The Emergent Church and The Gospel
The Emergent Church: The Gospel of God (3)
from Truth and Tidings magazine, December 2011
One of the most common criticisms directed at the Emergent Church
concerns its handling of the Biblical gospel and, in particular, its
tendency to promote the dangerous heresy of Universalism. In the words
of one of its most popular advocates, Universalism is the belief that
"in the end, all men will be gathered into the love of God" (Barclay,
1977). Although it has been presented in many guises throughout 2,000
years of church history, it has not been widely accepted. But due to its
natural appeal to the sentimentality of human nature, it has never
finally disappeared, experiencing strong resurgence in the liberal
theology of the Pentecostal Latter Rain Movement (1940s & 50s) and,
most recently, within the Emergent Church. Despite this assertion
writers, such as Brian McLaren and Steve Chalke, have stayed
sufficiently distant to avoid being directly labelled "Universalist."
That is, until the March 15th 2011, when Rob Bell published his latest book, Love Wins,
aiming to get "at the heart of life’s big questions." Using the popular
tactic of the Emergent Church, he asks a number of questions designed
to implant a seed of doubt in otherwise resolute minds, and take aim at
essential gospel truths such as righteousness, judgment, heaven, hell,
faith, repentance, conviction of sin, conversion, and the new birth. He
says "Of all the billions of people who have ever lived, will only a
select number make it to a better place and every single other person
suffer in torment and punishment forever? Is this acceptable to God? Has
God created millions of people over tens of thousands of years who are
going to spend eternity in anguish? Can God do this, or even allow this,
and still claim to be a loving God?"
In the promotional video for the book, Bell goes further: "If
that’s the case, how do you become one of the few? Is it what you
believe; or what you say, or what you do, or who you know—or something
that happens in your heart? Or do you need to be initiated, or baptized,
or take a class, or be converted, or born again—how does one become one
of these few?"
Although Bell is careful to steer clear of making any overt
statement directly supporting traditional Universalism, it would be mere
semantics to deny its presence. Bell’s brand of Universalism is a
kingdom here upon earth where human beings "belong before they believe,"
and need only to opt into God’s vision of a "desired future."
In the first of two articles considering the issue of the
Emergent gospel, and the particular issue of Universalism, we shall
assess some of the questions that Bell asks, not necessarily by
answering them (they have been deliberately biased to deliver specific
conclusions), but by examining the propositions contained within them.
First, what is the purpose of the gospel, and how is this in keeping
with the character of God?
"Make it to a better place," or "torment and punishment forever?"
The manner in which Bell speaks of eternity should be noted. He
refers to the purpose of the gospel disparagingly, speaking of the
"select making it to a better place," and the remainder "suffering in
torment and punishment forever." These carefully worded phrases are
seeking not only to undermine the reality of a future destination (Matt
7:13-14; Luke 16:23; John 14:1-3), but also its eternality (Matt 25:46).
By removing the true purpose of the gospel - being brought into an
eternal relationship with God, and saved from hell and the lake of fire -
Bell is also undermining the Biblical doctrine concerning the depravity
of the human heart. We should be clear: the impending judgment of God
against the sinner is because of sins that they have committed, born out
of a corrupt and defiled nature (Rom 1:18; 2Thess 1:7-9), and is in no
way a nasty or vindictive strike at people who choose not to become one
of the "select few." Care should be taken to note the propensity to
describe infinite punishment for sins committed within a finite
lifetime, as injustice. This is a misnomer: sin is against God, and God
is eternal in His character. His holiness and righteousness are
infinite. While Scripture clearly teaches differing degrees of eternal
suffering for sin (Rev 20:12), the time period is always the same:
eternity.
In a chapter entitled "Here is the New There," Bell all but
removes the distinction between time and eternity, making hell a living
reality, something experienced now as a consequence of bad choices,
while heaven is the result of living a life in tandem with God. Neither
is eternal. In this interpretation God is reduced to merely having a
"desired future." Thus He is no longer sovereign. Instead, He has chosen
to allow human beings to contribute to the destination of history.
Despite sharing some of the characteristics of Postmillennialism, this
is defined by Brian McLaren as "participative eschatology" (New Kind of Christianity).
Emotional examples of hell on earth are used to corroborate the
point, such as the genocide in Rwanda, but the logic is flawed. In this
case the "hell" that an innocent victim experiences at the hands of
genocidal murderers is not just. They did not earn it; they are simply
citizens of that country. This is totally out of line with the
Scriptural truth of personal accountability for sins (Rev 20:12-13). But
in the Emergent gospel there is no mention of universal guilt or
personal sin and transgression. Instead, we are presented with vapid
platitudes such as the suggestion that how you act is more important
than what you are. While behavior is deemed important by Scripture, the
cause of that behavior is always, and only, the wicked heart of man (Rom
5:12; Mark 7:20-23).
One of the most alarming themes throughout the book is that at
any point one can opt out of their choice of a personal hell and choose
God instead. The logical reasoning here is ambiguous, but one would
assume that if it is possible to opt out of hell, it is just as easy to
opt in as well. The truth of Scripture should be presented clearly;
salvation is an eternal act, with eternal consequences. Not only will a
true believer never entertain the possibility of opting out, but it is
also a spiritual impossibility (John 10:28).
Does God get what He wants?
Having blurred the distinction between time and eternity, the
literalness of heaven and hell, and the essential nature of the human
heart, the next step in Bell’s strategy is to question the character of
God. As mentioned earlier, when speaking of eternal punishment, Bell
asks "Is this acceptable to God? Has God created millions of people over
tens of thousands of years who are going to spend eternity in anguish?
Can God do this, or even allow this, and still claim to be a loving
God?"
Most believers have grappled with these issues at some point, but
the answers are contained within Scripture, and are based on a Biblical
understanding of the character of God. It is precisely at this point
that Bell seeks to employ logic to prove his point. However, this logic
is based on a human understanding of the character of God. In a chapter
devoted to this subject, entitled "Does God get what He wants?" he
posits his argument: "Will all people be saved, or will God not get what
God wants?"
This question is actually a thinly-veiled deductive syllogism, which can be set out as follows.
Major premise:
God is God and therefore must get what He wants.
Minor premise:
God wants all people to be saved.
Conclusion:
All people must be saved.
While the truth presented by the major premise is redoubtable,
the minor premise has been deliberately narrowed to ignore all but the
will of God in relation to the salvation of mankind (1 Tim 2:4), or more
succinctly, all but His love. But Scripture also attests to God desiring
justice (Psa 33:5), and righteousness (Psa 11:7; 33:5), and holiness
(1 Peter 1:16), and never one at the expense of another. If Bell was to
continue to quote Paul, he would find that a qualifying clause follows:
"and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." The truth incorporates
not only the love of God, but His righteousness, justice, holiness, and
sovereignty. There is no salvation that excludes any facet of the truth.
When the character of God is understood Biblically, asking
whether eternal punishment is acceptable to God, or if God can allow it
and still be called loving, is not the right question. The better
question is, "How does God declare His love while maintaining the full
panoply of His character?" In Romans 3, Paul establishes that the cross
has demonstrated the love of God in the salvation of guilty sinners,
without compromising the righteousness or holiness of God. What a truth
we have contained within Scripture: "to declare, I say, at this time His
righteousness: that He might be just and the justifier of him that
believeth in Jesus" (Rom 3:26).
The Emergent Church is clever in its strategy. By changing the
focus from eternity to time, and emphasizing only the loving attribute
of God’s character, it has laid an erroneous foundation for an all-out
attack on its real target – the death of Christ upon the cross.
Truth and Tidings magazine, available in print by subscription, also viewable online at:
