How’s this for good news?

The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you and is dreadfully provoked: his wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the fire.

This news, from Jonathan Edwards’ famous sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” delivered in 1741, hardly sounds good! We moderns generally refrain from using such intense language in our gospel presentations, but, no matter how much we temper it, the end result is the same.

God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life, and if you don't love God back and cooperate with God's plans in exactly the prescribed way, God will torture you with unimaginable abuse, forever. (xiv)

In The Last Word and the Word After That, the third installment of his New Kind of Christian trilogy, pastor Brian McLaren wrestles with evangelical’s obsession with hell. He is willing to recognize what few of us are willing to admit, namely, that reconciling God’s everlasting love with the eternal torments of hell is difficult, to say the least. One of the characters in his book expresses this existential frustration in a way that most of us can identify with: “If Christianity is true, then all the people I love except for a few will burn in hell forever. But if Christianity is not true, then life doesn't seem to have much meaning or hope. I wish I could find a better option” (5). McLaren offers his book as a “conversation, with multiple points of view” in order to help us discover a better option.

Getting Rid of the Baggage

The problem with much evangelical thought about hell begins with a one-sided perspective of justice. A distinctly Western view of jurisprudence causes us to read “judgment” passages in the Bible in a distorted way. We often speak of an absolutely perfect standard of “justice” that appears to hang over God, forcing God to navigate the mechanisms of a complex court system beyond God’s control – a court system unknown to Jesus’ ancient audience. God’s obligation to enforce this absolutely perfect standard of justice allows Christians to “keep believing in both a loving God and horrific hell. God is a decent judge stuck in a rigid, heartless system” (41).

To further complicate matters, we find hell in the strangest of places. It is Jesus in the Gospels (and primarily in the Gospel of Matthew, and usually directed to Pharisees) who first speaks of hell. Hell, as commonly understood, is non-existent in the Old Testament (45), even though we tend to read our concept of hell back into it.

Jesus’ use of hell serves a specific purpose in the Gospel of Matthew. He primarily uses hell language against the Pharisees who threatened “hell” against the sinners – both pagans and Jewish renegades – who refused to share their views and lifestyle.

The Pharisees used hell language in one way. Jesus turned it around and used it in the opposite way. They threatened marginal people with hell unless they submitted to their religious dominance. Jesus threatened the religious establishment with hell unless they showed compassion for the marginal people. (136)

To begin with either heaven or hell in our proclamation of the gospel distorts things from the very beginning. “If you were to die tonight, do you know for certain that you’d go to be with God in heaven?” is the wrong question to ask. One searches in vain to find any equivalent to this question in the New Testament.

When we begin with the wrong question, we reduce salvation to individual deliverance to an otherworldly place. Salvation has little or nothing to do with the present. Nor does salvation have much to do with resisting evil in this world or yearning for the restoration of all things. And yet, this is what salvation is about in the New Testament – the redemption and restoration of the world through Christ in the peaceful revolution of the Kingdom of God.

The Gospel of the Kingdom of God

Instead of speaking about salvation into heaven or salvation from hell, Jesus speaks of entering (or refusing to enter) “the kingdom of God.” He calls us to seek first God’s kingdom and righteousness, or better, God’s justice (Matthew 6:33). Seeking righteousness is not just about personal piety; it is about seeking justice – both personally and publicly. “To seek God's kingdom and justice means, as the Lord's Prayer makes clear, to seek for God’s will to be done on earth as it is in heaven” (165).

The centrality of the kingdom of God preserves the corporate and present dimensions of salvation. It forbids us from understanding salvation as merely individual, escapist, or otherworldly.

The Kingdom of God integrates both sides - personal and social, private and public, secret and visible, spiritual and political, historic and eternal, earth and beyond... Their [Matthew, Mark, and Luke’s] gospel of the kingdom is about God’s will being done on earth for everybody, but we’re interested in getting away from earth entirely as individuals, and into heaven instead. (149)

Salvation is not merely about “the elect” finding a secret cure for original sin on a personal level. The question is not “If you were to die tonight, do you know for certain that you’d go to be with God in heaven?” but rather “If you were to live for another fifty years, what kind of person would you like to become – and how will you become that kind of person?” On a more social level, “If Jesus doesn’t return for ten thousand or ten million years, what kind of world do we want to create?” (171)

Those of us who profess to believe and participate in God’s kingdom must believe and participate in the salvation of the world. “To believe in God is to believe in the salvation of the world. The paradox of our time is that those who believe in God do not believe in the salvation of the world, and those who believe in the future of the world do not believe in God” (152).

By conscious surrender to and participation in God’s kingdom, the church willingly (and truly) contributes to the restoration of all things in Christ. One does not have to embrace universalism, but all Christians must grapple with the fact that hell is not the final word; the restoration and renewal of all things is! No matter what one’s position on heaven or hell, one must seriously wrestle with, explain, and incorporate the biblical passages that speak of a universal restoration of all things into their theology (e.g., John 12:32; Acts 3:19-21; Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:20-26; 2 Cor. 5:19; Phil. 2:9-11; Eph. 1:10; Col. 1:16-23; 1 Tim. 2:4, 4:10; Titus 2:11; Heb. 2:9; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:2). Tragically, these passages are seriously underemphasized when hell dominates the discussion.

God’s Judgment against Human Evil

God’s wrath and judgment (which, contrary to our interpretational habits, should not immediately be connected with our concept of hell) are real and have to do with our participation or lack thereof in God’s kingdom in this world. Our willingness (or lack thereof) to enter into and participate in God’s kingdom is at the heart of salvation. We are thus forced to ask ourselves: “Which side are we on? Are we on the side of God’s justice, or are we on the side of human oppression and sin? Are we welcoming God’s judgment, or are we seeking to avoid it?” (70) God is against – and thus God’s wrath and judgment are expressed against – human evil and injustice on both a personal and corporate level.

Judgment is real, for all people are accountable to God. In two passages from his book, McLaren presents a sobering picture of divine judgment:

What could be more serious than standing in front of your Creator – the Creator of the universe – and finding out that you had wasted your life, squandered your inheritance, caused others pain and sorrow, worked against the good plans and desire of God? What could be more serious than that? To have to face the real, eternal, unavoidable, absolute, naked truth about yourself, what you’ve done, what you’ve become? (79)

Judgment is real. Accountability to God is real. A good, just, reconciling, loving, living God is in everybody’s future. The danger of wasting your life and ruining other people’s lives is real. Whatever road you take, you'll end up facing God, and that means you’ll face the truth about your life – what you’ve done, who you have become, who you truly are. (137)

Reflections like these should cause us Christians to reevaluate what kind of people we are becoming, how we are living in this world, and what we are doing to make a kingdom difference in the here and now. We are responsible creatures. Our actions have serious consequences. What we say and do – rooted in what we believe – has a significance that far exceeds what we can possibly fathom.

Jesus uses strong language to force us to grapple with the serious ramifications of our actions and the high calling of our lives. This includes language referring to hell – of that there is no doubt. But we should not be too quick to immediately connect all judgment and condemnation language with hell. Jesus has a broader use for such language. In fact, many of Jesus’ parables end with something other than hell, proving that hell is not the point!

“Sometimes [in Jesus’ parables] the bad guys are simply destroyed - like the vineyard employees who killed the vineyard owner’s son. Sometimes what the bad guys have is taken and given away to the good guys. Sometimes a bad person simply suffers the consequences of his bad decisions – like the man who built his house on sand. Sometimes the consequence is that Jesus is ashamed of the person. Sometimes the bad person is punished or has to pay back a debt. I remember one place where it specifically says that a bad servant will be cut into pieces, which I’ve never heard anyone take literally. Another time, people who snubbed an invitation to a big banquet simply missed the fun.”

“What’s your point?” I asked.

“Just that the language of hell isn’t the only end to the stories. It’s one option Jesus uses among many others to give his parables a shocking choice between consequences, which reinforces my point.”

“Which is…?” I asked, still not satisfied.

“Let me try one more time. My point is that hell itself is not the point. The point is the purpose for which Jesus uses the language of hell, or whatever other imagery he uses to convey the negative consequences of rejecting God’s way. The point is that we can let Jesus’ strong language arrest us so that we repent – we rethink our current path and choose a better alternative.” (80-81)

Jesus uses strong language to call us to participate in his kingdom of love, peace, compassion, and justice. His warnings concerning hell, primarily delivered to insiders to the kingdom of God (and those who thought they were insiders) rather than outsiders, are intended to sober us to serious action. Is this how we use “hell” language in the evangelical church? Sadly, too often, it is not.

Because when we talk about hell, it’s generally not to unsettle ourselves. It’s generally the opposite - to reassure ourselves, so we think, Aren’t we glad we’re insiders with God and going to heaven? Isn’t it a shame those other people are so bad and wrong and going to hell? It’s part of a system that reinforces us-them thinking, I guess - to strengthen the "us" identity. (101)

We lose our ability to truly stand with God for the good of the world when we use hell as an excuse to exempt ourselves from active involvement in the world.

Whenever we locate evil ‘over there’ with ‘them,’ we render ourselves innocent and proud. They are of the devil; we are of God. No one is more likely to commit injustice than those who think themselves incapable of doing so, those who are certain that God is on their side and vice versa. (142)

Pastor Dan’s Conclusions

In McLaren’s book, the main character, Pastor Dan, wrestles with reconsidering hell. Though the newness of his way of thinking may be initially shocking, the brief summary of his views he provides for his church board demonstrate the breadth and depth of his conclusion.

3. What is your position on heaven and hell? Explain your position in reference to universalism, inclusivism, exclusivism, and conditionalism...

As for the first question, the only way I can answer it is as follows:

Re exclusivism: I believe that God in justice wants to exclude from creation all that is evil and wrong, including the irreligious sins of the irreligious and the religious sins of the religious.

Re inclusivism: I believe that God wants to include everyone and everything redeemable by mercy and grace.

Re universalism: I believe that God’s love is universal, that God has goodwill toward all, universally, and that God looks on all with mercy and justice, universally. I also believe that Jesus is the universal Savior, meaning that he brings good news and hope to all people.

Re conditionalism: I believe that God’s love is unconditional and that God’s truth is also unconditional. In other words, God shows no favorites. All will have to stand before God’s merciful and just gaze and will be judged by justice and mercy. In this context, all evil will be judged and excluded, all good saved and included, universally.

I respect and will continue to respect those who feel or think differently on all of these questions. (112)

Throughout the book, Pastor Dan’s wife, Carol, wrestles along with him, although her conclusions remain more traditional: “I guess I’m still a traditionalist – what do you call it, exclusivist? – when it comes to hell. I can’t get my mind around all those other views. But I realize that even if that view is the right one, the correct one, it can really be misused. It can have a very bad effect.” (175)

There are certainly slippery slopes on both the right and the left (something the right often fails to admit). No matter what one’s conclusion, McLaren’s book helpfully demonstrates how an unhealthy emphasis on hell distorts evangelical life and witness.

Relax: All Will Be Well!

McLaren’s book is sure to cause a stir in the evangelical world, but his wrestlings should not threaten those secure in their faith. The Bible never teaches that we are saved because of our beliefs concerning heaven or hell. Furthermore, we can all agree that the good news is always greater than we can possibly fathom! Indeed, grace is always greater than sin. Sin, death, judgment, and hell are never the final words in God’s kingdom (101). Righteousness, life, peace, and glory are! Finally, any Christian who has any compassion whatsoever should hope for the salvation of all people, whether they conclude this is the message of Scripture or not. In this way, we reflect the heart of God for the world – we desire that none would perish and all would be saved.

My favorite answer given in the book to the question of hell is, “I don't know” (42). Pastor Dan wrestles with understanding why he is unable to give this answer. I am not as reluctant. God is the judge of all people. I am not. God’s judgment will be greater – more gracious, more sobering, more loving, more enlightening – than I can possibly fathom. My call is not to stand in the place of God and pronounce judgments from my position of ignorance. My call is to invite people to participate in the kingdom of God through Jesus and by His Spirit, and then let the chips fall as they may. Like Julian of Norwich, I believe that, in the end, “all will be well, yes, all will be well.” This stems from a deep trust in the gracious character of God who will do no wrong – the just judge of all the earth.

The Post-Protestant Church as a Beacon of the Kingdom

The last part of the book provides the reader with a beautiful picture of what church could be. McLaren allows us to share some time with a loving group of believers with diverse ethnic and church backgrounds. These folk consider themselves part of a Post-protestant church which does not argue about the right “form” of church, whether hierarchical, congregational, home-church, or two or three gathered together. They have come to the conclusion that “the purpose of the church – at least, of the post-Protestant church in our way of thinking – is to spiritually form people to love God and others and themselves so that they can live life to the full in God's kingdom, in the way of Jesus” (141).

They consider themselves as participants in “the emergence of catholic, missional, monastic faith communities” (155). Catholic with a lowercase c highlights the ecumenical nature of the group. Missional draws attention to their focus on the good of the world. Monastic suggests an order or community of practice. “An order is different from a denomination, which is a group defined by structure and doctrine. An order is defined by practice” (155-156).

In their discussions, they highlight the centrality of spiritual formation for the purpose of kingdom living. The contemporary church could hardly improve on this focus.

Yes, post-Protestant churches see everything as spiritual formation – everything worth doing, that is. Public worship is an exercise in group spiritual formation through rituals like the Eucharist and preaching. Fellowship is exercise in the spiritual practices of community. The success of a church isn’t measured by the numbers who attend but by the formation of people as agents of the kingdom of God. (142)

Our understanding of hell is unhelpful to the extent that it detracts from this end – from living as agents of the kingdom of God in this present world. Whether one is a universalist or a traditionalist, the proof of one’s participation in God’s salvation is found in one’s heart for the world. Our perspective on hell must be rethought and revised if it causes us to exalt ourselves, belittle others, withdraw from the world, or passively wait for pie-in-the-sky-sweet-by-and-by. McLaren’s book is a challenging and helpful resource to provoke us in this direction. Regardless of our position, he calls us to righteous action, self-giving service, and compassionate hearts. In other words, he invites us to kingdom living in a fallen world – the only salvation able to deliver us from a hellish existence both now and in the future.

© Richard J. Vincent, 2005

Click HERE for a recent interview with Brian!