The Facebook fan page will probably also vanish in the near future.

If you want to keep following me, you can find me on Twitter.

I might continue posting (at some point in the future) on www.DrewCosten.com, so feel free to bookmark that site as well.

Thanks to all my readers over the years. It’s been an interesting ride.

For one thing, a lot of people find them easier on the eyes (I actually don’t, but I might be unusual ). Also, many people just enjoy the feeling of holding a physical book in their hands over an eReading device such as a Kindle, a Kobo, or even an iPad. Finally, an actual book is easier to lend to a friend who might be curious about why you believe what you do about your unorthodox theological views.

With that in mind, I’m listing a number of excellent books on the topic of hell that you can’t go wrong on having available in your personal library.

The Inescapable Love of God by Thomas Talbott

This is a classic among Christian Universalists, possibly responsible for helping more Christians understand the truth about how God’s love will inevitably triumph in the end than any other book on the topic. Part autobiography, part theology, if you know someone new to the topic of Universal Reconciliation, this is the book for them to read.

The Evangelical Universalist by Gregory MacDonald

Gregory MacDonald (a pseudonym) first breaks down the problems with the doctrine of Everlasting Torment, then gives a solid biblical defence of the doctrine of Universal Reconciliation. The author demonstrates that it is indeed possible to be an Evangelical yet still hold to Universalism.

Hope Beyond Hell by Gerard Beauchemin

I’m realizing that these descriptions will sound a little repetitive, since they’re all very similar in what they teach. Still, Gerard makes a compelling theological case for the doctrine that everybody will eventually be saved.

The One Purpose of God: an Answer to the Doctrine of Eternal Punishment by Jan Bonda

Jan breaks down the apostle Paul’s epistle to the Romans to prove that neither Paul nor the prophets to whom he appeals show any trace of supporting the doctrine of everlasting torment in hell. Instead, he concludes that they reveal a God who not only wants to save all people, but a God who won’t rest until that goal has been achieved.

Martin Zender Goes to Hell: A Critical Look at an Un-Criticized Doctrine by Martin Zender

Martin is an unusual theologian, combining humour, comics, and strong biblical analysis to the topic of hell. Martin himself has been to hell (lots of people have, and some have even brought back photos to prove it), making him an ideal person to discuss the subject. As this book is shorter than most, it’s perfect for lending to friends who don’t want to read a long, in-depth theological tome on the subject.

If Grace is True: Why God Will Save Every Person by Philip Gulley & James Mulholland

The previous books were all written with the concept of biblical inerrancy in mind. This book, however, was written more from a philosophical perspective. It might not convince somebody who holds strongly to the idea biblical inerrancy, but it is still extremely well written and worth reading.

I’ll recommend other heretical books on other topics in the future, but that’s a good place to start. If you have any recommendations of your own, please add them to the comments section below.

The best source of morality generally can’t be found in a church. Likewise, you won’t learn how to be the best person you can be in the Bible.

No, the best way to discover how to be a truly ethical person is in a completely different place. It’s in the science fiction section of your local video and book stores.

If you’re basing your morals on what you’re taught on Sunday morning, odds are high that you’re going to have to wade through a lot of sexism, homophobia and erotophobia, not to mention a lot of conservative greed. If you’re reading the Bible literally and hope to find good advice, you’re going to have to learn to distinguish between helpful ideas such as loving your neighbours and harmful doctrines that tell us women are second class citizens, that it’s okay to invade other nations and kill people with different religions, and that slavery is a perfectly acceptable way to run a household.

If you turn to Star Trek instead, you’ll find that exploring new places is desirable, but that perhaps you should think twice before interfering in local affairs, and that you definitely shouldn’t steal other people’s land. You’ll learn to respect people who look, act and speak differently than you. You’ll discover that working together is more productive than always fighting over riches and resources. And you’ll see that going out of your way to help those in need, even if it increases the time you spend on your voyage, might just be the right thing to do. Also, we probably shouldn’t allow all the whales to go extinct if we want to survive as a species.

