 |
|
|
A second possibility concerns what is meant by the 'name of the beast.' I do not think it will be name of a specific man. . . This mark again might be a simple tattoo indicating that the bearer is a member of the Communist Party, and loyal to the antichrist.
-- Robert W. Faid
|
|
| |
News: Brian McLaren on Hell: A Review of The Last Word and the Word After That
Posted on Saturday, January 28 @ 13:03:46 PST by Virgil |
|
by Andrew Perriman
The Last Word and the Word After That is an examination of the idea of hell set against the background of the fictional story of a crisis in pastoral ministry. Pastor Dan Poole faces doctrinal investigation because a conservative faction at Potomac Community Church fears that he is on a twisting slippery slope that will lead by way of inclusivism and conditionalism to the cesspit of universalism. The following exchange between Dan and Neil Oliver mid-way through the book encapsulates the theological and moral dilemma that McLaren wishes to address. Jess is Dan’s daughter, whose own faith has been badly shaken by the thought that people she loves will burn in hell forever; Kincaid is her boyfriend.
I thought for a few seconds. “Of course, I need to talk this through—but I feel I especially need it to help her. Look, Neil, I’m a Christian. It really shakes me to think that I could have been so misguided or uninformed about so much, but even so, my roots go pretty deep. But for Jess and for Kincaid, if they don’t get this hell thing worked out, they’re never even going to send down roots. They’re going to become …”
Neil finished the sentence: “… like the millions of others, young and old, who have given up on Christianity because our way of talking about hell sounds absolutely wacky. ‘God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life,’ we say, ‘and he’ll fry your butt in hell forever unless you do or believe the right thing.’ ‘God is a loving father,’ we say, ‘but he’ll treat you with a cruelty that no human father has ever been guilty of—eternal conscious torture.’ No wonder Christianity—or at least that version of it—is a dying religion in so many places in the world.” (75)
Although it is rather contrary to the narrative, dialogical spirit of the book, I want to extract from the various conversations a number of points that relate especially to the exegetical basis for what is commonly understood as the ‘doctrine of hell’. This should not be taken as a repudiation of the novelistic approach – the value of McLaren’s books lies to a large extent in the fact that they model dialogue, they resist the closure of discussion, they demonstrate the practical and personal significance of theology, they keep us alert to the essential interplay of life and thought. But some sort of theological analysis is unavoidable. Although the conversational format makes it difficult to know how much of what is said reflects Brian McLaren’s own views on the subject (that is part of the point, it is an exploration of the experience of learning), a reasonably coherent line of thought takes shape as Dan Poole engages with various.
Click here to read the entire review
|
| |
|
|
Average Score: 5
Votes: 1
 |
|
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: Brian McLaren on Hell: A Review of The Last Word and the Word After That (Score: 1)
 by chrisliv on Saturday, January 28 @ 15:00:48 PST
(User Info | Send a Message) | Yeah,
Good article.
Recently, I listened to a John Anderson interview (http://www.lighthouseproductionsllc.com/broadcast.htm) with Brian McLaren, where as a former English professor, it seemed obvious to McLaren when he was exposed to the Preterist position, that it made sense to him from the text and that he should accept it. So, he's a Preterist, more or less, which is worth mentioning at the outset.
We know that a good portion of 1st-century Jews didn't believe in the Greek concept of the immortality of the soul, however, Jesus did seem to refute that, at least regarding the Righteous: "He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err." Mat. 12:27. And it's interesting how in the Rich Man vs Lazarus parable that only the more righteous example is mentioned as a proper pronoun.
As Preterists, we also know that many of the passages in the New Testament that Dispensationalists take as statements about a futuristic Heaven are really talking about the Presence of the believer in Christ's Kingdom in the here and now, even though adversity may be very real. For example, "In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you." John14:2 And I think early Church History (until the Church became a State Corporation in 312 AD) is a witness to that Presence even through Roman State persecution.
So, I can heartily agree that many New Testament statements that people take as teaching a pie-in-the-sky Heaven when-you-die and a Hell under the Earth, are really speaking more about things that can be now seen in the dimension of the Holy Spirit and in the dimension of a hostile World System. Or, to put it another way, in my opinion, Heaven or Hell begins now, and might even continue for all eternity. The choice is ours.
It seems obvious to me that most people prefer Hell. I mean, it would be terribly cruel for God, and everyone concerned, to send parasitical egos who've lived a hellish life on Earth to an eternity of pure Heaven.
Peace to you all,
C. Livingstone
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by MiddleKnowledge on Saturday, January 28 @ 15:17:47 PST
- by Virgil on Saturday, January 28 @ 19:09:33 PST
- by Ozark on Saturday, January 28 @ 18:56:26 PST
- by Virgil on Saturday, January 28 @ 18:58:57 PST
- by Virgil on Saturday, January 28 @ 18:59:35 PST
- by davo on Saturday, January 28 @ 19:55:24 PST
- by chrisliv on Saturday, January 28 @ 21:28:18 PST
| 
|
