In Feb 2010, Daniel McClellan, on the old Mormon Dialogue forum, took Aaron “the yellow” Shafovaloff to the wood chipper about D&C 19 and hell being "eternal." I saved McClellan's refutation of Aaron in a word document for future reference. I am a reproducing it here. McClellan's comments will be in black and Aaron's will be in blue.
Of course, Aaron has no idea why Joseph Smith had this revelation, but the more pigeonholing and marginalizing you can squeeze into a post the better, right?
First, these scriptures don’t actually use any word translated “hell.” Matt just talks about “eternal punishment,” Dan says some will awake to “everlasting contempt,” and Rev says, “they will be tormented [in a lake of fire] forever and ever.” No word for “hell” is ever used, which points to a critical flaw in Aaron’s argument. He does not address the disparity between the ideologies concerning the afterlife found in the various stages of the Hebrew Bible's composition and in the New Testament. Nor does he concern himself with the lack of a philosophical concept of eternity in ancient Israel and New Testament times. Aaron presupposes this reference point either without knowing about these concerns or without thinking readers will know.
Like most Mormons today, George Q. Cannon understood this revelation to teach that "eternal punishment" is not endless:
That earlier scriptures had described damnation as "eternal" is acknowledged [in] verse 7, but dismissed as an "express" way of working "upon the hearts of the children of men". Mormon blogger Geoff Johnston writes,
Mormons are less inclined to see this as a problem than Christians, since Mormonism has traditionally promoted itself as [a] necessary expansion on and correction of ancient scripture.
But there are other problems with the passage. When considered together with the Biblical data on hell and with later developments of Mormon theology, the passage is shown to be entirely unnecessary. Mormonism later developed a theology of a temporary hell in spirit prison (the intermediate state between death and final judgment)
In this sense "hell" is a condition and not a location. The term is often used this way.
I’ve always been of the opinion that God’s light does not permeate outer darkness, and so people who go there eventually cease to exist altogether.
Any time anyone says “the Bible describes” anything, their claims deserve a high degree of skepticism. The Bible is a collection of numerous texts which promote numerous different ideologies. There are very few things that the Bible as a whole agrees on without exception.
Actually Tartaros is the equivalent of Gehenna, not Hades. Hades is a generic underworld of all dead, but Tartaros was the place of imprisonment of the Titans and was said to be “as far below Hades as the earth is below the heavens” (Homer, Iliad 8.15). It appears only once in the Bible (in 2 Pet 2:4).
The difference in usage between Gehenna and Hades is primarily the result of their distinct provenances. Hades comes from Greek mythology. Gehenna comes from Hebrew ideology and it means “Valley of Hinnom.” It is associated with fire because tradition holds it is where children were sacrificed to Molech by fire, and where, later, a perpetual fire was kept burning into which trash was thrown. It developed into a metaphorical place of post-mortal punishment, but in its original conception, and throughout its use in Judaism, that punishment is only temporary. 12 months is the duration according to the Talmud, and later sources follow it. According to Sanhedrin 7 five people have been consigned there forever, but everyone else only stays for a year. See also t. Bereshith 6.15, b. Rosh Hashanah 16b:7a; b. Bereshith 28b; Kiddushin 4.14, Avot 1.5; 5.19–20. Hades is associated with punishment by fire in Luke 16:23 as well.
I’d also point out that Gehenna is nowhere in the Bible said to be eternal, everlasting, or “forever and ever.” The three scriptures Aaron mentions at the beginning don’t make reference to any term ever translated “Hell,” and so Aaron’s assertion that they are referencing Gehenna and explicitly not Hades is begging the question. I also see no indication that the resurrection separates the two ideas.
There are a variety of ideologies that modern Christians consolidate into the doctrine of Hell, and they all presuppose the univocality of scripture. They retroject more modern ideologies into ancient contexts that never held them and conflate vastly disparate ideas that did exist synchronically.
But many Mormons use “hell” to refer to the lower kingdoms. The term is used a bunch of different ways within Mormonism. In this respect it is right in line with the use of the concept within the Old and New Testaments.
I don’t see any indication that Aaron takes the Bible seriously. He subjugates the Bible to his own ideologies, not the other way around.
A meaningless argument in light of the variegation of the concept of Hell within the Old and New Testaments.
Aaron’s naivety concerning the variegation of the ideologies of the Bible mirrors his refusal to acknowledge the broad semantic spectrum of the term “hell” in Latter-day Saint vernacular. As a result he has produced a fallacious and uninformed argument that ignores what the Bible actually says but will no doubt catalyze plenty of huzzahs and backslaps from others with equally myopic perspectives on the Bible and Mormonism.
Aaron
Shafovaloff recently posted a thread on another board seeking comments on a
paper draft I assume he intends to post on the Mormon Coffee blog, where he is a regular contributor. Here is the
explanation he gives and the post:
Quote
The following is a draft of an article I am
writing. Your critical and constructive feedback is appreciated. I have never
heard a good Mormon argument in response. One Mormon tried to argue that
D&C 19 is merely trying to reinforce the endless duration of the concept of
individual eternal punishment, but it flies in the face of how Mormon
leadership and culture has been using the passage for nearly 180 years.