Growing up, what I learned from church was that people with different beliefs were dangerous and that new concepts would lead us astray. Well, it’s true, new ideas might lead you in a different direction than the way your religious leaders would prefer you go, but those new paths might very well be preferable, and far more ethical, than the ways they want you to live.

There’s nothing wrong with studying Scripture to find positive teachings, but one should first be firmly grounded in a positive form of morality, one that respects varying opinions, and isn’t calling for discrimination against people because they might have different sexual preferences than you do, otherwise you won’t be able to tell the good from the bad and might think harmful dogmas are actually helpful.

Start with the various Star Trek series and films but don’t stop there. Dig deeper by watching Babylon 5, Stargate, Firefly, and even Battlestar Galactica. Once you’ve finished these series you’ll not only have a good grounding in what’s actually in the best interest of both you and those around you, you’ll also know how to appreciate shades of grey and situational ethics. Then, and only then, you might just be ready to start trying to interpret Scripture in positive ways.

Just a warning for those who aren’t familiar with Martin’s trademark odd-ball humour, the little introduction he gives at the beginning will seem a little over the top, but his brief presentation is worth it.

If you’re interested, you can subscribe to Martin’s weekly reports (he alternates between a video and a newsletter every other week) at www.martinzender.com.

Okay, that might only apply to religious folk who do tithe or give offerings to religious organizations, but that’s still a fair number of people in the world (if you don’t fit into that category, be glad. You’re already saving that money).

But aren’t Christians supposed to tithe? In a word? No!

The tithe was meant solely for Jews under the Old Testament law, not for Christians who have been freed from the law. If, for some reason, you really want to put yourself into slavery to the Old Testament law then, by all means, have fun. But not only is it not necessary, if you want to follow any of it then you’re obligated to follow the whole thing (that means no more bacon or shrimp or clothes with mixed fabrics or washing your car on Saturday).

A true biblical tithe, by the way, is actually in the form of food or livestock, and only goes to the Levite priests. Unless your pastor is a Levite who performs temple sacrifices, he has no biblical basis for demanding it (but if he does demand it, bring him a tenth of your goats or your grain and his response will show you just how biblical he really is).

There’s absolutely nothing in the New Testament about Christians having to give a tenth of their money to their religious leaders or organizations (and, as an aside, any pastor who tells you to tithe more than 10% is an outright fraud, as the word tithe literally means “a tenth.” It’s no more possible to tithe higher or lower than 10% than it is to give more or less than half of something and still call it 50%). What did happen in the New Testament is people gave financial gifts to those in financial need. In fact, Jesus said that if you want to enter the Kingdom you have to give food to the hungry and drink to the thirsty and clothing to the poor. He didn’t, however, say to support religious leaders who simply want to live off your hard-earned money.

So be generous, but give your money to people who actually need it. Donate to worthwhile charities that actually help those in need, not to organizations that will use the money to maintain useless church buildings and to pay the salaries of pastors who should be put out of business so they will be forced to stop the lies they preach every week. And if you still have left over money you feel you need to give away, feel free to donate it to me. At least I’ll use it to help free minds rather than enslave them.

This post was just a summary of the topic, and I realize I haven’t provided any biblical texts to back up what I said, but I wanted to keep it brief so that you’ll have time to go read the brilliant article The Tithe is Illegal by Gary Amirault where you’ll find all the biblical proof you need.

It’s said that Tony Campolo would often begin speeches with the previous quote, and it’s a great example of how certain people get offended by the wrong things.

