What do you think?
Rate this book
Razing Hell: Rethinking Everything You've Been Taught about God's Wrath and Judgment
The idea of hell can haunt dreams and disturb sleep. Many wonder at the justice (or injustice) of it all, feeling confounded by a God who deems it necessary to send the majority of humanity to burn there forever. Seventy percent of Americans believe in hell, as do ninety-two percent of those who attend church every week. Clearly, it's a hot topic. Baker offers readers a safe space to contemplate tough issues as they rethink traditional views of hell. In her candid and inviting style Baker explores and ultimately refutes many traditional views of hell, presenting instead theologically sound ways of thinking that are more consistent with the image of God as a loving creator who desires to liberate us from sin and evil. This is an excellent selection for general readers, students, pastors, professors, and grief counselors, and will provide clarity for those with questions about hell, God's judgment, and what happens to us when we die.
241 pages, Kindle Edition
First published August 23, 2010
32 people are currently reading
238 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
December 29, 2011
In Razing Hell, Sharon Baker, who teaches theology at Messiah College in Grantham, Pennsylvania, argues against the traditional Christian doctrine of hell. She argues that hell is not a place of eternal torment. Instead, she views the language of hell as largely metaphorical: the biblical passages that speak of hell refer to a purifying experience of judgment; although she does not state it explicitly, her view of hell seems to be, in some ways, similar to the concept of purgatory: hell cleanses us of our sins. Throughout this book, Baker's comments seem to imply that she is a universalist; however, at one point, she explicitly states that she is not a universalist: due to her respect for free will, she says that it is possible that some people, even when presented with the overwhelming experience of God's presence and God's love, will still choose to reject God and eternal life with God; such people, she argues, will not be tormented eternally in hell but rather will simply cease to exist. Still, in numerous other passages, one gets the distinct impression that she believes that no one will ultimately reject God and that everyone will be saved; thus, it might be best to describe Baker as a pragmatic universalist, though in principle she is not a universalist.
Baker's main arguments against the traditional view of hell are arguments from justice--it is unjust to punish and torment eternally people for sins committed in a temporal realm and sins that do not have eternal consequences--and arguments from the character of God--God as revealed in Jesus Christ is the hermeneutical lens through which all Scripture should be read and interpreted, and in light of the love and life and teachings of Christ, the existence of hell as a place of eternal torment is impossible, for it is not consistent with the loving, merciful character of God as revealed in Christ.
Baker writes for an evangelical Christian audience, so she accepts the authority of the Bible, and she often quotes at length from the Bible. Thus, quite often, this book reads more as a sermon than as a theological treatise on hell. For those of us who are not evangelical Christians, this can become rather tedious at times, but it is necessary that she respect and affirm this high view of the Bible in order to remain within her religious tradition and argue in favor of her unorthodox view of hell.
As a former evangelical Christian myself, I recognize in Baker a kindred spirit, and I think that there are many, many evangelical Christians who, like Baker, are scandalized by the traditional doctrine of hell and are looking for biblically sound ways to re-interpret and do away with this horrific teaching of eternal damnation, and for those Christians, Baker's book (as well as Rob Bell's book Love Wins) provides a great argument.
Baker's main arguments against the traditional view of hell are arguments from justice--it is unjust to punish and torment eternally people for sins committed in a temporal realm and sins that do not have eternal consequences--and arguments from the character of God--God as revealed in Jesus Christ is the hermeneutical lens through which all Scripture should be read and interpreted, and in light of the love and life and teachings of Christ, the existence of hell as a place of eternal torment is impossible, for it is not consistent with the loving, merciful character of God as revealed in Christ.
Baker writes for an evangelical Christian audience, so she accepts the authority of the Bible, and she often quotes at length from the Bible. Thus, quite often, this book reads more as a sermon than as a theological treatise on hell. For those of us who are not evangelical Christians, this can become rather tedious at times, but it is necessary that she respect and affirm this high view of the Bible in order to remain within her religious tradition and argue in favor of her unorthodox view of hell.
