Anabapt-ish Theology Book Club discussion

After reading the book, did your views on the topic change at all? What is your final impression of the book? What are your key takeaways?

There were several new ideas and approaches to interpretation that I hadn't come across prior to reading this book. The idea that the Bible doesn't offer a single "this is it" scenario for judgment and hell/heaven/afterlife is at once liberating, but could be difficult for many Christians who are conditioned toward certainty.

I don't think my view as held immediately prior to reading this book has changed after the reading. That is to say, I was already leaning toward a kind of universalist outlook, with allowance for someone to choose an opt-out of spending eternity in God's presence, in which case rather than some kind of eternal torment I would probably lean toward annihilation.

That said, I am also at the point where I'm not certain there will be any kind of afterlife. It's quite possible this life and this present world is it.

I guess that overall, I lean on the "hope" that is part of the book's title. I don't know for sure God exists, and if God does exist that there will be anything beyond this life. But if both are true, then I hope that the kind of God and new world envisioned in Jesus is the one that comes about.

I would say that I'm more open to ultimate redemption after reading the book. Though I lean toward a conditional view of judgement, the book did a great job of sharing the diverse views in Scripture.

The background he gives on Gehenna was extremely helpful and fleshed out things I've heard in the past.

I'd recommend this book to those who are looking for permission to let go of ECT. While not choosing a "right answer," Jersak at least shows that one can hold another view based on exegesis of Scripture.

I really enjoyed this book and thought it was a good discourse on universalism. I am left with a couple of thoughts...

1) I am wondering (probably futilely) how Jersak’s hell fits in with a more systematic theology. Like creation. I know this slips into speculative territory, but did hell evolve also along with earth?? Or maybe it doesn’t have any implications at all for creation??

2) Most people have a problem with eternal conscious torment because of what it says about God’s goodness, right? (At least, that is one of my issues with it). But I am kind of left with the same feeling about universalism. If the gates will never be shut, and people may still be saved “afterwards”, then why is God prolonging this whole earth thing? He could at least put those who love Him now out of their misery??

At this point, annihilation is still making more sense to me overall. But the book was great.

Genni wrote: "I really enjoyed this book and thought it was a good discourse on universalism. I am left with a couple of thoughts...

1) I am wondering (probably futilely) how Jersak’s hell fits in with a more s..."

Hey Genni! I love your first question. Could you add it to the "Questions for Brad" discussion so we can run it by him on May 3rd. I hope you'll be joining us.

I would love to hear him speak to the ways his views of judgement fits into the big picture of creation, fall, redemption, consummation. I get the feeling he would connect the healing/restorative nature of Gehenna to the ways that God is renewing creation.

I appreciate the second question too. I think he would point to the reality of sin and the need for us to be made holy before coming into God's presence, which may take a long time for many. Feel free to add that to "Questions For Brad" too.

I was very glad that I read this book and reading the takeaways and questions of others throughout helped me to get more out of it as well. Though there wasn't anything necessarily paradigm-shifting for me in this book, I came away with a bit more of a hopeful universalism than I already had coming into it. Jersak himself repeatedly iterated that no one position should claim any absolute certainty, and I too came away more convinced that Jersak's approach is the most honest in its assessment of the various positions. A couple other takeaways:

1) The section on Gehenna was incredibly helpful and well researched. The historical and biblical background certainly helped shift my understanding of what the scriptures may mean when alluding to Gehenna.

2) The exegesis on Revelation was very helpful, particularly the point that after the lake of fire there are still people outside the Gates. Somehow I had never even noticed that, but that observation helped to open up many more possibilities in my mind beyond annihilationism.

3) This is a less significant critique, but I did find the format to be fairly choppy. For lack of a better description, it was hard for me to "get in the groove with this book" and I think a lot of that had to do with all the different headers and sub-headers that seemed to break up the chapters. Sometimes it was difficult to understand how he was trying to connect various points he was making within each chapter.

The part of the book that I most appreciated was the exegesis in Revelation. After reading his thoughts, I am really prepared to accept both the idea of hell and the idea of repentance after death. I really fell in love with the ideas of John Hick and soul building when I was in college. Then, I went back to my Reformed Baptist roots, and completely forgot about it. Jersak's exegesis really reawakens a hope that I haven't had in a while . . .a hope of taking hell seriously but of also believing that there can be repentance after death.

I also really took a lot from the discussion of Gehenna and the valley of Hinnom. I feel like I really understood the concept better.

The thing I most struggled with is is the long block quotes throughout the book. Sometimes I found myself skimming and not really absorbing what I was reading because of the strings of block quotes. I know that's not a substantive complaint, but it really took away from my reading.

I also think I would have appreciated the reading of the rich man and Lazarus more if it had come at the end of the book as an appendix. At the time it seemed weird, but after I had read the whole book, his more reflective/responsive reading was more understandable.

Almost as soon as I read this book, I took a quick detour to read Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God: The Scandalous Truth of the Very Good News, and the two together made a very nice book flight.

So much information and knowledge in this book. For me, I think this is going to be a "tool in my toolbox" that I will be referring back to, and re-reading sections. I'm not sure, under different circumstances, that I would have been able to absorb more than I did. I was very interested in the mythological influence for the interpretation of "hell". I guess my biggest take away is that there doesn't seem to be a "right answer" to the question of hell.

This was fun, and the zoom call was spectacular. I first read this book when I was starting out as a minister in a homeless church in Texas. At that time I had a hard time reconciling the human condition and the consequences of Hell. How could such mindless and temporal decisions result in an eternal conscious torment? That is where I began and this book began to peel back the layers of my theology. Many books later and a whole lot of conversation, debate and deep thought - I would easily categorize myself in agreement with David Bentley Hart. I could summarise the notion in the words of Julion of Norwich: “All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well”. I am so thankful for this community, Brad and the journey the Spirit has led me on to realize such freedom.