In this section Keller explains his reasoning for why the existence of hell is not contrary to the notion that God loves us. He starts by defining hell as the state of being apart from God, and not so much a lake of fire as is commonly depicted. He says that souls get there by continuing on their selfish trajectory after death. He points to paranoia, envy, anxiety, and other ails of the living and suggests that they are caused by selfish behavior, and that this mentality would continue after death into an eternity, eventually consuming the soul entirely, creating hell. He says that people in hell do not even want to be rescued, that they are too absorbed in self deception or denial or blaming others. He says that ultimately everyone either says, “Thy will be done,” to God, or he says it to them, and that their will inevitably leads to hell.
There are dozens of problems with this argument, and I’m sure I’ll miss some, but I’m going to plow ahead anyway.
Okay, assuming you believe his notion that the soul exists, and that the soul has a trajectory that it continues on after death, this is not meaningfully different from the notion of god tossing souls into a pit of fire. The nature of infinity means any non-infinite number is essentially 0 in comparison, so even if ones trajectory is very slightly towards hell and it will take you say, 100 billion years to reach it, that’s an instant compared to eternity. Since you can’t change directions after death, the extreme of ones trajectory at death is essentially your state for eternity, as with the classic conception of heaven and hell.
Keller tries to take some of the agency from God in his description of hell. He describes it as people choosing it and God just allowing it. Whether God actively sentences people to hell is irrelevant, though, from a justice standpoint. First, God made those people that are rejecting him, knowing they would do so, so he sentenced them in his act of creation. If you don’t believe that and somehow get around God’s omniscience to suggest that we have the ability to surprise God, then he still has the ability to remake us, or the universe so that none or fewer people go to hell. For example, he could actually do what Keller suggests, and appear and ask everyone if they’d like to do his will. I bet a lot fewer people would end up in hell if he did that.
Keller also implicitly states that anyone not devoted to God is a selfish person, but I take umbrage with that statement. Keller, in previous sections on morality, stated that Christianity doesn’t necessarily make you a better person, and that people can be better than Christians without being Christian. These statements seems to conflict with the idea that your final destination is determined by simply general moral attitude. What role do the things the church says are important (accepting Jesus as the one true god, asking for forgiveness, etc.) play in affecting your trajectory upon death?
In order to allow for anyone to be saved in the trajectory model of heaven and hell, it would be necessary to only consider a very small segment of time when determining the trajectory, or to have some sort of reset mechanism. Without such, a lifetime of sin could not be overcome without a similarly long time of sainthood. With either escape case, though, does it work both ways? If I live a life of good attitude, but then think something negative before getting splattered will I continue in that mindset until I wind up in hell? Or could I accidentally reset all my good thoughts, and wind up going to hell?
All of this, obviously, is purely speculation. There is no evidence of a soul or an afterlife. If you want to use reason, it’s in the title of the book, in such a situation you should apply Occam’s razor and determine that neither exist, since that is the simplest explanation.
In conclusion, another totally unconvincing and uncompelling section from Keller. How many in a row is that?