As a former evangelical Christian myself, I recognize in Baker a kindred spirit, and I think that there are many, many evangelical Christians who, like Baker, are scandalized by the traditional doctrine of hell and are looking for biblically sound ways to re-interpret and do away with this horrific teaching of eternal damnation, and for those Christians, Baker's book (as well as Rob Bell's book Love Wins) provides a great argument.
April 24, 2019
This book offers thoughtful, academic critique of traditional interpretations of hell and offers alternative perspectives that create harmony between Gods divine justice, love, and reconciliation without ignoring the troublesome passages that seem to conflict. I appreciated this thoughtful work as I am reconstructing my belief systems after toxic church, and I would highly recommend this book to anyone trying to follow Jesus.
April 29, 2013
In the opening of this convoluted mess the author states "I am very concerned about remaining faithful to scripture; but am more concerned about remaining faithful to the God of love..." (xiv) which proves extremely telling on the author's bias. Baker hates the idea of retributive justice in the Bible and yet does very little to really deal with the texts that suggest such a model. While many texts are uncomfortable to read (especially when they convict me) we can't throw things out because they are uncomfortable.
It also sets up a false dichotomy between God and His Word.
Now I must say I am not a traditionalist or a universalist when it comes to the doctrine of hell, and I find common ground with the author in tearing down what I believe is an unbiblical model for judgment. However, the author skips over so many relevant texts, makes repeated anecdotal claims regarding what she perceives to be future judgment, and even outright ignores the questions asked by her students recorded in the book.
Baker attempts to build a hybrid of universalism and annhilationism and in my opinion fails miserably. I would rather read a book on traditionalism or universalism because they provide a more coherent system and arguments than what is given here. Some of the highlights include:
Quoting a "literary critic" who suggests that societies create scapegoats in order to justify violence and that is how we arrive at the modern traditionalist view of hell. While this may the case, and I may even agree with her in the modern portrait of hell, she uses it as a way to sweep aside the retributive justice in scripture. The problem is she never once deals with the sanctuary system in the OT which, according to scripture, was instituted by God. Its a glaring omission. She also acknowledges difficult texts that highlight divine violence but then skirts most of them, and ignores all the imprecatory Psalms in favor of the ones that fit her anti-violence worldview.
She claims that the worldview of the ancients was that both good and bad came from God and therefore we can skirt around the more militant passages of scripture because that is simply a product of culture. But the same argument could be applied to Baker and the modern reader who are uncomfortable with violence. She even goes so far as to say "where there's violence, justice is absent."
The book is rarely exegetical. She suggests that when Jesus reads from Isaiah in Luke 4 that He intentionally leaves out the verse concerning the day of vengeance" in order to reinterpret the OT and give us the "Jesus lens" to look through when dealing with difficult passages. She suggests that His omission communicates that the concept of vengeance/retributive justice is faulty. However a simpler interpretation of the passage is that Jesus omitted the phrase because, when He was speaking, He was not announcing the vengeance of the eschaton. He only read the scripture that was being fulfilled before the eyes of the people--namely that the time had come to preach liberation and freedom. The reason He left out "the day of vengeance" was not because it was false/irrelevant, but because it wasn't the time for its fulfillment yet.
Baker argues for an almost purgatorial style judgment--where everyone will be given a second chance to stand before God, have all the sin burned away in His presence, then be able to make a choice as to whether or not to join God's side (this, she argues, is how she avoids universalism). The problem is that she never establishes a biblical argument for a "second chance" for everybody regardless of how they lived. To her credit she acknowledges this as an issue, but then says that the space in this book doesn't allow for a treatment of the issue and says she will write another book later. To me this is appalling scholarship. You can't just not explain a key pillar of your theological framework--one critical enough to make the whole structure collapse--by saying you ran out of room.
She makes statements about how God's forgiveness is not dependent upon our response and cites an author who says, "the only sin in the world is forgiven sin." She also says forgiveness leads to repentance--a surprising statement for a Wesleyan scholar who should distinguish between prevenient grace/repentance/forgiveness. She builds this off a misreading of 2 Cor. 5v19 where "Christ is reconciling Himself to the world" and Rom. 5v8 where "God showed His love for us that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." This comes close to universalism (only saved by her yet unestablished second chance theology) and doesn't take into consideration that there is a difference between making a way for someone to be reconciled/forgiven and having them actually accept that way.