People all over the world, even the western world, are being persecuted solely on the basis of who they happen to be sexually attracted to. Much of the time this persecution is perpetuated by those claiming to follow Christ. People in the US are going into debt because they had the gall to get sick or be injured and require medical care, and many of the people insisting this debt should continue to be forced upon them are also Christians. Children and adults alike are going hungry all over the world, even in America, while there’s more than enough food in the world to feed every single one of them. Many women, often while they’re still just children, are forced to be sex slaves, even here in the west. People are arrested and thrown into prison every day for the crime of ingesting (or even simply possessing) a plant that God created, while actually harmful drugs are allowed to be created by greedy companies and sold to us in order to make these rich men even richer. And politicians continue to create unjust and harmful laws all over the world, again, even here in the west; and what’s worse, a large majority of people often actually support these laws because they think their deity will bless them if these rules are created and obeyed.

Most of us have become desensitized to these tragic everyday realities. Honestly, most of us really just don’t care (if we cared we’d do something about it). Yet, while these horrible things don’t phase most Christians anymore, some still get terribly offended when they hear certain sounds or read specific combinations of letters. And, let’s be honest, that’s all swearing or profanity really is.

I’m not going to exegete all the passages in the Bible about language, though I will quickly point out that saying “oh my God” isn’t taking the Lord’s name in vain since “God” isn’t even close to being the Lord’s name in Scripture. Instead I’ll point out the hypocrisy, not to mention haughtiness, of having trouble with profanity.

All profanity means is “outside the temple,” ie., anything that isn’t sacred. I won’t get into the problems with the secular/sacred dualism most Christians hold to, but technically anything non-religious is “profane,” not just certain words. However, pretending for a moment that certain words are more profane than others, the idea that words can be bad in the first place quickly becomes comical when you begin to deconstruct the idea.

Let’s break it down. Is it the particular combination of letters, or the specific sound the word makes when spoken, that makes a word wrong to use? It’s obviously ridiculous to think so, otherwise the words “damn,” “hell,” and “ass” shouldn’t be read in the KJV Bible, or said in a homily, as they’d be just as inherently bad in Scripture or sermon as when spoken in everyday parlance.

Is it the meaning behind the word? If so, simply saying “sexual intercourse” (or “rats” or “ouch” any other number of euphemisms) would be just as bad as saying “fuck;” and “crap” or “faeces” would be just as bad as saying “shit.”

Is it the intent behind the words? For instance, is it okay to say fuck if you’re referring to sex, or just using it as a playful adjective, but wrong to use in anger against another person? I’m okay with this, but only as much as I am with the idea that we shouldn’t be saying anything with the intention of hurting another person (whether in anger or not), regardless of what words we’re using.

When it comes right down to it, getting offended by these “vulgar” words implies that you think you’re too good to hear everyday, common language, and that you probably need to be brought down a peg or two.

Honestly, the old childhood saying about sticks and stones is true, and words can only hurt you if you let them. But, if you really insist on being offended by certain words, how about choosing to be offended by those words intended to hurt people who don’t happen to share your particular values or preferences instead of words that simply add a bit of colour to everyday speech.

But I’ll make a compromise. Get offended by the many injustices and atrocities being committed not only around the world but even in your own backyard, and I mean offended enough to actually do something about it, and I’ll try to pretend you’re not a snob when you turn up your nose at everyday language. And I won’t even say the word uterus around you if that helps.

The standard response I’ve always received when bringing this up to conservative Christians is that they don’t believe it’s the government’s place to be legislating economic morality (funny how their outrage towards government control goes out the window when it comes to legislating morality relating to sexuality or altered states of consciousness, but I digress), and some even claim that socialism is theft.

Considering the fact that money has no inherent value (the only value a dollar or renminbi or euro actually has is the value that people decide it has, and that value changes from day to day), today’s paper and digital money is ultimately nothing more than a social construct that is pretty much only imaginary when you really think about it. So one question we need to ask is, can someone truly steal something from you that doesn’t really even exist?

But, putting the metaphysics of money aside for the moment, if you believe that it’s not the government’s place to redistribute wealth, whose place is it to do so? The typical answer I’ve heard from conservative and libertarian Christians is that it’s the church’s job to take care of those who need help, not the government’s. Which brings up the question, if there are over 2 billion Christians in the world, why are there still poor people, not to mention sick people going broke over their treatment?

The early church apparently “had all things in common,” according to the book of Acts, but the church today can’t even be bothered to make sure their own members can afford basic health care and food, not to mention those outside the church.

Until the church has put a plan into action that makes sure that everyone in their country, and eventually on the planet, has adequate shelter, food, water, and health care, there’s no excuse for complaining about socialism. Obviously the church can’t do the job right now, so somebody has to fill in for them in the meantime (the government, in this case), but I’d eventually like to see the church get their act together and do something useful a change. The combined effort of the Christian church worldwide could probably end poverty altogether in months if they got their asses in gear and did their job. Of course, poverty is profitable to far too many conservative business people, so you’re going to have a fight on your hands, but if everyone in the church pitches in and does their part, perhaps the church can finally be a positive force in the world instead of causing problems like it normally does.

• Exodus 20:13 – “Thou shalt not kill.”

Well, that isn’t going to work if we’re going to support the death penalty and war and cops carrying guns in the line of duty. Let’s see… Oh, I know. Other translations put it as, “You shall not murder.” That’s better. Hmm… Except that murder technically means “illegal killing,” and if abortion is legal then it can’t actually be labelled murder. Well, let’s find a better passage then.

• Jeremiah 1:5 – “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.”

Great! No, wait, all that really tells us is that God knew Jeremiah before he was born. Hmm… does this mean that we exist as spirit babies before we’re born? This is going to help Mormons defend some of their theology, but all it does for the rest of us is explain that God foreknew Jeremiah’s existence and planned for him to become a prophet beforehand, so we’d better keep this one under wraps if we don’t want to have to wear special undergarments. Anyway, it doesn’t tell us that God hates abortion like we know He does from the Bible, so we’d better find those passages telling us that He does.

• Psalm 139:13-16 “For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.”

I’m not sure what that says, let’s check the NIV. Oh, that’s just more of Jeremiah 1:5, explaining God’s foreknowledge and predestination. Since most of us want to keep believing in free will, it wouldn’t be a good idea to take that passage too literally anyway. Moving on…

• Luke 1:39-42 “And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda; And entered into the house of Zacharias, and saluted Elisabeth. And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.”

Yes! Babies in the womb can leap when the Holy Spirit inspires them to do so. Though on second thought, what does that have to do with abortion? Drat, I thought I was onto something there. Well, let’s see what else I can find. Hmm… I’m out of passages. Well, at least we know that God loves children and would never do anything to harm them:

• 2 Kings 2:22-24 “So the waters were healed unto this day, according to the saying of Elisha which he spake. And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.”

Whoa, God sent bears to kill children for making fun of someone’s baldness? That’s scary. Maybe He only loves children while they’re still in the womb. It’s a good thing we’ve got all those passages explaining that He does, isn’t it?

Disclaimer: This post isn’t meant to support either the pro-abortion or anti-abortion positions. The only point is that the Bible can’t be used to defend the idea that God hates abortion or is pro-life. God does LOTS of killing and sanctioning of killing, even of children, according to the Bible, so it isn’t in your best interest to try to use it to fight abortion.

Also, if you believe in everlasting torment in hell and the age of accountability, you should be hoping that every pregnancy ends in abortion.

Up until then I’d been a good fundamentalist. Sure, I knew the Bible had to be properly interpreted, and I wasn’t under any crazy illusion that the KJV was a perfect translation, but I still assumed that the Elders in my assembly knew what they were talking about for the most part, and I generally took their word for it when they taught a particular doctrine from the pulpit of the Bible Chapel I was attending (I grew up among the Open Brethren, if any of these terms seem unfamiliar to you). I certainly disagreed on a few minor theological points, and never kept those disagreements a secret, but I was still a fairly conservative biblical inerrantist who trusted that the assembly’s leaders had enough integrity to not only tell the truth, but to continue digging to make sure that their theology was in line with reality.

Then I went to Bible College.