To appease the universalist leanings of Martin Harris, Joseph Smith gave a revelation that reoriented the language of the New Testament describing hell.
To appease the universalist leanings of Martin Harris, Joseph Smith gave a revelation that reoriented the language of the New Testament describing hell.
Of course, Aaron has no idea why Joseph Smith had this revelation, but the more pigeonholing and marginalizing you can squeeze into a post the better, right?
Quote
Whereas the Bible describes hell as "eternal"
(Matthew 25:46), "everlasting" (Daniel 12:2), and "forever and
ever" (Revelation 20:10), Joseph Smith essentially taught in D&C 19
that the punishment was only described as "endless" and
"eternal" because God is endless and eternal, not because the
punishment itself has no end.
First, these scriptures don’t actually use any word translated “hell.” Matt just talks about “eternal punishment,” Dan says some will awake to “everlasting contempt,” and Rev says, “they will be tormented [in a lake of fire] forever and ever.” No word for “hell” is ever used, which points to a critical flaw in Aaron’s argument. He does not address the disparity between the ideologies concerning the afterlife found in the various stages of the Hebrew Bible's composition and in the New Testament. Nor does he concern himself with the lack of a philosophical concept of eternity in ancient Israel and New Testament times. Aaron presupposes this reference point either without knowing about these concerns or without thinking readers will know.
Quote
The revelation explains,
Quote
"Nevertheless,
it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written
endless torment. Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more
express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the
children of men, altogether for my name’s glory... For, behold, the mystery of
godliness, how great is it! For, behold, I am endless, and the punishment which
is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name.
Wherefore—Eternal punishment is God’s punishment. Endless punishment is God’s
punishment." (6-7,10-12)
Like most Mormons today, George Q. Cannon understood this revelation to teach that "eternal punishment" is not endless:
Quote
“Joseph Smith taught a different doctrine even
before the Church was organized. He taught the doctrine, in a revelation given
to Martin Harris—it had to be given with great care, because it was entirely
different to what was generally believed—that ‘eternal punishment is God’s
punishment;’ but it does not follow that those who come under God’s punishment
are to be punished throughout the endless ages of eternity." (Journal of
Discourses, v. 24, p. 374)
That earlier scriptures had described damnation as "eternal" is acknowledged [in] verse 7, but dismissed as an "express" way of working "upon the hearts of the children of men". Mormon blogger Geoff Johnston writes,
Quote
"D&C
19:4-12 is a humdinger of a scriptural passage. In it the Lord confirms what
people had surely been suspecting about various doctrines for thousands of
years: “He has to be kidding about that doctrine, right?” Apparently the answer
to their question in at least one case was 'yup' The specific misleading
doctrine that the Lord tells us he had allowed people to buy into until section
19 was given in 1830 is the doctrine that 'endless torment' and 'eternal
damnation' are actually endless and eternal in duration. Rather, the Lord
admits, such punishments usually do have an end. God just allowed his people to
believe otherwise because having people believe such punishments last forever
was a useful form of motivation."
Mormons are less inclined to see this as a problem than Christians, since Mormonism has traditionally promoted itself as [a] necessary expansion on and correction of ancient scripture.
But there are other problems with the passage. When considered together with the Biblical data on hell and with later developments of Mormon theology, the passage is shown to be entirely unnecessary. Mormonism later developed a theology of a temporary hell in spirit prison (the intermediate state between death and final judgment)
In this sense "hell" is a condition and not a location. The term is often used this way.
Quote
and of a post-resurrection outer darkness of endless
duration for the worst of the worst.
I’ve always been of the opinion that God’s light does not permeate outer darkness, and so people who go there eventually cease to exist altogether.
Quote
The Bible also describes a different hell for the
intermediate state and for post-resurrection punishment.
Any time anyone says “the Bible describes” anything, their claims deserve a high degree of skepticism. The Bible is a collection of numerous texts which promote numerous different ideologies. There are very few things that the Bible as a whole agrees on without exception.
Quote
The pre-resurrection hell is often described using the term
Hades (and sometimes Tartaros), but is never described as eternal, everlasting,
or "forever and ever".
Actually Tartaros is the equivalent of Gehenna, not Hades. Hades is a generic underworld of all dead, but Tartaros was the place of imprisonment of the Titans and was said to be “as far below Hades as the earth is below the heavens” (Homer, Iliad 8.15). It appears only once in the Bible (in 2 Pet 2:4).
Quote
Those in it await the final judgment as described in
Revelation 20.[1] The post-resurrection hell, often described as Gehenna and
the "lake of fire", is the only hell described as eternal.
The difference in usage between Gehenna and Hades is primarily the result of their distinct provenances. Hades comes from Greek mythology. Gehenna comes from Hebrew ideology and it means “Valley of Hinnom.” It is associated with fire because tradition holds it is where children were sacrificed to Molech by fire, and where, later, a perpetual fire was kept burning into which trash was thrown. It developed into a metaphorical place of post-mortal punishment, but in its original conception, and throughout its use in Judaism, that punishment is only temporary. 12 months is the duration according to the Talmud, and later sources follow it. According to Sanhedrin 7 five people have been consigned there forever, but everyone else only stays for a year. See also t. Bereshith 6.15, b. Rosh Hashanah 16b:7a; b. Bereshith 28b; Kiddushin 4.14, Avot 1.5; 5.19–20. Hades is associated with punishment by fire in Luke 16:23 as well.
I’d also point out that Gehenna is nowhere in the Bible said to be eternal, everlasting, or “forever and ever.” The three scriptures Aaron mentions at the beginning don’t make reference to any term ever translated “Hell,” and so Aaron’s assertion that they are referencing Gehenna and explicitly not Hades is begging the question. I also see no indication that the resurrection separates the two ideas.
There are a variety of ideologies that modern Christians consolidate into the doctrine of Hell, and they all presuppose the univocality of scripture. They retroject more modern ideologies into ancient contexts that never held them and conflate vastly disparate ideas that did exist synchronically.
Quote
It seems the only way one could correlate Mormonism with this
Biblical distinction is to parallel the pre-resurrection hell of the New
Testament (Hades/Tartaros) with hell in Mormonism's intermediate spirit prison,
and the post-resurrection hell of the New Testament (Gehenna) with Mormonism's
outer darkness. Given that Mormonism clearly teaches the only post-resurrection
hell is outer darkness, and that outer darkness is endless in duration, there
was no need to reorient the language of "eternal punishment" to
supposedly refer to the pre-resurrection temporary hell of spirit prison.
But many Mormons use “hell” to refer to the lower kingdoms. The term is used a bunch of different ways within Mormonism. In this respect it is right in line with the use of the concept within the Old and New Testaments.
Quote
If a Mormon attempts to take the Bible seriously along with
Mormonism,
I don’t see any indication that Aaron takes the Bible seriously. He subjugates the Bible to his own ideologies, not the other way around.
Quote
he or she is put between a rock and a hard place. Either
the post-resurrection hell (Gehenna) is endless in duration or it is not. If it
is, then D&C 19 is wrong both in describing the theology of the New
Testament and in describing the theology of modern Mormonism. If
post-resurrection hell is not eternal, then both the New Testament and modern
Mormonism are in error. Put another way, if the Bible is right in describing
the post-resurrection hell as eternal, then D&C 19 is wrong in trying to
redefine such descriptions. But if D&C 19 is correct in refuting the
Testaments descriptions of post-resurrection hell, then traditional and modern
Mormonism is wrong in teaching that the only post-resurrection hell, outer
darkness, is endless in duration.
A meaningless argument in light of the variegation of the concept of Hell within the Old and New Testaments.
Quote
Furthermore, if only very few people of those who come to
earth to experience mortality—those who commit the unpardonable sin—will
actually go to Gehenna (the only explicit post-resurrection hell; paralleled
with “outer darkness” in Mormonism), why does Jesus so widely warn about the
threat of Gehenna for those who do not fight lust and anger, and for those who
lead children astray (i.e. Matthew 5:22,29-30)? Why does he so widely warn
people to “fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna”
(Matthew 10:28). Why does he denounce the general groups of the scribes and
Pharisees, “How will you escape being condemned to Gehenna?” (Matthew 23:33)
Modern Mormonism, contra Jesus, seems to teach that nearly all the scribes and
Pharisees will end up in a heavenly kingdom, not Gehenna.
The most reasonable conclusion is that Joseph Smith got it wrong in D&C 19. The hell the Bible describes as "eternal", "everlasting", and "forever and ever" really is endless in duration (just like "eternal" life is endless in duration; cf. Matthew 25:46). Neither the early universalism (or annihilationism?) of D&C 19 and Martin Harris nor the developed quasi-universalism of later Mormonism fit with the Biblical data.
The most reasonable conclusion is that Joseph Smith got it wrong in D&C 19. The hell the Bible describes as "eternal", "everlasting", and "forever and ever" really is endless in duration (just like "eternal" life is endless in duration; cf. Matthew 25:46). Neither the early universalism (or annihilationism?) of D&C 19 and Martin Harris nor the developed quasi-universalism of later Mormonism fit with the Biblical data.
Aaron’s naivety concerning the variegation of the ideologies of the Bible mirrors his refusal to acknowledge the broad semantic spectrum of the term “hell” in Latter-day Saint vernacular. As a result he has produced a fallacious and uninformed argument that ignores what the Bible actually says but will no doubt catalyze plenty of huzzahs and backslaps from others with equally myopic perspectives on the Bible and Mormonism.