What do you think?
Rate this book
Hell and Heaven in Narrative Perspective
The debate about "hell" is always going to be a difficult one. A number of recent books, notably Rob Bell's Love Wins, have added fuel to the flames. This collection of essays from postost.net addresses important aspects of the current debate, arguing for a radical revision of the evangelical understanding not only of hell but also of heaven on the basis of a narrative-historical reading of the New Testament. Punishment and reward are part of the story of what was happening to the people of God as it passed through a long and painful transition from national Israel under the Law to a cosmopolitan, empire-wide community under Jesus. This approach forces us to rethink some traditional assumptions about who we are and where we are going. Through his blogging and books Andrew Perriman is pushing for a renewal of evangelical thought and practice after modernity.
- GenresTheology
148 pages, Kindle Edition
First published December 4, 2011
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
June 30, 2015
Actually, I think the book is probably worth at least 3.5 stars. The book would be much more helpful if it were actually a book written to address its subject systematically, but that's not what it is; it's a collection of Perriman's blog posts on the subject of hell. They are arranged as systematically as possible and with a few added to introduce the narrative-historical hermeneutic, but the presentation is less than ideal. That said, I knew what I was purchasing and I bought the book so that I could have Perriman's blog posts in one place and as organised as they'll ever be.
As far as content goes, the book is helpful and full of food for thought. I agree with with most of Perriman's analyses of New Testament passages traditionally or commonly used as prooftexts for hell that are really about temporal judgement rather than eternal damnation. I'm not convinced that all of those passages can be interpreted as referring to merely temporal judgement and in a couple of cases I find Perriman's exegesis to be stretching the text quite a lot. He makes a very good case for annihilation rather than eternal conscious torment--again some good food for thought. If nothing else, Perriman offers some exegetical alternatives to those of other scholars also working in the narrative-historical school and I've found them helpful.
As far as content goes, the book is helpful and full of food for thought. I agree with with most of Perriman's analyses of New Testament passages traditionally or commonly used as prooftexts for hell that are really about temporal judgement rather than eternal damnation. I'm not convinced that all of those passages can be interpreted as referring to merely temporal judgement and in a couple of cases I find Perriman's exegesis to be stretching the text quite a lot. He makes a very good case for annihilation rather than eternal conscious torment--again some good food for thought. If nothing else, Perriman offers some exegetical alternatives to those of other scholars also working in the narrative-historical school and I've found them helpful.
February 16, 2017
This is a collection of blog posts by Andrew Perriman (http://www.postost.net/) on heaven and hell (hence the title). Perriman's big argument, as seen in his books The Coming of the Son of Man and Re:Mission, is that Christians miss the point of the New Testament because we read it as universal theology rather than narrative. Early in this "book" he writes: "my proposed one sentence summary of the message of the Bible: The one true god of an obscure and cantankerous Middle Eastern people eventually, after numerous set backs and no small amount of suffering on the part of that people, overcomes the pagan empires that conspired against him for so long – and the rest is history."
Another key facet of Perriman's argument is that the New Testament looks prophetically towards two main events: the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the defeat of paganism (seen in the conversion of Constantine in the early 300s). This view changes how we understand hell and heaven. Perriman argues that most (all) judgment passages spoken by Jesus do not refer to hell as we think of it but of the death and destruction that came to the city of Jerusalem at the hands of the Roman armies. When Paul speaks of judgment, he sees it as God bring death and destruction on the pagans who have persecuted God's people (Perriman mentions Constantine's conversion, though I imagine the fall of Rome in the 400s AD would also fit). Thus "hell" is not eternal conscious torment, instead the New Testament speaks simply of "death" (you could say Perriman is an annihilationist).
This little book is a great place to start for those interested in learning more about such ideas.
After reading this and a few of Perriman's books I do wonder if he, in correcting one mistake (that Christians too often and too quickly universalize the specific message of the Bible) he goes too far the other direction. Perriman, whether you agree with him or not, does brilliant exegesis. His reading of scripture is fresh and invigorating. But, and maybe this is me being a self-centered westerner, when does it apply to the life of the individual believer? At times I wonder if Perriman's preferred style of worship is simply lecture to help believers understand the Bible better. He seems to almost resist any application of the words of Jesus or Paul to our life today.
At one point he asks "Is there something in the text or elsewhere in the Gospels that suggests that Jesus typically and intentionally made prophetic statements that had a split fulfilment?" Wouldn't the fact the OT prophets' messages often have split fulfillment (as they had a message for their day which Jesus appropriated for his day) indicate this is common in prophetic statements? Perriman focuses us strongly on exegesis, I am curious of more how this would preach in contemporary communities.
(To be fair, Perriman does talk a bit about this in Re:Mission and he does work in ministry, so I am sure he has answers. I am just wondering at their absence from his written work.)
A second question is more in regards to his interpretation. He says "This means that the only people who get to go to heaven in the New Testament are people who have been raised from the dead in advance of the renewal of all things. Jesus was raised on the third day; the martyrs are to be raised at the parousia, which I think refers – historically speaking – to the moment of Christ’s victory over Greek-Roman paganism and the deliverance of the churches from persecution". In other words, just as Jesus rose from the dead, so at the time of Constantine's conversion the martyrs also rose from the dead.
The Bible, and traditional Christianity, is pretty clear that Jesus rose in a literal physical body (as opposed to the disciples believing Jesus continued to exist in heaven while his body rotted). Perriman believes in this view of resurrection (unless I am mistaken). But if the resurrection of the martyrs is parallel to Jesus' resurrection, does he mean the martyrs also rose to new bodies already? If Jesus' tomb was empty, were the tombs, if we go dig them up) also empty by 325 AD? I think more clarification is needed by Perriman on what he means by resurrection.
Overall, I find Perriman's work thought-provoking and fascinating. His writings, in book and blog, always make me think. I highly recommend these books for any Christian pastor or person interested in the message of the early church. Whether you end up agreeing or disagreeing, I think you will appreciate his work.
Another key facet of Perriman's argument is that the New Testament looks prophetically towards two main events: the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the defeat of paganism (seen in the conversion of Constantine in the early 300s). This view changes how we understand hell and heaven. Perriman argues that most (all) judgment passages spoken by Jesus do not refer to hell as we think of it but of the death and destruction that came to the city of Jerusalem at the hands of the Roman armies. When Paul speaks of judgment, he sees it as God bring death and destruction on the pagans who have persecuted God's people (Perriman mentions Constantine's conversion, though I imagine the fall of Rome in the 400s AD would also fit). Thus "hell" is not eternal conscious torment, instead the New Testament speaks simply of "death" (you could say Perriman is an annihilationist).
This little book is a great place to start for those interested in learning more about such ideas.
After reading this and a few of Perriman's books I do wonder if he, in correcting one mistake (that Christians too often and too quickly universalize the specific message of the Bible) he goes too far the other direction. Perriman, whether you agree with him or not, does brilliant exegesis. His reading of scripture is fresh and invigorating. But, and maybe this is me being a self-centered westerner, when does it apply to the life of the individual believer? At times I wonder if Perriman's preferred style of worship is simply lecture to help believers understand the Bible better. He seems to almost resist any application of the words of Jesus or Paul to our life today.
At one point he asks "Is there something in the text or elsewhere in the Gospels that suggests that Jesus typically and intentionally made prophetic statements that had a split fulfilment?" Wouldn't the fact the OT prophets' messages often have split fulfillment (as they had a message for their day which Jesus appropriated for his day) indicate this is common in prophetic statements? Perriman focuses us strongly on exegesis, I am curious of more how this would preach in contemporary communities.
(To be fair, Perriman does talk a bit about this in Re:Mission and he does work in ministry, so I am sure he has answers. I am just wondering at their absence from his written work.)
A second question is more in regards to his interpretation. He says "This means that the only people who get to go to heaven in the New Testament are people who have been raised from the dead in advance of the renewal of all things. Jesus was raised on the third day; the martyrs are to be raised at the parousia, which I think refers – historically speaking – to the moment of Christ’s victory over Greek-Roman paganism and the deliverance of the churches from persecution". In other words, just as Jesus rose from the dead, so at the time of Constantine's conversion the martyrs also rose from the dead.
The Bible, and traditional Christianity, is pretty clear that Jesus rose in a literal physical body (as opposed to the disciples believing Jesus continued to exist in heaven while his body rotted). Perriman believes in this view of resurrection (unless I am mistaken). But if the resurrection of the martyrs is parallel to Jesus' resurrection, does he mean the martyrs also rose to new bodies already? If Jesus' tomb was empty, were the tombs, if we go dig them up) also empty by 325 AD? I think more clarification is needed by Perriman on what he means by resurrection.
Overall, I find Perriman's work thought-provoking and fascinating. His writings, in book and blog, always make me think. I highly recommend these books for any Christian pastor or person interested in the message of the early church. Whether you end up agreeing or disagreeing, I think you will appreciate his work.
July 11, 2014
I've found Perriman's books to be always challenging and fascinating, even when I have not agreed with every last bit of them. This one proves to be no exception to the rule. The first two thirds of the book is generally exceptional. Having blogged extensively through the issue of hell, he has collected the posts together in one place.
Perriman's argument is essentially that hell as a metaphysical place does not exist because the passages that have commonly been used in its defense all refer to historical judgments that take place with regard to corporate entities like Israel and Rome. That is, the passages which the Church has taken to refer to punishment after death actually refer to the historical wrath of God revealed against Israel in A.D.70. I find myself in substantial agreement with this reading of the texts in question. There is no concept of hell in the Old Testament, and the presumed texts in the NT have been misconstrued. This puts Perriman into someplace close to what we might call a "modified annihilationism."
He takes the annihilationist position because he does not see much merit to the Christian universalist or "Ultimate Redemptionist" view, believing that the universalist texts don't say what the universalist wants them to say, and briefly outlines his objections in a page and a half or so. In so doing, however, he ignores almost all of the salient passages; where sin abounds grace abounds all the more and just as in Adam all are imprisoned so under Christ all men will be vindicated (Rom. 5). All men were imprisoned under sin so that God might forgive them all (Rom. 11). The deliverance purchased upon the cross was for the whole world, not just the redeemed community (1 John 2:2).
This leads me into the points of disagreement:
1. Perriman is singularly focused on an Israel-centric reading of the NT; that is, the theological geography and language that is used all refers to Israel's coming punishment and the Church's existence as the New Heavens and New Earth, that Jesus came to save the new Israel. Now, I am in substantial agreement with this idea. Certainly this is the argument in many NT passages. But to say that this is the only arrangement imagined by the NT writers, it seems to me, goes beyond the actual text into an imposed hermeneutical grid. Jesus certainly saved his people and undid the exile (Matt. 1). But the odd thing is that as we move through the NT the more we come to realize that Jesus's death cannot be limited in this way. His redemption is comprehensive. 1 John 2:2 is the classic text in this regard, that His cross was salvation/deliverance/vindication for the Church, yes, but also for the whole world too, and John says the cross impacted those who are "out" in precisely the same way as those who are "in." So while his exegesis is in many cases quite sound, his perspective is unnecessarily limited.
2. Perriman still has a vague Constantinian hovering over his reading of the NT. He wants to say that the final, final victory over the nations came about when Constantine legalized Christianity. Needless to say, this is at the very least a questionable reading of the NT in this regard, and is a bizarre claim to make of a collection of documents so singularly opposed to empire and the nations and speaks of them in such starkly negative terms.
3. Perriman denies not merely hell, but heaven as well as a metaphysical reality. Rather, he views resurrection as the central interest of the NT. While interesting and challenging, I find that he has constructed here a minority of one in his unique reading. One need not jettison the intermediate state of heaven in order to make his case, of course, and so I cannot follow him down this road.
So all in all, this was a captivating, fascinating read that has quite a few great insights. I find his schema to be compelling, but possessing a limited horizon - one which the NT won't let us wholly embrace as "the whole picture." Still, it is worth reading and wrestling with, particularly when the ebook version can be downloaded for free from Amazon.
Perriman's argument is essentially that hell as a metaphysical place does not exist because the passages that have commonly been used in its defense all refer to historical judgments that take place with regard to corporate entities like Israel and Rome. That is, the passages which the Church has taken to refer to punishment after death actually refer to the historical wrath of God revealed against Israel in A.D.70. I find myself in substantial agreement with this reading of the texts in question. There is no concept of hell in the Old Testament, and the presumed texts in the NT have been misconstrued. This puts Perriman into someplace close to what we might call a "modified annihilationism."
He takes the annihilationist position because he does not see much merit to the Christian universalist or "Ultimate Redemptionist" view, believing that the universalist texts don't say what the universalist wants them to say, and briefly outlines his objections in a page and a half or so. In so doing, however, he ignores almost all of the salient passages; where sin abounds grace abounds all the more and just as in Adam all are imprisoned so under Christ all men will be vindicated (Rom. 5). All men were imprisoned under sin so that God might forgive them all (Rom. 11). The deliverance purchased upon the cross was for the whole world, not just the redeemed community (1 John 2:2).
This leads me into the points of disagreement:
1. Perriman is singularly focused on an Israel-centric reading of the NT; that is, the theological geography and language that is used all refers to Israel's coming punishment and the Church's existence as the New Heavens and New Earth, that Jesus came to save the new Israel. Now, I am in substantial agreement with this idea. Certainly this is the argument in many NT passages. But to say that this is the only arrangement imagined by the NT writers, it seems to me, goes beyond the actual text into an imposed hermeneutical grid. Jesus certainly saved his people and undid the exile (Matt. 1). But the odd thing is that as we move through the NT the more we come to realize that Jesus's death cannot be limited in this way. His redemption is comprehensive. 1 John 2:2 is the classic text in this regard, that His cross was salvation/deliverance/vindication for the Church, yes, but also for the whole world too, and John says the cross impacted those who are "out" in precisely the same way as those who are "in." So while his exegesis is in many cases quite sound, his perspective is unnecessarily limited.
2. Perriman still has a vague Constantinian hovering over his reading of the NT. He wants to say that the final, final victory over the nations came about when Constantine legalized Christianity. Needless to say, this is at the very least a questionable reading of the NT in this regard, and is a bizarre claim to make of a collection of documents so singularly opposed to empire and the nations and speaks of them in such starkly negative terms.
3. Perriman denies not merely hell, but heaven as well as a metaphysical reality. Rather, he views resurrection as the central interest of the NT. While interesting and challenging, I find that he has constructed here a minority of one in his unique reading. One need not jettison the intermediate state of heaven in order to make his case, of course, and so I cannot follow him down this road.
So all in all, this was a captivating, fascinating read that has quite a few great insights. I find his schema to be compelling, but possessing a limited horizon - one which the NT won't let us wholly embrace as "the whole picture." Still, it is worth reading and wrestling with, particularly when the ebook version can be downloaded for free from Amazon.
March 13, 2013
It is hard to rate this book as it is really a collection of blog posts. If you are interested in the subject and have some solid background in the issues involved you will probably find it fascinating (or perhaps infuriating if you don't share the author's perspective). I enjoyed immersing myself in Perriman's thoughts on heaven and hell but did sometimes wish he offered more of a primer on the issues or had time to slow down and unpack some of the details, etc.
Perriman has a unique take on eschatology (a version of preterism, with narrative theology and new perspective aspects as well I believe) which I find compelling in many ways but which is certainly not orthodox or traditional. I need to read some of his other books to get a fuller sense of his perspective.
For Perriman scripture is primarily to be understood as historical and narrative rather than theological and metaphysical. He also stresses a community rather than individual focus. As such he rejects traditional concepts of hell (literal place of eternal fire and torment, etc.) and heaven (a place believers go immediately after death to be with God and await the second coming).
And his theology and eschatology are based on a close reading and understanding of the Biblical texts not on a liberal desire to remove difficult or hard doctrines. It is post-modern in a sense but not with the connotation of removing truth, etc.
As I said, fascinating to me but not for everyone. And of course, if you wanted to you could read all of this on his blog.
Perriman has a unique take on eschatology (a version of preterism, with narrative theology and new perspective aspects as well I believe) which I find compelling in many ways but which is certainly not orthodox or traditional. I need to read some of his other books to get a fuller sense of his perspective.
For Perriman scripture is primarily to be understood as historical and narrative rather than theological and metaphysical. He also stresses a community rather than individual focus. As such he rejects traditional concepts of hell (literal place of eternal fire and torment, etc.) and heaven (a place believers go immediately after death to be with God and await the second coming).
And his theology and eschatology are based on a close reading and understanding of the Biblical texts not on a liberal desire to remove difficult or hard doctrines. It is post-modern in a sense but not with the connotation of removing truth, etc.
As I said, fascinating to me but not for everyone. And of course, if you wanted to you could read all of this on his blog.
September 21, 2012
Perriman offers compelling reasons to affirm preterism, and his comments about judgment are quite illuminating. He is articulate, persuasive and at times funny. The only downside was his chapter on universalism, which is weak and all too brief.
July 8, 2014
Some great content, but needs some heavy editing. I think it would have served the book so well to have more content on the new heaven and new earth... A little more hopeful
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews