Whatever Takes Us Away

I had absolutely no idea the surface I was beginning to scratch with my last post.  I listen to many podcasts and radio programs that scan a wide variety of Christian thought, and recently they have been flooded with a central theme.

For just about two weeks now the main topic of conversation is about a single book.  I haven’t had the opportunity to read it yet, but the quotes I am hearing are a bit disturbing.  It seems one person, above the millions of believers throughout the centuries of orthodox thought, above the theologians, teachers and well-thinking laity, one person believes he has the answers about heaven and hell.  One person.  Now, when it comes to beliefs, and specifically those about Christianity, I would certainly put myself in with traditional, orthodox protestant thought; rather conservative and holding all things about faith and practice up to the light of the Bible.  Yes, I read some of the early church fathers and I also read through people like Luther, Calvin, Wesley and even more modern theologians.  I have a copy on my computer of Edward’s “Sinners in the hands of an angry God” and have read though it a few times.  Charles Spurgeon?  Yes, he’s on the book shelf too.  So I ask, “How is it that one man believes so many of these, and many others before and since, have been wrong for nearly 2,000 years?” 

I have heard at least two programs that have labeled this author, pastor and teacher as a heretic.  No calls for excommunication or anything of that nature, but a heretic label has been set forth. 

Why the uproar over this author and his new book?  Let’s just say, once again, that God has more than one attribute to His nature.  I will say it over and over, love is only ONE aspect of God.  For many within the Christian church today there is a huge failure in where they start with God, and where it logically leads them to end.  Typically the argument goes something like, “Why would a loving God have so much pain, suffering, and ultimately lead some to end in hell for eternity?”  Here’s the problem: God does not lead people into hell.  This argument assumes that people are inherently good natured and honestly seek to do good and get to God.  Human nature though, is corrupt, violent, and anything but seeking after God unless He reaches out and changes the heart first.  The typical argument starts and ends with MAN in the center, and God on the fringes.  It is an incorrect and unbiblical view.  But, if we start AND end with God at the center, the picture painted is much more in line with reality.

The man centered view, with all it’s assumptions, leads down a slippery slope.  The view from the book is that, ultimately, everyone will end up in heaven.  The love of God will prevail over all and eternal life, in the positive sense, will be provided to every person from the beginning of humanity to the end.  There is no biblical backing to this idea, and in the past, views like this were deemed heretical.  It’s called universalism.  This thought leads me to a few things: 1) the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is empty and meaningless, 2) salvation is empty and meaningless, 3) there is no such thing as sin in the human condition. 

First, Jesus.  If in fact all people of all times will eventually be saved and get into heaven then the life and teachings of Jesus are absolutely meaningless.  His message was of love, justice, peace, grace and mercy.  God condescended from His rightful place in heaven to become human so that humanity, in it’s wicked condition, could have a rightful savior; perfectly sinless.  He taught about the kingdom of God, of salvation, of sin, and even of hell more than heaven.  He was condemned and died as an atoning sacrifice on a cross, to save lost humanity.  But, he was raised back to life, ascended into heaven and sent the third person of the Holy Trinity (the Holy Spirit) to be an aide to believers, and to empower believers.  Through the life, death and resurrection of Christ people can find eternal life in the positive sense; life in the presence of God himself.  If the premise is correct that all will be saved (in a universal sense), then the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus was for nothing.  The claim by the author is that Jesus came to save humanity from God - but even Jesus taught that a kingdom divided cannot stand against itself (Matthew 12:25-28).  If the premise is false, the argument fails.

Secondly, Salvation.  If in fact all people of all times will eventually be saved and get into heaven, then salvation itself is meaningless.  Why would God send His own son to die as a sacrifice if He knew that eventually He would save all people?  Throw out missions right now!  There is no need to send people out to preach the gospel; salvation has no meaning!  However, the picture from the Bible is clear.  Humanity’s condition is such that they cannot bring themselves TO God, but require something outside themselves to provide a means of reconciliation.  God provided the means of salvation through Jesus and through the work of the Holy Spirit.  If one starts with man, he fails, but if one starts with God empowering people through the Holy Spirit towards salvation, the ends are justified.  God provides the means and the ends - the means are that believers, even in their fallen human condition, have been sent to preach the good news of Jesus (Matthew 28:16-20), and the ends are that salvation comes directly from God (Jonah 2:9, Acts 4:8-12).  If the premise is correct that all will be saved  (in a universal sense) then the idea of salvation is worthless.  The claim by the author is that eventually, every person will achieve salvation, either in life, or with an option to choose after death (even from Hell itself).  The Bible shows otherwise, and if the premise is false, the argument fails.

Third, Sin.  I think this is one that I have had the most trouble with wrapping my head around.  If in fact that all people of all times will eventually be saved and get into heaven, then the human condition is generally good and sin does not reign and is meaningless.  Contrary to the biblical account (beginning with the fall in Genesis), the author seems to believe that people are good, and even those who are not Christians will get into heaven (the image of Ghandi is used in videos and in the book).  If there is no such thing as sin, then why, in the first instance, would humanity require salvation?  This is why this portion is so troubling to me.  If the human condition is good and all people will achieve eternal life with God, why the need for salvation or a savior?  The lack of depth in thought by the author is staggering.  Yes, the love of God is amazing and powerful, I do not doubt that even an iota!  However, all one needs to do is look around and see how wretched humanity truly is; and we aren’t getting any better.  As a whole, humanity is pretty jacked up, wrought with sin, and in order for us to be reconciled to God we need a savior, we need something to provide our means of salvation.  If the premise is correct that all will be saved (in a universal sense), then the idea of humanity’s sinful nature is meaningless, void of any bearing on our thoughts and actions.  The claim by the author is that, even horribly wretched people who reject God because of their sinful nature in this life, will eventually be accepted into heaven.  The picture painted in the Bible by Jesus is far different (Luke 10:16, John 3:31-36), and if the premise is false, the argument fails.

Some of you may know of the book and author I’m writing about, others may not.  I have purposely left that out of this post so as to not muddy the waters any more than necessary.  If you have found these premises to be upsetting and contrary to the biblical narrative, then chances are, your beliefs and faith are on the solid foundation of the truth of the Bible.  However, if you think that the book has provided great insight, then chances are my thoughts here have offended you.  I do not apologize for what I have said, but stand with the Word of Truth in the Bible.  I also stand with nearly 2,000 years of thinkers, preachers, and theologians on the side of orthodox Christian belief.  Yes, I know that not all have said the same things, but in general, the Christian faith has been solid in its core teachings, based on the Bible itself. 

My hope and prayer is that this is NOT where the church is heading.