Raising Hell: Christianity's Most Controversial Doctrine Put Under Fire

by Julie Ferwerda

Finally, a clear, logical, and loving picture of a sovereign God.

I want to commend Ferwerda on the painstaking detail, broad foundation, careful scholarship, and the respect and honor in which she conveys the issues.

“The message of Raising Hell isn’t wishful thinking or one of those ‘hell just can’t be real because it would be so mean’ books. Each argument is laid out with evidence and a lot of research.

spiritual intellectual’s journey of discovery.

Even if you believe fully in the concept of eternal hell, I would recommend this book as a way to test your beliefs. What do you have to lose?

In my opinion, it’s not safe to NOT question.

the simple, uneducated, illiterate fishermen, tax collectors, and prostitutes, all of whom could easily offer a spiritual parallel to today’s folks who haven’t been to seminary and who are overlooked, disregarded, or despised by those more knowledgeable?

It occurred to me that the reasons for pharasitical and cultural rejection of these kind of folk parallel the same kind of rejection proposed by the theology of hell.

Arminianism

Calvinism

Jesus’ true message, as we’ll fully explore, was that He came to save all people with the assistance of a chosen people, in a purposeful plan that extends long past this mortal lifetime.

Jesus died for ALL

I just realized that this biblical truth is irrelevant to even mention if salvation doesn’t include everyone. Why doesn’t the passage say, “Jesus died only for those who accept him”?

Universal Reconciliation or Restoration, Universal Salvation, the Blessed Hope, Christian Universalism,

Universal Reconciliation is the belief that all people for all time will eventually be reconciled to God—that this lifetime is not the “only chance” to be saved—but that there is only one way to God, through Jesus Christ.

every knee will have bowed, and every tongue will have confessed Jesus as Lord, giving praise to God

James 2:19. Isn’t the point of this verse that anyone can proclaim that they believe that Jesus is Lord? So the Romans passage is only significant if it actually means that people have confessed him out of admiration, joy, and commitment. The Philippians passage illustrates Jesus ultimate example of sacrifice and love prior to this verse. No wonder all confess him as Lord. Who wouldn’t want to receive him?

What child in the world would ever believe (without adult influence) that a loving parent would create a fearful

place of torment, and then endlessly abandon most of his or her children there, punishing them for a limited duration of unbelief or rebellion, or for choices made from ignorance, distortions, deceptions, or bad influences? My educated, reasoned belief is zero.

Dare to question what you’ve been taught, retesting all against the full counsel of Scripture, according to 1 Thess. 5:21: “But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.”

Before the young man could utter a word of remorse, before he had a chance to admit what a screw-up he’d been, the father had been scanning the distant horizon for his son’s form and ran to meet him with open arms.

This is a great point. The son did not state his claim of humility before the father made his joyful declaration of his son returning home. Nor did the father wait with arms folded in disgust waiting to see what the son’s words would be.

What does this parable reveal to us about God’s heart toward His children—even the rebellious, ungrateful, unbelieving, completely lost ones who are as good as dead to Him at the moment?

Is there ever a limit or deadline to God’s love and patience in waiting for His children to come home?

but did the son have to repent before he was received into welcome arms?

Did the straying sheep ultimately have the choice not to rejoin the flock?

Might the point be, in any case, that the move to “come home” will

eventually and always be agreed upon as desirable by the one lost?

The idea here is that the reason people refuse God’s invitation to begin with is because they have been grossly misinformed by the tragedies of life which have the power to naturally promote a false god: a god who is evil and who does not care about us. Once the truth about God has been sufficiently been revealed, why wouldn’t you want to embrace him?

Was His death for most in vain?

“love does not fail”—could

Messianic Jewish woman,

Hebrew scholars

Interlinear Bible. [‡]

The more we questioned and studied, the more inconsistencies and translation errors we found—errors in the NASB, the KJV, the NIV, and especially the NLT (my previous favorite)!

Well to be fair, inerrancy could potentially still be claimed about the original Greek and Hebrew. Obviously modern translations are not error-free. If they were, there wouldn’t be a need for so many different translations.

most lay people do not differentiate the original language manuscripts from the modern translations they read from.

inconsistencies between translations,

the Jews do not believe in the inerrancy of Scriptures, but teach that they are inspired writings in varying degrees, to be interpreted within the whole.

this doesn’t mean that errors dominate the Scriptures, or that truth isn’t there to be found, or that we need to throw out everything we’ve held to. But what I have realized is that getting to the fuller, truer picture of the Scriptures is going take a lot more thoughtful and personal study—more digging and

searching—than most of us have ever done before, and it’s going to be a lot like searching for buried treasure.

Savior-of-all.com,

If you believe you have the truth, you shouldn’t be afraid to read or question anything—let the truth defend itself.

the thought has always seemed pretty weird to me that God would go to the trouble of creating billions of people in His image, knowing ahead of time that He would endlessly reject and torture them.

God hardens most people who ever lived, forming them with no choice of their own into “vessels of wrath prepared for destruction.”

If Jesus “rejoiced” about God hiding truth from educated and intelligent people of his own religious heritage, does that mean He was glad they were going to hell?

Not to mention the fact that they were people who actually wanted to know the truth about God as opposed to people like Pharaoh who didn’t want to know God.

Did you know that if Evangelical America put just their church building funds toward feeding the poor that they could drastically reduce, if not eradicate, world hunger?

If Jesus knew the Gentiles of His day were going to hell—the worst fate a person could possibly imagine or experience—how could He ignore all of them? How could He ignore any of them?

Yes indeed. This contradicts everything we understand about the “God desires everyone to come to him” premise (2 Peter 3:9)

forever.”

those who have never heard will be given a “fair” chance to believe later, at the Judgment. If that’s the case and those people will have a chance later to profess Jesus while being dangled over the lake of fire in the presence of God—a situation that will take no faith at all—then

wouldn’t it make more sense to stop sending missionaries to them? Maybe we are sending people to hell by giving them a choice now, in a world where they have to choose by faith.

Luke 2:10 the angel says, “Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of great joy which will be for all the people…” Have you ever wondered how the Gospel can be “good news” for all people if most people will not benefit from it?

Perhaps if hell is true the angel should have said, “I bring you good news of great joy for only the people who receive it and believe it.”

I could not find one instance where it was used in the same context with hell or everlasting torment or even judgment—like the way we use it when we share the gospel today.

“The good news or else! Turn or burn!”

The lengthy message in Acts 2:14–3:26 is the perfect opportunity for Peter to tell the unbelieving men of Israel that if they don’t shape up and accept the message, they’re going straight to hell.