So that you will also rise with him. God's action on Good Friday and Easter is about incorporating you into the interior life of the trinity such that you are and will be "righteous" by participation. The Orthodox call it theosis, mystics have called it union with God, Paul used the metaphor of adoption. Identification is what is behind imputed righteousness. It is what Jesus is on about in his pastoral prayer in John with his "that you may be one as I and my father are one" stuff. It is what the ministry of reconciliation is about which is the work of the church helping to establish God's kingdom on Earth. It is eternal life - life expanded infinitely through all the living. It is the opposite of Hell, which is the domain of death. Hell is what identification with Christ defeats.

    Sorry for the long comments.

  21. Aric,
    I think you and I are after something similar. What I'm trying to do in this post is show some of the problems associated with "traditional" views of hell as well as the view of God sitting behind those views. I think we share these concerns.

    But I take your point about too closely aligning pain with education and the potential abuses and shortcomings of that line of thinking.

    I'm fully on board with the Orthodox view of hell. Salvation is more about rescue from an ontological condition (being "in Adam", slaves to Sin and Death) than about avoiding hellfire and "going to heaven" on Judgment Day.

  22. Richard - exactly what do you mean when you say you are "fully on board with the Orthodox view of hell"? I really enjoyed your enitial post and will probably (knowing me) spend the day thinking on it. However, I'm still curious what you think hell is? In my mind it is an awful place of eternal suffering with no escape soooo are you saying there is more to it than that or what exactly? Kim

  23. Although I'm not Richard, I'm pretty sure that when he capitalized Orthodox, he was referring to the Eastern tradition of Christianity (which encompasses its birthplace and all but one of the ancient Sees).

    Within that tradition, Hell is not a place and those in Hell do not experience anything different from God than those in Heaven. God is love and his love is a consuming fire. When all creation is filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord (Habakkuk and Isaiah 11) that already fills it (Isaiah 6), the question turns on man, not on God.

    Will you experience the fire of his love as warmth and comfort? Through his grace, which is to say himself, which he gives freely to all through his Son, have you been shaped, formed, and recreated as a true human being, an icon of God?

    Or have you chosen to shape yourself in other ways? Have you sought nonexistence? Have you turned and formed yourself so that you refuse God's love and now experience that unveiled love as consuming fire and torment?

    God will not force you to love him. For then it would not be love at all as 1 Cor. 13 so beautifully outlines. But if you will not love him and his love unveiled permeates all reality, what torment that will be.

    It's within that context that you have a minority view (most notably St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Isaac the Syrian, but others as well) which finds it hard to believe that a human heart could be so twisted and so cold and so deformed that it could never be warmed by the unyielding love of God. It is, in part, a reaction by those who have been utterly overwhelmed by the merest glimpse of that love.

    I tend to join them, myself. I am Christian because of that love.

    I have to admit I'm bemused by those who would consider a place 'heaven' even as they knew that in the middle of it was a concentration camp where people they have loved were being tortured. And yet that seems to be the flavor of many modern expressions of the idea of hell. I think I'll stick with the tradition of the ancient church on this one. (Curiously, or perhaps less so since I read many of the ancient writers, I believed this long before I knew it was the specific theology of what we call the Orthodox Church today.)

  24. Scott - Thank you so much for your answer. I was not even aware of such theology to be honest. I guess you would say I'm only familiar with Western theology. I'm only just exploring the "Orthodox Church" - to be honest I always thought what I was familiar with were the "Orthodox" teachings. What you have shared has lifted a weight from my heart. I will be going back to reread Richards post and your answer again. Thank you. Kim

  26. Wow, so much for my mushy theological mumbo jumbo about the universality of salvation......... Just kidding, but seriously, this is profound. So, do you think hell is forever, or just as consequences eventually end, and a lesson is learned. After one has served the consequences, will there be reconciliation?

  28. show me hell i'll show you mankind on earth . The devil created man in his own image.

  29. We're all going to hell anyway, whether we want to or not. You will not be saved by Christ Jesus.

  31. Dear Sir I agree with your thoughts, but I have another reason for going to hell.

    I want to go to hell because I am drawn to the place I am attracted to it. I feel a deep yearning to go there.
    I feel like its my home. My hearts desire to go to hell.

    Do I believe in the pain and tortures of hell? Sure I do, but that doesnt influence my decison. I just really feel like hell is my home.

    perhaps we can chat sometime. ccchris@live.com

  32. I've often thought that the worse thing that God could do to me was the best thing He could do for me. I love this. Yes that's what I want to be free from sin, not hell.

  33. I agree with you on this topic. I want to go to hell because I need to be punished for the ones i've wronged. I have done some terrible things that i can never forgive myself for. And that is why,everyday, i pray for god to send me to the most terrifying place you could imagine. And if he doesn't do it, then i'll never forgive him for it. I'll just stay mad at him till he does.

  34. Irrational thought processes are best seen through the rantings of those obsessed with politics or religion. You must be a complete whack job to invest that much energy in the post above, but hey, others just like you will bah like sheep when they're done reading it. Nice "AA" reference by the way...spoken like one of the destructive alcoholics your gracious god created.

  35. Dude, this person's thoughts about hell and going there are completely different from ANY follower of the Abrahamic religions I've ever known. How can you call them a sheep?
    This is kind of ironic, actually, since almost all atheists think of religious people as "sheep" and condemn religion without examination nearly universally, thereby behaving much like sheep themselves...

  36. Hey man, I like your attitude about hell. Very noble. This world could use a few more good people like you and that's coming from an atheist. I believe there's some sort of afterlife that we all choose to some extent, just no gods or angels and such, but I do sometimes have my doubts that there isn't a Creator. Guess I'll find out. :)

  37. Well first of all let me stop you on the part where you say "we all need it". listen, hell wasn't even made for us to begin with, it was for demons are the devil and ish so don't say we "need it", for how can we "need" something that wasn't made for us. So no you DO NOT need hell, and just think about this; in the bible when Jesus was casting out demons, the demons begged Jesus not to cast them into the fiery pit. If demons don't want to go their (who already know what it's like) let me say that again, if DEMONS don't want to enter the fiery pit then why in saint John's baptist church would you want to? Imagine the hottest flame known to man, that can not even compare to the flame lieth there in the spiritual world. The place you desire to go to when you die can not be comprehended by the human mind I really don't even think you know what your saying even when you say the word. Look I understand you have knowledge that Jesus died for you but do you understand he doesn't want you to go there?!!? That is the whole point in him coming down earth to save people like me and you from that place and he does not want you to even think such a thought to that be your final desired destination!!! The whole purpose of God creating you was NOT, i repeat NOT to punish you, but to test you and see if you would turn back to him and seek his face so that you may inherit eternal life. Don't think life serves just for people to mess up so that they can pay for their sins! Keep praying and please please lose that desire for it shall be the end of you! Ill pray for you as well.

  38. should you really be spanking your children to keep them in line? or punish them some other way? What does the Bible really say about this?

    Nowhere does it say that it is okay to hit your children. It is
    definitely encouraged to parent, develop, and train your children in the
    ways that they should go to succeed in life, and this often takes the
    form of a physical response to bad choices. However, I don’t think
    anyone could say that a spanking constitutes physical abuse so long as
    it is performed IN LOVE and without overstepping the bounds into
    beating. I was spanked by my parents, even with a switch or two, but it
    never was more than 2 or 3 “swats” on the butt. I was never slapped,
    hit, punched, or anything else. And my parents always made a point of
    telling me why I was being punished and coming back later to encourage
    me and let me know that everything was okay. I think I had a -great-
    upbringing.

    “Spare the rod, spoil the child” is taken out of context of the day.
    This was a proverb, written by Solomon, King of Israel. What did a rod
    mean to him? It was one of two things: a king’s rod or a shepherd’s rod.

    A king’s rod is an implement of his royalty. It was a sign of
    kingship, authority, and leadership. It was not a physical beating tool.

    A shepherd’s rod was a goad. It was what he used to guide the sheep
    back into formation. Sometimes, he would have to poke the sheep so that
    it physically hurt, but sheep are pretty dumb and need the extra
    incentive to go straight sometimes. He also used the rod to defend the
    sheep against invaders and animals.

    In either case, the rod was not a beating tool, but an instrument of
    teaching, authority, defense, and (ultimately) love. If you live as a
    parent without ever instructing or punishing them for inadequate
    behavior, how can you expect them to do the right thing on their own?
    You can’t, and that’s what this verse is trying to portray.

    But people, narrow-minded, viewing only the “current” interpretation,
    have taken this verse out of context and distorted it to mean that
    children should be silent unless spoken to, obedient to the end of their
    lives, cowering in fear of their parents as demi-gods, for all intents
    and purposes slaves. That is a ridiculous distortion of the love that a
    parent should have for a child, and one that was portrayed by Solomon in
    the way(s) he knew best to describe it.

    Blame the English language or the stupidity of man, but either way,
    there is no place in the Bible where it is okay to hit your kids.”

  39. i found this quote online. I was spanked too but i never knew why, mostly because my parents thought we needed to be spanked.

  40. " It was not a physical beating tool."

    Oh, yeah? Psalm 2:8-9 disagrees with you.

    8 Ask me,

    and I will make the nations your inheritance,

    the ends of the earth your possession.

    9 You will break them with a rod of iron ;

    you will dash them to pieces like pottery.”

    If a rod is not a beating tool, then how can you smash pottery with it?

    Proverbs 23:13-15 also supports the interpretation of "spare the rod, spoil the child" to mean beating the child into obedience.

    "Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you strike him with a rod, he will not die. If you strike him with the rod, you will save his soul from Sheol. My son, if your heart is wise, my heart too will be glad."

    We also have Proverbs 22:15

    "Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him."

    Proverbs 13:24

    "Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him."

    Proverbs 29:15

    "The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left to himself brings shame to his mother."

    Proverbs 20:30

    "Blows that wound cleanse away evil; strokes make clean the innermost parts."



    So yes, the Bible DOES say that beating a child as a form of discipline is not only acceptable, but MANDATORY.

  41. Well, that was an interesting read. Unfortunately, like most fan fiction on the Net, it has little basis in its source material (i.e., the Bible in this case).

  43. Hell has been portrayed incorrectly. Hell means grave and everyone goes there and rests when they die until Judgement Day. Then you either go to Heaven or the Lake of Fire where your soul is DESTROYED, their is NO eternal torture.

    Anyway, I have no desire to go to Heaven. Fuck that. I'd rather not list the reasons, but fuck it.

  44. I actually think that was quite mature of you and admirable... Exactly the reason I believe a person thinking like this should in fact go to Heaven!!! If you said you hadn't sinned then you'd be like God or BE God/Jesus. Your humbling yourself and I'm impressed. "for all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory if God" Have you considered

  47. After about one nanosecond in Hell, Mr Beck would change his theology.

Leave a Reply