It was actually an Open Brethren Bible College, and for the first few months everything was fine. But over time I began to recognize some discrepancies in what they were teaching me. They were just little things, like insisting that we were still required to follow the 10 Commandments even though we were no longer under the Old Testament law, but they got me wondering. However, it was a book that one of the teachers introduced me to that finally got me to question everything.

Have you ever had one of those epiphany moments where you suddenly realize that nothing will ever be the same again? It was a simple book that brought this on for me. I’m sure my ecclesiology teacher didn’t have any idea when he handed the book to me just what it would do to my theology, and I wonder if he still would have recommended it to me if he knew where it would take me over the years to come.

Truthfully, I don’t know if most Christians who read the book would have the same reaction as I did. It was a simple book, called The Open Church, which revealed to me that the traditional method of singing a few songs and sitting through a lecture once or twice a week, and perhaps eating a tiny piece of bread and a sip of grape juice or wine, was not the way the church gatherings were meant to be. It also presented a better way where, rather than “going to church,” we could instead “be the church,” and have real fellowship with one another instead of the fake fellowship that happens in pretty much every church in the western world.

I’ve discussed how the book affected my ecclesiology here previously, but perhaps even more important than what it taught me about church gatherings was what it taught me about church leaders. I realized that if they were lying to me about something as foundational as the church, even if only unintentionally, then they could be feeding me all sorts of other theological misinformation as well.

So I began digging, and quickly discovered that there were many other important doctrines being taught at church that weren’t at all true either. Of course the big one was realizing that everlasting torment in hell for non-Christians is not biblical, but it didn’t end there. I also discovered that tithing isn’t something Christians were ever meant to do. I found out that premarital sex probably isn’t actually condemned by the Bible. I figured out that the religious rules we’d been taught to follow not only aren’t obligatory, sometimes they can be harmful. And, more recently, I began to wonder if the idea that there are no contradictions in the Bible is actually true as well.

Now, I’m not saying that most Christian leaders are intentionally lying to their congregations. Many of them have no idea how many of their ideas are inaccurate. When you’re brought up with certain presuppositions, and never taught to question them, you’re very likely to continue teaching the same traditional doctrines you yourself were brought up believing. And when someone brings up Scripture that seems to contradict what you believe, it’s much easier to try to figure out how it doesn’t mean what it says than it is to accept the possibility that you could have been wrong all your life. Not to mention the fact that, for most leaders, their continued paycheques depend on defending the forms of “faith” they’ve been entrusted with.

And when it comes down to it, most of the people in church will continue to buy into the traditional doctrines themselves, even when presented with evidence pointing to the contrary. It’s just easier to continue believing what you’ve always believed than it is to question your presuppositions, and most people are happy to simply follow the leader anyway. But there will always be people like me (and hopefully you) who are more interested in knowing the truth than we are in accepting dogma. And as long as religious leaders refuse to admit their errors, or at least admit the possibility that they could be wrong about some of these important issues, it will drive us farther and farther away from being able to accept them as legitimate spiritual and theological authorities and cause us to wonder all the more what else they’re lying to us about.

It was only a couple days after the funeral when I ran into Johnny, Joshua’s best friend. We decided to catch up that night, and over drinks he and I discussed some of the various things Josh had said and done throughout his tragically short lifetime. Johnny had a hard time talking about it, but something he said stood out in particular. He told me that the last thing his friend had said before he died was, “it’s over.” It stood out because Johnny mentioned that Josh had said it in an oddly loud voice.

A couple evenings later, I happened to run into another acquaintance, Lucas. Now Lucas hadn’t actually ever met Josh either, but he knew some people who were there at Josh’s bedside on his last night as well. I mentioned that Johnny and I had been talking about Josh’s final night, and how unusual Johnny found it that his last words were so loud. “I’m told it was weird, but moving,” Lucas said. “Josh was very spiritual, even to his last breath,” he continued. I asked him what he meant by that, and he explained that he’d been told that Josh’s last words were, “I’m going to be with God now,” in a very loud voice immediately before closing his eyes and passing on.

Now, after reading that story, what is it that comes to mind? Would you question the honesty, or perhaps the accuracy of Johnny and Lucas? The funny thing is, I’ve been told all my life that everything Johnny and Lucas have ever told me was 100% accurate and honest, particularly about the things they told me about Josh’s life and sayings. Not only that, I’ve been told that they’ve never even contradicted each other.

Before going, I’d like you to read the following two quotes and decide for yourself which one of the two were actually Joshua’s final words.

Quote 1

Quote 2

Regardless of what it turns out his book says, this controversy has demonstrated just how much believing in the traditional view of hell perverts one’s sense of justice. Anyone who has seriously questioned the traditional view has heard the argument that “God’s justice demands He punish sinners forever,” and this argument might even make sense at first. After all, sin is apparently an offence against an infinite God, or so we’re told, so shouldn’t it deserve an infinite punishment?

Simply put, nowhere in Scripture does it actually say that one deserves everlasting torture for their sin. Instead, it tells us that the wages of sin is death. To insist that Romans 6:23 means the consequence of sinning is suffering forever in hell is to read one’s own presuppositions into the passage.

With that in mind, if God decides to forgive everyone, would that go against His justice? He’s apparently willing to forgive some people for their “infinite sins,” according to traditionalists, so why would it be unjust for Him to choose to forgive everyone? Not to mention the fact that He apparently expects us to forgive those who trespass against us, and nowhere does it give any stipulations that the trespassers have to do something first, so how can it be an affront to justice for God to do what He commands us to do?

When it comes down to it, the Bible just doesn’t say what it is traditionalists want us to believe it says. What it does say is that “God is love,” and love keeps no record of wrongs. This, along with many other passages of Scripture, leads me to conclude that justice demands forgiveness, and that tells me that God indeed will forgive everyone.

Could your pastor or priest be lying to you, even if only inadvertently?

Is the Bible truly as accurate as you’ve been told it is? Are there really no contradictions or errors in its pages?

And, even if it is accurate, is it possible that the interpretations (and methods of interpretation) you’ve been taught are completely wrong?

Do you know, beyond a reasonable doubt, that your theological assumptions are indeed correct?

What’s that? The Bible is the inerrant word of God? Really? You know this for a fact? How did you come to this particular knowledge?

Your pastor, or perhaps a parent, told you so? We could (and should) ask how your pastor or parent(s) know this, but if you’re just taking their word for it then you haven’t even begun to dig far enough into it for yourself.

More Questions

Seriously, if you’re entrusting the fate of your soul to what you think a book says, shouldn’t you devote a large amount of study to whether or not that book is true, as well as to what it is the book actually says? It seems to me that, at the very least, a basic study of bibliology and hermeneutics is something every believer should be taking the time to immerse themselves in to make sure that what they believe really is true.

If someone can’t be bothered to study at least the foundation of their theology, how seriously can we take them when they make such broad claims as the inerrancy or infallibility of Scripture? These aren’t just questions for you though. These are questions I need to ask myself as well. Yes, I’ve asked them of myself over the years, but I plan to dig into them even more in depth over the next little while. I hope to post some of my thoughts on my study as time goes on, but it may not be right away (I may need time to digest what I’m studying). In the meantime, I hope that you also will take the time to look into it, and please feel free to let us know what you discover, as well as free to bring up any questions your inquiries might raise.

I give you my best wishes on this journey if you choose to take it. And if you choose not to look into it (and never have), then please at least have the honesty to admit that you could be wrong about what you’ve been taught to believe.

This doesn’t just go for Christians, by the way. This goes equally for Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and anyone else who might follow the teachings of any “holy book” or spiritual leader (I’m simply focusing on the Bible for now since that’s what I was raised with). If you just blindly accept that what you’ve been taught is true without trying to find out why, then there’s no reason for us to trust you when you try to teach us something spiritual or theological.