I could go on but this book is so full of this kind of thing that I may never finish.
I did give two stars because I agree with the author that people have a choice, God's primary motive in judgment/justice is reconciliation, and that sinners will not burn forever in conscious torment. I also do not like the violence in scripture, but its there and it must be dealt with.
However this book feels more like the blog of a graduate student than the work of a PhD teaching at a university. It needs a lot of work, and the author cannot be let off the hook just because its not written for a scholarly audience. No writing scholarly doesn't mean you sacrifice content/argument it simply means you make the language understandable-you still need to answer the questions and be comprehensive if you are building a comprehensive biblical theology of hell.
It also sets up a false dichotomy between God and His Word.
Now I must say I am not a traditionalist or a universalist when it comes to the doctrine of hell, and I find common ground with the author in tearing down what I believe is an unbiblical model for judgment. However, the author skips over so many relevant texts, makes repeated anecdotal claims regarding what she perceives to be future judgment, and even outright ignores the questions asked by her students recorded in the book.
Baker attempts to build a hybrid of universalism and annhilationism and in my opinion fails miserably. I would rather read a book on traditionalism or universalism because they provide a more coherent system and arguments than what is given here. Some of the highlights include:
Quoting a "literary critic" who suggests that societies create scapegoats in order to justify violence and that is how we arrive at the modern traditionalist view of hell. While this may the case, and I may even agree with her in the modern portrait of hell, she uses it as a way to sweep aside the retributive justice in scripture. The problem is she never once deals with the sanctuary system in the OT which, according to scripture, was instituted by God. Its a glaring omission. She also acknowledges difficult texts that highlight divine violence but then skirts most of them, and ignores all the imprecatory Psalms in favor of the ones that fit her anti-violence worldview.
She claims that the worldview of the ancients was that both good and bad came from God and therefore we can skirt around the more militant passages of scripture because that is simply a product of culture. But the same argument could be applied to Baker and the modern reader who are uncomfortable with violence. She even goes so far as to say "where there's violence, justice is absent."
The book is rarely exegetical. She suggests that when Jesus reads from Isaiah in Luke 4 that He intentionally leaves out the verse concerning the day of vengeance" in order to reinterpret the OT and give us the "Jesus lens" to look through when dealing with difficult passages. She suggests that His omission communicates that the concept of vengeance/retributive justice is faulty. However a simpler interpretation of the passage is that Jesus omitted the phrase because, when He was speaking, He was not announcing the vengeance of the eschaton. He only read the scripture that was being fulfilled before the eyes of the people--namely that the time had come to preach liberation and freedom. The reason He left out "the day of vengeance" was not because it was false/irrelevant, but because it wasn't the time for its fulfillment yet.
Baker argues for an almost purgatorial style judgment--where everyone will be given a second chance to stand before God, have all the sin burned away in His presence, then be able to make a choice as to whether or not to join God's side (this, she argues, is how she avoids universalism). The problem is that she never establishes a biblical argument for a "second chance" for everybody regardless of how they lived. To her credit she acknowledges this as an issue, but then says that the space in this book doesn't allow for a treatment of the issue and says she will write another book later. To me this is appalling scholarship. You can't just not explain a key pillar of your theological framework--one critical enough to make the whole structure collapse--by saying you ran out of room.
She makes statements about how God's forgiveness is not dependent upon our response and cites an author who says, "the only sin in the world is forgiven sin." She also says forgiveness leads to repentance--a surprising statement for a Wesleyan scholar who should distinguish between prevenient grace/repentance/forgiveness. She builds this off a misreading of 2 Cor. 5v19 where "Christ is reconciling Himself to the world" and Rom. 5v8 where "God showed His love for us that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." This comes close to universalism (only saved by her yet unestablished second chance theology) and doesn't take into consideration that there is a difference between making a way for someone to be reconciled/forgiven and having them actually accept that way.
I could go on but this book is so full of this kind of thing that I may never finish.
I did give two stars because I agree with the author that people have a choice, God's primary motive in judgment/justice is reconciliation, and that sinners will not burn forever in conscious torment. I also do not like the violence in scripture, but its there and it must be dealt with.
