Differences I Would Have with Dante
Reading The Inferno makes me think a lot about the afterlife. I am not sure whether this would count for an actual post, but this is what has been on my mind concerning The Inferno. I have three main aspects that I would consider to be rather big differences with Dante’s view of Hell.
We discussed in class that Dante’s views were very much associated with church teachings of the time. Part of this teaching was of Purgatory. Like many other Protestant Christians in today’s world, I do not subscribe to the doctrine of Purgatory. Here is my reason. If Purgatory was meant to refine people to be ready for Heaven, then what was Christ’s sacrifice for? Also, being refined is what this life is supposed to be about. All over Scripture we get the picture that Christians are supposed to be increasing their faith and refining their character throughout their lives. This process of perfecting our faith is not to get ready for Heaven, but to be transformed into the image of the One who created us. We are to continue growing in Christ-likeness.
Another difference I would hold with Dante concerning Hell is that I would not have a place for people who died before Christ came. Or at least I do not believe there is a provision for that. The God of the Old Testament is the same God of the New Testament. One of the aspects of this God is that He is not held to our standards of time. God completely transcends time. My personal view is that just because someone dies on earth on one certain day does not mean it is that same day in the afterlife. The timeline of eternity is not held to the same boundaries as earth’s timeline.
My final difference with Dante concerns his different levels of punishment. At this point in my understanding of sin, I would not believe there are different levels of punishment which go from bad to worse based on the sin. I do, however, like Dante’s portrayal of the punishment being ‘cantro passot’. If I were to present it, I would likely have everyone on the same plain because all have sinned. From my perception, the root of sin is the heart beating for something else more than it does for God. God embodies everything good and pure. One could say, therefore, that making the ultimate decision of something else over Him results in the absence of anything good and pure which would be Hell. Also, everyone has a laundry list of sins we deal with and have dealt with in life. How does one decide which sin counts for more? If I have rejected God and must then end up in Hell to be punished for sin, which sin defines my life? Which sin is the biggest? Even if God had an opinion on which sin was worse, why would that count for any merit when I have rejected Him?
When it comes to the idea of spending some time in Hell then being allowed to enter Heaven or being destroyed, I have an issue, again based on the time concept. How much time can you spend in a place where time simply does not exist? The years of eternity will not be counted. It’s eternity. Who is keeping track?
I hope this was not incredibly confusing or even seen as unnecessary, but there it is.
April 14, 2009 at 2:18 am
Ha, it’s been almost a year, but here I am the first to comment. Interesting post, Stephanie. I agree with most of what you said. If you define sin as rejection of God (which all sin is) then one sin is the same as another. If you define sin as dysfunctional behavior, then some dysfunctions are more destructive than other. That’s what contra passo means, you get to live with the dysfunctional choice you have made.