I’m delighted to have Brian McLaren as a guest on this journal today. Brian wrote the following post, and he will be engaging here over the next couple of days. Ask him any questions you want, raise issues, enjoy and practice a generous orthodoxy (other sites on the blog tour: Tallskinnykiwi, Jordan Cooper, Jen Lemen, Paradoxology, and Pomomusings).

Peace, dwight


Guest Post from Brian McLaren

Hi, everyone – it’s an honor to be your guest and have a bit of conversation about my newest book, “The Last Word and the Word After That.”

I thought I’d offer a bit of personal information about the book. I felt a good bit of excitement and intellectual/spiritual energy about writing and publishing “The Last Word and the Word After That.” I also felt a good bit of fear and trembling.

I knew that it would be controversial, and I knew that many Christian sisters and brothers would consider me an enemy for writing it. The timing of the book’s release was also somewhat disadvantageous in my mind, because “A Generous Orthodoxy,” which I didn’t expect to be seen as controversial, ended up eliciting some pretty harsh response. That meant I was coming out with two highly controversial books in less than a year. I’m not by nature a controversialist, so I didn’t look forward to a hornet’s nest being stirred up.

But at the same time, I have felt for a long time that Western Christian theology (in its Catholic and Protestant forms) had somewhere become preoccupied with getting individual souls out of hell after death, and had too often lost a sense of God’s continuing love for all creation in this life – in other words, we had substituted something else for the gospel of the kingdom of God, which was at the heart of Jesus’ message. It was as if the doctrine of the fall had eaten up the doctrine of creation. The issue of hell-avoidance became the centerpiece of salvation, and I felt this perspective was neither true to Scripture nor healthy. So that was the origin of the book.

I’d be interested in knowing if any of you have read the book, and how it seemed to you. Did it seem shocking, or tame? Did it present new information, or were you already familiar with the content of the book? I’ll do my best to respond to some of your questions/comments in the next couple days.  

Thanks! Brian McLaren


The following video was added later:

Brian McLaren’s Post
Tagged on:         

36 thoughts on “Brian McLaren’s Post

  • May 9, 2005 at 2:18 PM
    Permalink

    Brian,

    To my utter surprise, I find myself believing these days like Casey‘s Dad who said, "That dog‘ll hunt!"

    For me, one doctrine that has hunted (and caught me) is hellology. It started at age 9 when the traveling evangelist stopped by to light up the fire and toast me until I screamed, "PLEASE, NO, PLEASE NO. I‘LL DO ANYTHING. JUST DON‘T SEND ME TO HELL. PLEASE!!!" Then I filled my cub scout canteen full just in case. Now THAT dog hunts.

    I read your book the first week it was out and agree that the way we believe in hell and use it on each other is way more dangerouse than going there. But it works. It got me to say "I Do" to Jesus.

    The worst thing I can think of that it‘s done to me is like Amittai (Johan‘s father), it has produced a Jonah. But at least I‘ve been to Ninevah with the not-so-good news, seen some old fashioned repentence, and now have a chance to think under the grace gourd. I even had a chance to read about the first Jonah and repent from some of my evil ways, seeing the hell of it all. So the news I preach now is "better news" if not 100% good news.

    But I‘m stuck with a dog that hunts and doesn‘t know how not to hunt. When I told my story about the last word and word after that (as a form of confession and correction to the traveling evangelist) to kids interested in getting baptized yesterday, my dog hunted them down until they were all shuddering and begging for a one way ticket to heaven without stopping in hell.

    What do I do with this damn dog? He‘s been faithful. I can‘t just shoot him.

  • May 9, 2005 at 4:13 PM
    Permalink

    George MacDonald once wrote:

    "No, this is no escape. There is no heaven with a little of hell in it – No plan to retain this or that of the devil in our hearts or our pockets. Out Satan must go, every hair and feather."

    Thanks Brian.

    Liz

  • May 9, 2005 at 4:58 PM
    Permalink

    Brian,

    Ever since your name (and beautifully balding head) appeared in Time Magazine with 24 other influential evangelicals, and since your appearance on Larry King Live I have been sensing an invitation to pray even more consistently for both you and Grace. So much is being called of you and the more you are called to “step into” the more controversy seems inevitable; even though you are the very picture of a gracious and spacious person. Of course conflict avoidance isn’t the goal, but how one chooses to engage the other . . . well that is applied theology.

    I can’t image anyone who has had the privilege of conversing with you fact-to-face coming away from such an exchange with a sense that you had sought to stir up controversy. Yet between A Generous Orthodoxy and this your latest offering, a hornet’s nest has been stirred. On the one hand, I guess we should expect nothing less. As your text seems almost to extend the conversation of William Blake (in The Marriage of Heaven and Hell), and C. S. Lewis (in The Great Divorce) by inviting your readers to see “last things” in a fresh light . . . but who really wants to see their own theological systems in fresh lights?

    As you have thoughtfully pointed out, all too often the theology of the West has used the fall and sin as the starting point to understand humanity’s relationship with God. God’s creation of humanity imago Dei has often been functionally lost to “original sin.”

    Your willingness to engage with people holding differing hermeneutics, opinions, convictions and dogmas hints toward a more open-source theological future. Even a blog tour like this helps to level perceived separation between author and reader. Thanks for your courage and your wisdom, and your embodiment of Divine Love.

    I’ll say more later.

    Peace, dwight

  • May 9, 2005 at 6:06 PM
    Permalink

    Thanks Brian for articulating many of the thoughts and emotions that I have be unable to articulate. Marshall McLuhan said that he was more about creating heat than providing light. Maybe that is the way that some see you. I think that the heat or friction that your work produces will further the Kingdom. Thank-you.

  • May 9, 2005 at 6:38 PM
    Permalink

    Brian,

    I finished the book about 2 weeks ago and enjoyed it (if I can say that about a book on hell). I see the need for Westernized Christianity to look at the "gospel" in light of the Kingdom instead of the polemic heaven/hell construct we have now. Thanks for sheding some light (I‘m sure the topic is endless) on the history behind the idea of an afterlife. In the end, whatever we believe about hell/heaven, if it doesn‘t help us love our neighbor and the Almighty more, then it probably isn‘t helpful. And I think you made that very clear with Dan and Carol‘s characters.

    I think the most important idea I picked up on is the idea of mercy/judgment tango. I know you quickly touched base with it, but could you enhance that theme a little more if you can. This morning I read James 2:13 that states "judgment will be w/o mercy to anyone who has shown no mercy; mercy triumps over judgment."

    Thanks Brian for your voice and longing for justice and love in this world.

    ps. i read your daughter‘s blog every once in a while. you should be proud.

  • May 9, 2005 at 6:40 PM
    Permalink

    Brian,

    I’ve read two of your books and I don’t think I need to read any more. You sound to me like a somewhat passive aggressive pastor or theologian (or whatever you are). I’m sure you’re a nice person as but niceness only gets you so far. Your apparent willingness to treat Holy Scripture and Christian tradition in a cavalier way should concern your readers and maybe even your publishers.

    What gives you the right to redraw the boundary lines?

    A concerned Jesus lover,
    rob

  • May 9, 2005 at 6:57 PM
    Permalink

    Brian …

    Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I am incredibly grateful for your books which have been of immeasurable assistance to me in my faith journey. Through people like you, I‘ve discovered a way to abandon the anti-illectual approach to faith I held so dear for so long.

    I am grateful that you have challenged the boundaries of my faith …

    Keep up the good work.

    Cheers.

  • May 9, 2005 at 7:38 PM
    Permalink

    > What gives you the right to redraw the boundary lines?

    I think it\‘s the Holy Spirit. 🙂 Seriously, all of us have the right to redraw the boundary lines.

    As a demographics and org behavior freak, I am puzzled by the current paradigm of Evangelical Protestantism, that only includes one sixth of the population.

    Since we are called to \"make disciples\", maybe our \"hell theology\" should point that way? Thank you for making us think, we all win when that happens. And thank you for the graceful way you have presented.

    cheers,
    Mike O

  • May 9, 2005 at 8:07 PM
    Permalink

    Brian,
    I resonate with the more Eastern concept of Heaven and Hell as the same place.

    For the record: My starting point in all theological reflection is that God is Living, Holy, Self-emptying, Relationality.

    Thus “place” (Godself, creation:earth/heaven/hell) is always context for relationship, (this is what makes the incarnation God so powerful and particular), the after life, either heaven or hell would be a relational context. As such the “afterlife” will make clear what the reality of now is; the reality of now is that “God is” and we find life in its full only in and through God. As announced by Jesus the Christ life is the presence of God and this presence is at hand. Now we only see Divine presence through a glass darkly. But in the life to come – which is a continuation of this life – we will see the presence of God “face-to-face” as it were. We will fully see how all that is and moves and has its being, is in and through and connected to the God who is relationality and whose creation reflections Godself.

    Heaven and Hell may both be understood as the very presence of God.

    I often use example of a couple who are in love. When they are together time seems to stop as they simply enjoy being with one another. This reflects something of a relational vision of the afterlife. Love makes space for others, so much so, that self-emptying service and creative acts missionally extend love beyond “the couple”.

    If this loving couple were to break-up. Let’s say that one member (the man) decides to leave, and pursue self and his own self-interest. Separation begins to occur, relationship begins to breakdown and we witness “sin”. The relationship will work to convict to “wayward man” to return to relationship. But if the man in pursuit of self continues to live in opposition to relationship, it becomes “hell” for this man to be in the presence of the loving woman.

    Have you ever seen a couple who were once in love but had since split-up in the same room? It’s painful.

    What might it be like if throughout eternity God relentless offered God’s perfect love through God’s presence to a person who didn’t want relationship? . . . sounds like a self-made hell.

    This is my working metaphor for the afterlife. Heaven and Hell as both the presence of God. When we relationally respond to the Divine invitation to dance with God in God’s co-eternal intrapenetrating, interanimating dance we find fullness of life in interconnectedness and the High Priestly Prayer offered by Jesus finds its fulfillment.

    When we relationally reject the outstretch hand offered God by be choose oneness, and the very presence of the availably of love hardens our hearts to all others; including and especially God, and this is hell.

    In this way we make our own hell but we forever co-create heaven.

    Heaven and hell are the orthoparadox of the relationality God.

    peace, dwight

  • May 9, 2005 at 8:22 PM
    Permalink

    I haven’t read the book yet but based on what I’m seeing in discussion here I think I need to. I grew up hearing all kinds of sermons and teachings which made, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” seem tame.

    I have tried to avoid thinking about hell. Though I don’t know these categories well – I guess I’ve been leaning toward an idea of ceasing to exist as hell. I’ve just never given it much thought.

    Can hell ever be a hopeful thought?

  • May 9, 2005 at 8:26 PM
    Permalink

    "I think it\‘s the Holy Spirit. 🙂 Seriously, all of us have the right to redraw the boundary lines."

    Then what would be the point of boundary lines? By that kind of reasoning, every individual becomes the sole arbiter of truth. I just fail to see any other result of such an approach than epistemological nihilism and relativism.

    At the risk of being labeled a dreaded Modernist and shouted out of the building, I just don‘t see who gives us the right to redraw the boundary lines of Holy Scripture. Seems to me that, despite the claim to love community, what you wind up with is hyper-individualism and little common ground apart from a shared rejection of this or that. Sometimes we just need to learn to submit to the Spirit‘s teaching.

    Sorry if I‘m aiding in getting the conversation off track.

  • May 9, 2005 at 8:40 PM
    Permalink

    Recently I read or heard – I forget where – about the difference between wells and fences. Two different ways to build a ranch, focus on fencing in cattle or focus on providing a well, or a source which provides what they need in such a way that the cattle never wander too far.

    Could heaven and hell be a well of sorts? If so, is our theology more like a fence?

    DOes this make sense?

    pete

  • May 9, 2005 at 9:00 PM
    Permalink

    I don‘t mean to imply that scripture is totally flexible, what I mean is that scripture is absolute, but our ability to both translate it and interpret it is limited by our finite states.

    Many elements of faith get concretized, and exist as doctrine for centuries. Then a Brian McLaren comes along, performs rigorous scholarly research, and, with a grace-filled focus on preserving unity, poses a different view of that element. All within a covering of respect for those who have gone before, and a desire to preserve brotherhood.

  • May 9, 2005 at 9:06 PM
    Permalink

    I thought it was a wonderful read and a great finish to the trilogy. I think it was very suggestive in its subtlety (ie. the effect that another religion, that is, Zoroastrianism, had on the Semitic traditions). It helped me see hell as useful (can I say that?), but not the point. I was bummed by the responses I read on Amazon; I think many people went into reading this with a great deal of skepticism and anger.

    I would love to hear some expansion on the notion of Satan that you briefly touched on in The Story We Find Ourselves In. I kinda thought you would do that in this issue, but I guess not. Something about a computer virus analogy and how the Hebraic understanding of evil evolved (particulary pre- & post-exile).

    Cool, that‘s my two cents… Cheers!

  • May 9, 2005 at 9:53 PM
    Permalink

    “Did it seem shocking, or tame?”

    or

    “Did it present new information, or were you already familiar with the content of the book?”

    Brian, these are most interesting queries; why would the relative shock-value of your writing be of interest? Are you more of a closet controversialist than have been willing to admit?

    But I did find it shocking. If the hell is not what I came to your book understanding hell to be, than the whole gospel message as I have understood it changes.

    Though I personally find my heart strangely warmed to what you have written, the idea of recasting the gospel of Jesus Christ seems so radical that I would want to move very slowly, prayerfully, Scripturally, and communally.

    I don‘t want to be overly reactionary.

    Wisdom Lord, we need wisdom.

    Thanks,
    Patricia

  • May 9, 2005 at 10:51 PM
    Permalink

    Hi Brian,
    I truly appreciate your writings and insight. I don‘t appreciate how others publicly air out what they think of you personally based solely on what you‘ve written (especially when they‘ve only read in part or have never met you personally). I feel you come across very humbly and like a fellow journeyer through your writings & speaking engagements. I‘ve met you and heard you speak in person three times now (the latest being two weeks ago in Calgary) and each time you are very generous. I‘ve read all but one or two of your books and I say this kindly, I don‘t see what you‘ve written being all that controversial. I do see that you are nudging us on where we should be heading anyway in our thinking & theology. Keep doing it – you‘re a blessing!
    Steve

  • May 9, 2005 at 11:11 PM
    Permalink

    Pete, the analogy is really helpful. Here is what Frost and Hirsch write in their book…

    "In the bounded set, it is clear who is in and who is out (fences, not wells), based on a well-defined ideological-cultural boundary –usually moral and cultural codes as well as creedal definitions.. but it doesn‘t have much of a core definition beyond these boundaries. It is hard at the edges, soft at the center.

    "The centered set, on the other hand, "is like the Outback ranche with the wellspring at its center. It has very strong ideology at the center but no boundaries. It is hard at the center, soft at the edges. We suggest that in the centered set lies a real clue to the structuring of missional communities in the emerging culture.

    "The traditional church makes it quite difficult for people to negotiate its maze of cultural, theological, and social barriers in order to get "in.".. and by the time newcomers have scaled the fences built around the church, they are so socialized as churchgoers that they are not likely to be able to maintain their connection with the social groupings they came from…

    "We propose a better and more biblical way.. is to … sink wells. If you sustain your connection with the water sources, you will find a whole host of people relating to Jesus from different walks of life. We allow people to come to Jesus from any direction and from any distance. The Person of Jesus stands.. at the center." (The Shaping of Things to Come)

  • May 9, 2005 at 11:24 PM
    Permalink

    According to Kallistos Ware:

    "Love cannot exist in isolation, but presupposes the other. Self-love is the negation of love . . . self-love is hell; for, carried to its ultimate conclusion, self-love signifies the end of all joy and all meaning. Hell is not other people; hell is myself, cut off from others in self-centeredness." (The Orthodox Way, 1995, 28)

    Brian are you calling us Eastward?

    If it’s true that one of the most Eastern things anyone can do is honor their tradition. How might, say radically free church, evangelical, Baptists honor their tradition while "moving East"?

    peace, dwight

  • May 9, 2005 at 11:31 PM
    Permalink

    Hell has been used as one of those fences.. a way to test who is in and who is out. If we had kept our eyes on the well.. the abundant life and living it out with grace, love and peace.. less worry about measuring a persons current position instead noting the direction and asking what I can contribute to that journey.. fear drives us to worry about my responsibility hhmm maybe I should drop a tract over the fence today.. instead asking if they know the location of the well and then being available.. then there is the marketing thing.. we prefer black and white and a good insurance policy to discipleship and process..

  • May 9, 2005 at 11:46 PM
    Permalink

    Hi, all – thanks for the great posts. A few brief comments …

    Alex, I appreciate your concern about upholding the right boundary lines. I have no right (or desire!) to change anything God has laid down as unchangeable. I have no right to change or disregard Scripture. But I think you‘ll agree, we all have the responsibility to test what we hear against Scripture. That‘s what I‘ve tried to do regarding the conventional teaching on hell. I am trying to be more Biblical, not less – more faithful to God, not less.

    Martin Luther had to do this regarding issues in his day (not that I‘m comparing myself to him!). Martin Luther King Jr and Desmond Tutu had to do the same. Whether it was indulgences or racism … both were accepted and even defended as being essentially Biblical, and those who questioned them were called troublemakers, heretics, rabblerousers. These reformers questioned the conventional understandings, not against Scripture, but based on it. So please be assured – I‘m not trying to change the meaning of Scripture: I‘m seeking to find and understand it.

    Just one example for those who haven‘t read the book … why do we assume that condemn, judge, not enter the kingdom of God, and send to hell all mean the same thing? What if they mean different things? By equating them, we run the risk of misunderstanding Scripture.

    So many Christians quote verses from Matthew, Mark, and Luke about hell … but they are careless when it comes to asking, "What sends you there?" They believe in a literal hell, but they don‘t preach what Jesus preached would send you there; they tend to preach that not believing what they believe will send you there. Again – this isn‘t an attempt to be untrue to Scripture; it‘s an attempt to be true to it. In the book, I have a pretty long table listing the various consequences of various bad behaviors from the gospels … I hope this demonstrates respect for Scripture, not a cavalier attitude.

    Dwight – I loved the way you put issues of judgment in relation to the relationality of God. This is a very different picture from either a) the idea (amazingly common among American Christians) that God chooses some people to be saved from hell but tacitly chooses others to be forever tormented there, or b) the idea that God hates people who sin and can not rest unless they are tormented eternally.

    Ryan – your question about the idea of Satan is interesting, but I‘m rusty on the historical background. Can I recommend you read Walter Wink?

    Rob – I‘m sorry you feel that I treat Scripture and the Christian tradition in a cavalier way. I hope you‘re wrong, and I hope that if this is your opinion of me after reading two of my books, you‘ll at least keep praying for me … even passive-aggressive people need prayer, you know?

    Everyone – thanks for your kind words. I‘ll check back later this week to see if there are more comments/questions.

    This is a great group of people gathered around the table with Dwight! – Brian

  • May 9, 2005 at 11:49 PM
    Permalink

    Ron – about your dog. Don‘t shoot him. Just don‘t let him bite the neighborhood kids or make a mess on your carpet. He‘s protected you from some mean intruders in the past, and it sounds like you‘ve trained him pretty well. If/when he dies, keep a picture of him; he‘s part of your life!

  • May 10, 2005 at 12:05 AM
    Permalink

    I don‘t disagree. But frankly: I find this discussion, and those like it, beside the point. Anyone who‘s out there really following Christ isn‘t preoccupied with doctrine, be it traditional or radical— which is not to infer that you or others aren‘t followers, or that I am…

    If the day is passed when converts could be won through force of argument— and I agree that it is (if it ever actually was) —is not all this so much of the same? That it is a different argument does not change it; it is remains a question of semantics. While we‘re debating those, people are suffering in this world and will be in the next.

    I find hell as simple as this: it is a place of our own making. To most people that doesn‘t sound too bad, and probably never has. That it is not a good idea to be left to yourself is an understanding that in most cases, I should think, precipitates salvation. Any way you look at it, being saved is for now and later.

    (This, like most of these others, is not a question.)

  • May 10, 2005 at 1:01 AM
    Permalink

    i may read your book. it sounds interesting. but for now just the thought of undoing all the mess of my religion and sifting out the faith in Christ and figuring out how to simply Follow Him is taking up a majority of my time.
    I did get to read Adventures in Missing the Point and I admit i had to take it in small doses cuz it started pulling me all out of shape and added to the deconstruction of my religion.
    We have simply made too much of religion and doctrine and not enough about simple living in fellowship with the Living God.
    I will say a prayer for you to keep following the Holy Spirit and doing exactly what He is calling you to do….even if it unnerves us and makes us all feel rather unsafe in our \"religion\".
    Christ in us, Christ before us, Christ in all.
    Blessings this day.
    I do have questions about hell…but i am afraid to seek the answers. I fear the religion\‘s teaching that if you dont say the sinners prayer, etc, etc then you will end up there. (the whole weeping and gnashing of teeth, lake of fire, unending torment stuff)
    (what about the people who have \"been there\"?)(what about the rich man and Lazurus?)
    *sigh*

  • May 10, 2005 at 2:00 AM
    Permalink

    Brian,

    As a recovering fundamentalist I find your books both frightening and exhilirating. Mainly exhilirating. Well, almost completely exhilirating. Coming from a background of dogmatic, screaming, sweaty pulpits I especially appreciate your kindness and humility when presenting your views.

    I read a quote of yours recently where you wrote about the process of re-invention. You mentioned that this process starts when a person puts everything up for grabs except our identity as followers of Jesus. That‘s where I am in my journey, and you‘re right, it‘s messy.

    I have always desired to go to seminary. However, although I still desire to do this, I‘m not so sure any more because of the built in bias of each one. Keeping all I‘ve said above in mind, is there a place, a course of study, or a seminary you‘d recommend to me to help me in my deconstruction/reconstruction?

    God bless you.

  • May 10, 2005 at 2:49 AM
    Permalink

    Brian – thanks for your honest response. Dwight and I both teach at Mars Hill Graduate School – so I think it would be a great one to look into. There are a number of other good options too – more and more ever year, as I think (thanks be to God) that more and more seminaries are breaking out of some old ruts.

  • May 10, 2005 at 3:34 AM
    Permalink

    i‘m not sure if its because i‘m a woman, or because i not a very linear thinker, or something else completely but the idea of salvation being largely about hell-insurance has never been enough for me.

    i sense hope blossoming.

    thanks brian.

    cindi

  • May 10, 2005 at 8:46 AM
    Permalink

    ok, first – forgive me for the length of this comment.
    i‘ve not yet read brian‘s book, so cannot adequately comment on it yet (alas). however i would like to add a few things about the eastern orthodox connections that dwight (and others) are referring to. first, you can‘t divorce the conversation about hell from the essential questions of what Salvation is… and as many here probably know, the East rejects the merely juridical and transactional categories of salvation. in Eastern teaching on salvation has very little to do with the mere appeasement of an angry God. salvation is Eucharistic first, inherently relational/communal, more about marriage and the bridal chamber, not the courtroom.

    to quote from an essay about hell, written by an eastern orthodox writer:

    "This juridical conception of God, this completely distorted interpretation of God’s justice, was nothing else than the projection of human passions on theology. It was a return to the pagan process of humanizing God and deifying man. Men are vexed and angered when not taken seriously and consider it a humiliation which only vengeance can remove, whether it is by crime or by duel. This was the worldly, passionate conception of justice prevailing in the minds of a so-called "Christian" society. Western Christians thought about God’s justice in the same way also; God, the infinite Being, was infinitely insulted by Adam’s disobedience. He decided that the guilt of Adam’s disobedience descended equally to all His children, and that all were to be sentenced to death for Adam’s sin, which they did not commit. God’s justice for Westerners operated like a vendetta. Not only the man who insulted you, but also all his family must die. And what was tragic for men, to the point of hopelessness, was that no man, nor even all humanity, could appease God’s insulted dignity, even if all men in history were to be sacrificed. God’s dignity could be saved only if He could punish someone of the same dignity as He. So in order to save both God’s dignity and mankind, there was no other solution than the incarnation of His Son, so that a man of godly dignity could be sacrificed to save God’s honor. This paganistic conception of God’s justice which demands infinite sacrifices in order to be appeased clearly makes God our real enemy and the cause of all our misfortunes…. In other words, what Westerners call justice ought rather to be called resentment and vengeance of the worst kind. Even Christ’s love and sacrifice loses its significance and logic in this schizoid notion of a God who kills God in order to satisfy the so-called justice of God.

    that said, it would not be accurate to presume that the Eastern Orthodox retreat into an easy, quaint, lets-not-discuss-judgement-because-its-too-troubling-a-conversation.
    judgement is taken quite seriously… i mean, we just completed the Great Fast, and Holy Week, leading up to the celebration of Pascha (the Resurrection). and in those Lenten and Holy Week liturgies, there is weeping and gnashing of teeth regarding issues of judgement. however the context is this (taken from a primar Lenten liturgy)

    "Your bridal chamber I see adorned O my Savior, but I have no wedding garment that I may enter. Illumine the garment of my soul O Light Giver and save me.”

    or in other words, turning away from Augustine-Anselm-Acquinas, and quoting from an Eastern Father:

    "… those who find themselves in hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo no greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God … But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed! (St. Isaac of Syria, Mystic Treatises)"

    lastly, dwight‘s question about heading east but staying west (proverbially) is interesting. and i think its actually what happens more often than not. ie, the primary way to honor ones evangelical/western tradition but still borrow from the east would be to borrow eastern "ideas", but keep those ideas in the domain of ideology and concept. ie, talk "about" them. a lot. i mean, in the absence of Eucharist, theology can only be ABOUT something, and not the something (or Someone) itself.

    look fwd to reading your book brian. i remain deeply respectful and grateful for you and your work, and our friendship! Christ Is Risen!

  • May 10, 2005 at 10:34 AM
    Permalink

    Great insights sky,

    At least the Orthodox church believes in Hell. That is good news.

    Tim

  • May 10, 2005 at 4:33 PM
    Permalink

    Brian,

    I appreciate your willingness to challenge us to deeper thinking. For too long have we just accepted the teachings of our forrunners without any thought of digging deeper. Scripture is "living and active" as the Hebrew writer says and that means we always be learning from God‘s word as it interacts with us and our culture.

    This comes to me at a perfect time. My whole world is turning upside down as my wife and I prepare to plant a new church. We are researching and learning how to present the message of Jesus to the world in new and fresh ways. We are deconstructing many of our methods and a lot of our beliefs to simply find the heart of the Gospel message. You have added one more thing to think through and process that is very important to the message of Christ. Thank you for rousing us to think and know better what we believe.

    Greg

  • May 11, 2005 at 2:15 AM
    Permalink

    Hi, all – I just wanted to check in once more and see if there were any other questions. I‘m glad I did – Sky, your post was helpful to me. I‘d love to know where the first quote came from – if you have an author or reference. Strongly stated!

    My sense these days is that the Western church got off track way back there somewhere (largely becoming preoccupied with "juridical" imagery, as Sky‘s quote said, and losing or downplaying all the other rich Biblical images of salvation – healing, rescuing, marrying, welcoming home, etc). To find our way back to the path, we are wise to listen to our Eastern brothers and sisters. (We also need, I think, to listen to our brothers and sisters from cultures that were trampled by colonialism, but that‘s another story for another time.) Maybe this is one of God‘s clever uses of our schisms, a way that (as Ecclesiastes says) two are better than one … when one person (group) falls, he can be lifted up by his companion. Woe to the one who falls alone (or who won‘t accept help from anyone outside his little tribe!).

    Thanks again, everyobne, for good conversation. Thanks Dwight, for hosting a safe and interesting place.

  • May 11, 2005 at 6:31 AM
    Permalink

    Thanks Brian for your thoughts. I have not read your book, I have not seen it here in Johannesburg, South Africa yet.Hopefully it will be distributed soon.

    I\‘m not a theologian, partor or anything like that. I\‘m just a dude trying to follow Jesus because I love him more than anything and have found life in every word he says in the bible.

    In Matthew 18v3 Our Lord says,and said, \"Most certainly I tell you, unless you turn, and become as little children, you will in no way enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.\"

    I feel it\‘s safer to take the words of the Lord as truth and not temper with them by altering truth. We are not called to do \"whatever we can\" to make disciples, but to follow the footsteps of Jesus by living according to His word, trust and obey fully even if most of it makes no sense to us in this life, make disciples of Jesus according to His word.

    So, HELL, according to Word is a place where all those who have rejected the call to salvation are going to be. It is a place of eternal torment, fire and brimstone, the abscence of God and the tangible presence of SATAN with a full conentration of evil upon all who are doomed. Jesus will say, I never knew you, depart from me. . .These ara the words of Jesus Himself, the one who gave his life for us.

    So, i am scared for those of you who are altering the Word of the Lord for any reason. I urge you, in the name of oru Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ the Son of God, Please stop doing so.

    Hell is not a joke. The spiritual realm is a serious battle field for the souls of people. The only way, the only truth and the only life is in and through Jesus Christ. Outside that is eternal damnation. This is not some eastern / western ideology, i have no idea about what the story is with regards to the east and west stuff you guys are talking about because I come from the south. i come from africa, a place where life with God and life without God are 2 tangible realities.

    Maybe the church in the so called west has become too comfortable. Maybe the church in the west needs tribulation like the church in china so that you guys can get back to the basics of the gospel, trust like children and obey the Word of the Lord even if it means having both your legs chopped off..

    Thanks

  • May 12, 2005 at 12:56 AM
    Permalink

    Brian, afaict, that quote is from Doctor Alexander Kalomiros, "The River of Fire".

  • May 16, 2005 at 7:13 PM
    Permalink

    "Heaven and hell are right here, behind every wall, every window – the world behind the world. And we‘re smack in the middle." – Actor Keanu Reaves in "Constantine"

  • May 16, 2005 at 10:26 PM
    Permalink

    Have you ever seen a couple who were once in love but had since split-up in the same room? It’s painful.

    What might it be like if throughout eternity God relentless offered God’s perfect love through God’s presence to a person who didn’t want relationship? . . . sounds like a self-made hell.

    This is my working metaphor for the afterlife. Heaven and Hell as both the presence of God. When we relationally respond to the Divine invitation to dance with God in God’s co-eternal intrapenetrating, interanimating dance we find fullness of life in interconnectedness and the High Priestly Prayer offered by Jesus finds its fulfillment.

    Wow Dwight. That makes me want to love Jesus more. Very thoughtful idea.

  • May 26, 2005 at 3:36 AM
    Permalink

    Sibusiso,
    Iti is a amazing how very sweet the truths of your words were to me amoung many posts which grieved my heart.
    If the Church in Africa has many believers like you that still boldy believe the simple truth of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, what JOY there must be in fellowship! My friends in Africa say that the Holy Spirit is moving there that is uncomparible to our churches here.
    Please continue to pray for our Church here in the west. I am afraid that the winds of change will cause much damage, as we continue to place our faith more in ourselves……

  • June 7, 2006 at 9:18 AM
    Permalink

    This a year late in the writing but I must voice this to everyone who reads this book. When I sat down and read this book I cried and cried. I did not cry because of happiness but rather I cried because of the damage this book is and will continue to do to Christianity today.
    I cried the most when McLaren is talking about the visit to the Holocause museum in DC and he compares evangelical Christians who adger to the doctrine of hell to the Nazis of WWII. I wept because McLaren has obviously never studied the history of the War and has probably never been to the killing fields of Birkenau and Auswitz. I have stood among the ruins of the gas chambers and I have seen the pits that contain the ashes of thousands of Jews. I have been to the Ghetto’s of Krakow, Prague, and Budapest where millions of Jews were rounded up and taken to the slaughter. I cried because Mclaren thinks that the Nazis were “christians” when history will show that Hitler was deep into the occult and into mystical practices. He was shaped by Neitsche who abhored religion and most of all Christians. In Mein Kampf Hitler outlines his hatred of Jews, Christians, and most religions. To say that the Nazis were Christians is to show sheer ignorance to historical facts.
    But more importantly I dare Mclaren to go to a Synagogue and face the descendants of those killed by the Nazis and say there is no hell. I dare him to say that Hitler will not face punishment. I dare him to look them in the eye and say that Hitler was a good man, just confused and didnt know how to live a good life! I bet you he cant because deep down inside he knows that hell is real, he knows that people will go there, he knows it!
    This book is dangerous and I will tell everyone I know to never read it or pick it up. It is straight from the pit of hell and to McLaren I say that you need to get right with God and you need to get down on your face and repent before the Almighty. You have rejected His Holiness, His soveriegnty, and His will. You have made a mockery of sin, of human depravity, and of God’s Justice. I will pray for you and for myself as well. You have replaced the teaching of Christ with your own man-centered selfish theology and have rejected the words of the Master. I know that I have sin within me to, but I pray that God will have mercy on you for all your false teachings. He has shown me mercy by pulling me out of the pit and setting my feet upon the rock. I do fear hell and wish that noone would go but I know its real and I cant change that. My job is to show others the Truth that God wants a relationship with Him and can free them from the grip of hell, we just have to let him. STOP YOUR SOCIALISTIC DEPRAVED GOSPEL MCLAREN!!
    Repent McLaren for the kingdom of God is at hand!

Comments are closed.

Skip to content