However this book feels more like the blog of a graduate student than the work of a PhD teaching at a university. It needs a lot of work, and the author cannot be let off the hook just because its not written for a scholarly audience. No writing scholarly doesn't mean you sacrifice content/argument it simply means you make the language understandable-you still need to answer the questions and be comprehensive if you are building a comprehensive biblical theology of hell.
March 21, 2018
Should I be nice and compassionate or brutally nasty? Hmmmmmmm? Mostly NASTY. :D
I cannot believe that Sharon Baker is a professor of theology ANYWHERE. (Although it does say "assistant" on the back cover of the book.) In order to be a proper Christian theologian - you do have to deal with the Bible as a whole - and that is the problem with this silly little book.
To sum up her thinking: There is no Hell or eternal punishment (mostly?). We would all realize this if we just read the Bible through Hippy Jesus' eyes - or "lenses" she likes to say. But what we really have here is a lady who thinks people should read the Bible through Sharon L. Baker's lens. She indeed has made a God in her own image. A hippy Jesus that just loves/loves/loves...
The problem is: she has to ignore about a 3rd of the Bible to pull off this illusion. She claims the bad bits of the Bible are not what God intended. So verses like this:
2 Kings 10:17...30
And when he came to Samaria, he struck down all who remained to Ahab in Samaria, till he had wiped them out, according to the word of the Lord that he spoke to Elijah.
Now Jehu had stationed eighty men outside and said, “The man who allows any of those whom I give into your hands to escape shall forfeit his life.” 25 So as soon as he had made an end of offering the burnt offering, Jehu said to the guard and to the officers, “Go in and strike them down; let not a man escape.” So when they put them to the sword, the guard and the officers cast them out and went into the inner room of the house of Baal, 26 and they brought out the pillar that was in the house of Baal and burned it. 27 And they demolished the pillar of Baal, and demolished the house of Baal, and made it a latrine to this day.
28 Thus Jehu wiped out Baal from Israel... 30 And the Lord said to Jehu, “Because you have done well in carrying out what is right in my eyes, and have done to the house of Ahab according to all that was in my heart, your sons of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel.”
So what exactly is in God's heart? Not what Sharon tells us in her book.
Her God is not a sovereign and Holy deity that has carefully given his word to his people for centuries. Her pet god is a poorly thought out deity that ignores a great deal of scripture. Even New Testament scripture like:
Acts 5
But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property, and kept back some of the price for himself, with his wife’s full knowledge, and bringing a portion of it, he laid it at the apostles’ feet. But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the price of the land?4“While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.” And as he heard these words, Ananias fell down and breathed his last; and great fear came over all who heard of it. The young men got up and covered him up, and after carrying him out, they buried him.
I'm pretty sure Mrs. Baker's Jesus would never murder someone for fudging on a bit of money. Hippy Jesus doesn't do things like that.
I doubt Sharon has spent much time reading the end of the bible. Revelation chapter 19 and 20 don't portray hippy Jesus as very loving and all forgiving.
It's fascinating that Sharon claims Hell could be standing in the presence of God and being cleansed by his fire. That's a possibility - Doesn't fit very well with luke 16 (Lazarus and the Rich man in Hell.)
The problem is many other scholars try to say that Hell is Gehenna (like a burning garbage dump). That's not a very nice way to portray the presence of God. Personally I ignore both scholars in that area.
Sharon really wants Jesus to be a pacifist. Yet Jesus made Satan, demons, fighting angels etc. And who presents the first weapon in the Bible? God and his angels.
Genesis 3:24
24 After sending them out, the Lord God stationed mighty cherubim to the east of the Garden of Eden. And he placed a flaming sword that flashed back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.
I doubt very much that hippy Jesus would be running around handing out flaming swords to protect a garden and tree. :D
Sharon sounds like a very nice compassionate person. But you can't have love without protection. I hate liberal Christian thinking...so annoying. And God protects his children.
I cannot believe that Sharon Baker is a professor of theology ANYWHERE. (Although it does say "assistant" on the back cover of the book.) In order to be a proper Christian theologian - you do have to deal with the Bible as a whole - and that is the problem with this silly little book.
To sum up her thinking: There is no Hell or eternal punishment (mostly?). We would all realize this if we just read the Bible through Hippy Jesus' eyes - or "lenses" she likes to say. But what we really have here is a lady who thinks people should read the Bible through Sharon L. Baker's lens. She indeed has made a God in her own image. A hippy Jesus that just loves/loves/loves...
The problem is: she has to ignore about a 3rd of the Bible to pull off this illusion. She claims the bad bits of the Bible are not what God intended. So verses like this:
2 Kings 10:17...30
And when he came to Samaria, he struck down all who remained to Ahab in Samaria, till he had wiped them out, according to the word of the Lord that he spoke to Elijah.
Now Jehu had stationed eighty men outside and said, “The man who allows any of those whom I give into your hands to escape shall forfeit his life.” 25 So as soon as he had made an end of offering the burnt offering, Jehu said to the guard and to the officers, “Go in and strike them down; let not a man escape.” So when they put them to the sword, the guard and the officers cast them out and went into the inner room of the house of Baal, 26 and they brought out the pillar that was in the house of Baal and burned it. 27 And they demolished the pillar of Baal, and demolished the house of Baal, and made it a latrine to this day.
28 Thus Jehu wiped out Baal from Israel... 30 And the Lord said to Jehu, “Because you have done well in carrying out what is right in my eyes, and have done to the house of Ahab according to all that was in my heart, your sons of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel.”
So what exactly is in God's heart? Not what Sharon tells us in her book.
Her God is not a sovereign and Holy deity that has carefully given his word to his people for centuries. Her pet god is a poorly thought out deity that ignores a great deal of scripture. Even New Testament scripture like:
Acts 5
But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property, and kept back some of the price for himself, with his wife’s full knowledge, and bringing a portion of it, he laid it at the apostles’ feet. But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the price of the land?4“While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.” And as he heard these words, Ananias fell down and breathed his last; and great fear came over all who heard of it. The young men got up and covered him up, and after carrying him out, they buried him.
I'm pretty sure Mrs. Baker's Jesus would never murder someone for fudging on a bit of money. Hippy Jesus doesn't do things like that.
I doubt Sharon has spent much time reading the end of the bible. Revelation chapter 19 and 20 don't portray hippy Jesus as very loving and all forgiving.
It's fascinating that Sharon claims Hell could be standing in the presence of God and being cleansed by his fire. That's a possibility - Doesn't fit very well with luke 16 (Lazarus and the Rich man in Hell.)
The problem is many other scholars try to say that Hell is Gehenna (like a burning garbage dump). That's not a very nice way to portray the presence of God. Personally I ignore both scholars in that area.
Sharon really wants Jesus to be a pacifist. Yet Jesus made Satan, demons, fighting angels etc. And who presents the first weapon in the Bible? God and his angels.
Genesis 3:24
24 After sending them out, the Lord God stationed mighty cherubim to the east of the Garden of Eden. And he placed a flaming sword that flashed back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.
I doubt very much that hippy Jesus would be running around handing out flaming swords to protect a garden and tree. :D
Sharon sounds like a very nice compassionate person. But you can't have love without protection. I hate liberal Christian thinking...so annoying. And God protects his children.
July 23, 2025
Baker serves up a great apetizer that will prepare you to read more thorough books like "Her Gates Will Never Be Shut," or "The history of hell."
Baker offers a consideration that eternal concious torment might not actually be the only view of the afterlife out there from a "biblical perspective." In reality, the Bible itself can't even agree on the concept of "hell" or the afterlife, so with that in mind, find a spot nice shady spot in the back yard, grab this book, light a cigar, and find out why we should be "rethinking everything you've been taught about God's wrath and judgement."
Baker offers a consideration that eternal concious torment might not actually be the only view of the afterlife out there from a "biblical perspective." In reality, the Bible itself can't even agree on the concept of "hell" or the afterlife, so with that in mind, find a spot nice shady spot in the back yard, grab this book, light a cigar, and find out why we should be "rethinking everything you've been taught about God's wrath and judgement."
July 5, 2012
This book is more than meets the eye. Not only does Sharon help us take a second look at what we believe about hell, but her understanding of justice is worth the price of admission alone. Great book!
September 5, 2024
3.5 stars really. Baker takes on huge topics for a popular audience, which is brave. Not much is written on this topic on a popular level (check out the blog Eclectic Orthodoxy to learn of more academic writers).
Her exploration of God's love as a purifying fire is powerful. And I appreciate her approach to the cross as at-one-ment.
I wanted to like this book more than I do. I love Baker's goal/thesis & mostly agree with her position. But the writing is just plodding and could have done with some careful editing to eliminate repetitions, occasional grammatical errors, even misspellings.
In her chapters on forgiveness, I felt she gave short shrift to the legitimate needs of victims of serious harm such as childhood sexual abuse. This treatment might have read differently if the book had been published even a few years later.
On the other hand, I was surprised to near the end and find out that she is an annihilationist rather than a full-on universalist. She thinks this is necessary if God truly honors humans' freedom of choice. A process of purgation resulting in salvation for all makes more sense to me, as I believe we all have an innate profound desire for God. And what would freedom of choice actually mean in the ultimate sense, given that our brain chemistry and what we have suffered can make choice very murky? Finally, annihilation still would involve suffering for those who loved that person--and would mean God's victory was not quite complete.
Her exploration of God's love as a purifying fire is powerful. And I appreciate her approach to the cross as at-one-ment.
I wanted to like this book more than I do. I love Baker's goal/thesis & mostly agree with her position. But the writing is just plodding and could have done with some careful editing to eliminate repetitions, occasional grammatical errors, even misspellings.
In her chapters on forgiveness, I felt she gave short shrift to the legitimate needs of victims of serious harm such as childhood sexual abuse. This treatment might have read differently if the book had been published even a few years later.
On the other hand, I was surprised to near the end and find out that she is an annihilationist rather than a full-on universalist. She thinks this is necessary if God truly honors humans' freedom of choice. A process of purgation resulting in salvation for all makes more sense to me, as I believe we all have an innate profound desire for God. And what would freedom of choice actually mean in the ultimate sense, given that our brain chemistry and what we have suffered can make choice very murky? Finally, annihilation still would involve suffering for those who loved that person--and would mean God's victory was not quite complete.
June 21, 2011
Somewhat in the same vein as Rob Bell's Love Wins --- a re-exploration of the mainstream thought on the Christian Hell and a reinterpretation that focuses on God's grace and inclusive reconciling. In some ways, a deeper work than Bell's (think of it as a 12 week Sunday school class compared to Bell's sermon series), but also quite repetitive. The framing notion of the author speaking to three of her friends about the subject felt awkward to me. However, some of the arguments --- especially those on forgiveness preceding repentance --- are quite powerful.
February 1, 2013
a very accessible book on the 'problem of hell', advocating a restorative view of hell and thus a universalist solution to the problem of hell. This is done in a conversational style (aimed at a general public), from an evangelical point of view, with that confessional audience in mind.
October 28, 2024
Author and professor Sharon Baker tackles the issue of how an all-loving, all-forgiving God who doesn't want anyone to be lost would possibly allow a place of eternal torment and damnation. In short, he wouldn't. She argues that Christians wrongly interpret and prioritize a vengeful God who is willing to condemn people and exact his pound of flesh. Instead, she argues that the vengeful God is a product of man's and society's desire for a retributive rather than a restorative justice. Instead, she asserts, God is actually willing to forgive everyone and give every person a chance at repentance and change, even after death.
Baker covers more topics than Hell, including the Atonement. Well worth reading and pondering.
Baker covers more topics than Hell, including the Atonement. Well worth reading and pondering.
March 21, 2025
The author has a good thesis, but the book could have been much shorter. I got lost in the examples. I skimmed most of it trying to find the content and sift through the extraneous examples with the three “characters.” I can see how this could be helpful to some but was a distraction for me. I wish the book was written in a more academic style, but it was approachable for a wider audience. It lacked stylistic writing that would’ve made it a more enjoyable read. The book also could’ve just been an essay. I liked the exploration of hell and the supportive evidence the author provides for the nontraditional theory. I will definitely be exploring this topic more. Overall it was mostly the writing style that made it hard for me to read. Once I decided to skim it, it wasn’t so bad.
May 11, 2019
Baker lays out a Theology of Love. How can we believe in a God who is all-powerful, all-loving, all-knowing and yet believe that God damns people to eternal hell? The picture just doesn’t line up. Baker with the help of three people takes it step by step and piece by piece. Starting with the traditional view and ending with the alternative view and what that means for how we live out or lives. A well-thought out, biblically sound, argument for God’s love to prevail even in the afterlife whatever that may look like.
May 19, 2021
I used a good deal of information and insight from this book for a Bible Study I was leading entitled "Heaven, Hell, and the Afterlife." The pastoral ways in which questions were handled and the interweaving of scripture with cultural concepts of hell was so well done that I recommended it to those in the study who wanted to go deeper into the ideas we discussed.
December 24, 2021
According to Pugh Research, almost 60% of people believe in the eternally-punishing hell. This book provides a good, biblically-based case for why they shouldn’t. You don’t have to accept her reimagining to embrace the principles she builds it on,
January 16, 2022
It's a very well researched book. The author sets out her ideas logically. I can see why she wrote it in the style she did, but it didn't really work for me. Still worth the read. Love her theology though.
June 24, 2024
I quit believing in the idea of hell as a place of eternal conscious torment a few years ago, but this book helps put language to what I do believe about judgment and justice and the God of love. If you wonder about the idea of hell you’ve inherited, I highly recommend this book!!!!
December 13, 2024
This book has revolutionized how I view hell and the afterlife.
May 16, 2021
Powerful and pristine—a testament to the writer's faith and skill.
Dr. Baker's scholarship is stellar, and as someone who grew up in a rigidly conservative fundamentalist tradition (the Church of Christ—twitch), I found it delightfully refreshing. I went to a small Southern Baptist college in West Texas and wish that I had known of such marvels as this book when I was at that point in my life.
Having just read several phenomenal books by John Shelby Spong, I felt the need to seek out other writers who dared to question traditional Christian doctrines and practices. Baker's text is accessible and human while being rigorous in its approach. The writing is solid and refined (which is not always the case in such books). Her approach of using her friends and students to show the evolution of thought and understanding is remarkably effective, and it makes the ideas relatable to readers.
Well done, Dr. Baker. I wish I had encountered your book 10 years ago.
Dr. Baker's scholarship is stellar, and as someone who grew up in a rigidly conservative fundamentalist tradition (the Church of Christ—twitch), I found it delightfully refreshing. I went to a small Southern Baptist college in West Texas and wish that I had known of such marvels as this book when I was at that point in my life.
Having just read several phenomenal books by John Shelby Spong, I felt the need to seek out other writers who dared to question traditional Christian doctrines and practices. Baker's text is accessible and human while being rigorous in its approach. The writing is solid and refined (which is not always the case in such books). Her approach of using her friends and students to show the evolution of thought and understanding is remarkably effective, and it makes the ideas relatable to readers.
Well done, Dr. Baker. I wish I had encountered your book 10 years ago.
September 25, 2013
Although there is much biblical and church historical scholarship behind this book, it does not read as a scholarly book. Rather, it is a readable introduction for any Christian interested in the subject of Heaven and Hell. Baker takes us step by step through what the Bible really says about the possibilities of the afterlife, especially as they apply to commonly held but not really as biblically-based views as some think through a superficial look at the texts and through listening to hellfire preachers. The most helpful book on this subject for the general reader (and the specialist!) that I know of.
March 3, 2011
A new perspective on the doctrine of Hell. I liked it. The style was very conversational. Only negative is that I think it takes a long to for her to build her case for a "restorative" understanding of punishment in hell rather that the traditional "retributive" view.
October 13, 2011
This is the book Rob Bell's Love Wins should of been, and could have been had he not written in such a "cutesy" style. It is a serious examination of the doctrines involved, and a positive re-imagination.
December 1, 2017
Courageous woman to write this book.
December 29, 2015
Was intrigued by the premise, but did not like this book. Very dull.
July 24, 2014
Got about half way through it before losing interest a bit. I might try to finish it at some point. It's not bad, just wasn't feeling it at the moment.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews