I will presently steer clear of the issue of specific Biblical texts and address the issue of reconciling an eternal hell with notions of God's love. Presumably there will be no debate that the Scriptures describe our God as a specifically loving God.
I want to draw an important distinction between the mere label "love" and the actual content of the concept of love. The believer in eternal torment (ET) has a daunting task - giving an account of how eternal torment can be reconciled with the concept of love, when the latter is actually analyzed.
In my experience, all ETers agree that eternal torment appears to be non-loving. The usual counter-argument (at least what I have seen so far) is a kind of vague "God's version of love is is different from our version" or the equivalent "you're using worldy reasoning when you reject ET". I find such explanations to be rather obviously empty of real content. They have a kind of "slogan-y" and "debate-preempting" air about them - as if matter is settled by simple declaration.
While it is true that God's love is unfathomably richer than ours, this is not a warrant to accept propositions about His love that are repugnant to our sensibilities. We are not being asked (by the ETer) to accept propositions about divine love that are beyond the ken of our experience - we are rather being asked to asked to accept propositions that directly conflict with other things we know about divine love, both from the Scriptures and from human experience.
In short, even we fallen humans know in our bowels that inflicting endless torment is not love. I would say that this is "given to us as obvious". On a more rational level, however, it seems to me that God's various attributes (e.g. love, abhorrence of sin) have to work together. We may not know how they work together, but we can recognize solutions that do not work because they create contradictions. And eternal torment cannot be reconciled with love.
At the end of the day, I believe that the ETer is asking us to discard our "human" notions of love. But we are real people who live in a real world who need our God to give us a model for love that has actual content that we can make sense of. And I would claim that calling "eternal torment" loving does such damage to our concept of love that it effectively becomes useless to us.
I want to draw an important distinction between the mere label "love" and the actual content of the concept of love. The believer in eternal torment (ET) has a daunting task - giving an account of how eternal torment can be reconciled with the concept of love, when the latter is actually analyzed.
In my experience, all ETers agree that eternal torment appears to be non-loving. The usual counter-argument (at least what I have seen so far) is a kind of vague "God's version of love is is different from our version" or the equivalent "you're using worldy reasoning when you reject ET". I find such explanations to be rather obviously empty of real content. They have a kind of "slogan-y" and "debate-preempting" air about them - as if matter is settled by simple declaration.
While it is true that God's love is unfathomably richer than ours, this is not a warrant to accept propositions about His love that are repugnant to our sensibilities. We are not being asked (by the ETer) to accept propositions about divine love that are beyond the ken of our experience - we are rather being asked to asked to accept propositions that directly conflict with other things we know about divine love, both from the Scriptures and from human experience.
In short, even we fallen humans know in our bowels that inflicting endless torment is not love. I would say that this is "given to us as obvious". On a more rational level, however, it seems to me that God's various attributes (e.g. love, abhorrence of sin) have to work together. We may not know how they work together, but we can recognize solutions that do not work because they create contradictions. And eternal torment cannot be reconciled with love.
At the end of the day, I believe that the ETer is asking us to discard our "human" notions of love. But we are real people who live in a real world who need our God to give us a model for love that has actual content that we can make sense of. And I would claim that calling "eternal torment" loving does such damage to our concept of love that it effectively becomes useless to us.