May 23, 2011
Dear Mr. Camping:
I have never personally met you, nor have I ever given your ministry much thought until recent months. It is now May 23, 2011 and I – along with thousands of my fellow pastors and ministers around the world – are moving on with the day-to-day ministry God has called us to as many of your followers are trying to adjust from the bewilderment you’ve caused them. It is a serious thing to be a teacher of the Holy Scriptures, because God has given those of us who handle His Word a great level of influence in the lives of those He entrusts to our spiritual leadership.
At the moment I am writing this, there have only been a few vague statements released to the media by some of your assistants. I do look forward to the public being able to hear directly from you in the near future, hoping sincerely that you will take responsibility for the untold number of lives you have damaged through your reckless and arrogant false-predictions.
As a minister myself, I do not fault you for being mesmerized by the prospect of Christ’s soon return. It is a reality that I and millions of believers around the world long for. Neither do I fault you for making mistakes. I have made many mistakes in my life and ministry. I have spoken words that I wish I could take back, and have probably unknowingly damaged someone else’s faith by failing to live up to their expectations. You are a flawed human being like me and while my mistakes may not carry the level of consequence as someone of your notoriety – as a minister of the Gospel it is my responsibility be humble about my flaws and to make amends as much as possible when I have damaged someone emotionally, spiritually or otherwise (however unintentional it may have been).
That being said, the good news is that your embarrassing mistake is not without redemptive potential. You have an incredible opportunity to show the world the meaning of Christ-like humility. My recommendation is that you:
1) Sincerely offer an unconditional, public apology to your followers, the Body of Christ and the world at large.
2) Resign from your post as President of Family Radio
3) Return the money (or as much as has not yet been spent) to each of your donors.
This would go a long way in restoring some semblance of integrity to your life. In response, the Body of Christ would then have the responsibility to graciously forgive you and receive you back into fellowship as a brother in Christ. Such a display of grace and reconciliation could go a long way in the eyes of a skeptical world – showing that the love of Christ can rise above even the most consequential sins and mistakes.
I realize that there are some Christian leaders who have written you off as a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” and the kind of false teacher the Bible describes as worthy of avoidance at all costs. I confess that I myself have casually referred to you in this way. Yet, I do not believe that it is my place to judge the condition of your heart – or such matters related to your legitimacy as a Christian man.
Based upon some of what I’ve read about Family Radio and words you have written and spoken, you seem to be a sincere believer in Jesus Christ. You seem to affirm the essentials of the Christian faith – such as Christ’s Virgin Birth, His vicarious death and resurrection, salvation by grace through faith, and other core Christian beliefs. I know that you and I differ drastically in our understanding of eschatology and ecclesiology, but only God knows the true state of your faith before Him.
Please consider humbling yourself and making amends both publicly and privately with those you have hurt. While this may not be possible with every one of your followers individually, following through with my three recommendations above would go a long way in restoring not only your respectability, but even more importantly, the reputation of the risen Christ among all people.
May God comfort you in the midst of what I can only imagine is a serious time of soul-searching. And may the Body of Christ treat you as graciously as we would each want to be treated if we had sinned so catastrophically. No sin or mistake is beyond the scope of the unconditional love of Christ – and I welcome you with open arms to do the right thing regardless of how difficult it may be. The Name of Jesus is worth it!
Sincerely,
Rev. Jeremy White
Lead Pastor
Valley Church, Vacaville
Monday, May 23, 2011
Friday, April 29, 2011
Can a Person be a Christian without Good Works?
James 2 has long been a key operative text in attempting to legitimize the idea that all true Christians will inevitably “prove” they are truly saved by their outward good works. Well-meaning believers have for centuries pointed to this passage as evidence for Lordship Salvation (LS) – i.e. the idea that one cannot receive Jesus as Savior without simultaneously submitting to Him as Master. The key statements from James 2 leading to that conclusion are as follows:
“(14) What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such a faith save him?...(17) In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead…(19) You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that – and shudder…(21) Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered Isaac on the altar?...(24) You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. (25) In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? (26) As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.”
Admittedly, these are some strong statements which at first seem to stand in contradiction to an abundance of clear Biblical promises about salvation being available only by grace through faith (including John 3:16, Romans 3:28, Romans 4:5, Ephesians 2:8-9 and dozens of others). This apparent contradiction is so strong that Martin Luther actually wanted the letter of James to be eliminated from the New Testament canon!
In an effort to reconcile this apparent contradiction between James and Paul, theologians have attempted all kinds of theological and mental gymnastics. The most popular idea among those from Reformed and Evangelical persuasions is that James is teaching that outward “deeds” are the necessary evidence in assuring that our faith in Christ is genuine rather than phony. This is the clear teaching of Lordship Salvation (LS). But is this really what the passage is saying?
While there is some variance among those who interpret this text in light of Free Grace (FG) perspective, upon careful examination it becomes clear that James’s words cannot mean that the life of every true believer will be characterized by a litmus test of “good works”. For a basic understanding of a FG perspective on this passage, I invite you to consider the following realities…
Three Huge Questions:
In considering the context of James’ words, we must ask three significant questions: 1) What does James mean by his use of the word “save”?, 2) What does James mean by his use of the word “dead”? and 3) In what sense does James use the concept of “justification”? A simple look at the overall argument of the letter is indispensable for us here.
James uses the term “save” on five different occasions in his letter, initially in 1:21, where he writes, “Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you.” It is crucial to note that James is clearly addressing this letter to those who are already genuine believers in Jesus Christ. He refers to his audience with such terms as brothers, beloved, believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, righteous, etc.. Additionally, he speaks to them as those who are having their “faith tested” by trials (1:2-4). Clearly, these thoughts and titles do not apply to anyone other than those who are already genuine Christians.
So if James is speaking to those who are already “saved” in the eternal sense – that is, they have been rescued from judgment and forgiven of their sins through faith in Christ – then his use of the word “saved” in 1:21 cannot be used in that same sense. Because this word “saved” is used of in terms of something that “can” happen rather than as something that has “already” happened, James is clearly speaking about an aspect of salvation other than that of receiving eternal life by grace through faith.
Combine this reality with the fact that James stated earlier in 1:14 that “…sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.” The book of James is not an evangelistic book seeking to educate people about the essence of so-called “saving faith.” Rather, it is an admonishment to Christians about the futility of persisting in sin, affirming that “sin…gives birth to death” – that is, physical death, death to relationships, death to the opportunity of a more abundant life, etc. He sets his entire letter up along the lines of practical living, not eternal life.
Having established this contextual foundation, we can move into the latter part of chapter 2 with a better understanding of James’ crucial question: “What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him?” Clearly, James is not suggesting that his audience use the presence of good deeds in their life as a litmus test for whether they are genuine Christians! He is using “save” in the same sense in which he has earlier introduced it – as something practical that can rescue or spare a person from the deathly physical, relational and emotional consequences associated with living in rebellion against the Source of abundant life!
The fact is that no one – whether Christian or otherwise – will experience a fulfilling life when living principally to gratify their own hedonistic desires. The pursuit of selfishness always ends in emptiness – futility – and how much MORE for the Christian who has the opportunity to walk with and rest in God!
This sheds light on James’ use of the word “dead” also. He says three times that faith without works is “dead”. To understand his usage, we must look no further than the immediate passage. In 1:15, he gives a hypothetical scenario. “Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, ‘Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?” The word translated “good” in the NIV is the word “profit”. He is asking “what profit” is this kind of faith?
Clearly, the context points to the fact that “dead” faith means “profitless” faith in terms of practical impact. It does not suggest “phony” or “non-existent” faith, as the LS position insists. In 2:20, he confirms this analysis with the statement, “You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?” Furthermore, James illustrates his intentions when he writes, “As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead” (2:26). No one would suggest that a dead body is a phony or non-existent body. Rather a dead body is a very real body that lacks vitality. It is “profitless” or “useless” for making any practical impact in the world – as is clearly seen in the context of James’ argument.
Finally, the statements in this passage which typically cause the most confusion are related to the issue of justification. Some critics will accuse the teaching of Paul and James of contradiction based on this passage. By way of review, Paul’s teaching on justification is about God the Judge “ruling in our favor” – declaring us to be righteous based on faith in Jesus alone apart from any works of the law (Rom. 3:21-25; 4:1-5; Gal. 3:1-14, etc.).
Meanwhile, James says the following in chapter 2 of his letter: “Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous (justified) for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? (verse 21). And again in verses 23-24, he adds, “And the scripture was fulfilled that says, ‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,’ and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.”
Lifted out of context, it is no wonder skeptics point to these words as a blatant contradiction of Paul’s Gospel! Yet, both Paul and James appeal to the same Old Testament verse (Genesis 15:6) in making their point. Paul says in Romans 4:2-3, “If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about – but not before God. What does the Scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.’” (emphasis added).
By their joint appeal to Genesis 15:6, both Paul and James affirm that they understand the doctrine of imputed righteousness before God – that being in “right standing” with God comes through belief (faith) alone. What James does – in the context of the practical focus of his book – is to introduce a second type of justification. This second type of justification has nothing to do with a Christian’s imputed righteousness before God – but rather, with practical righteousness before men.
In spite of his fame, Abraham made many mistakes – several of which glare at us from the pages of Genesis. Clearly James’ readers knew this and were aware that God had declared Abraham to be righteous by faith (Genesis 15) decades before he ever offered Isaac on the altar (Genesis 22). Abraham’s obedience neither initiated nor proved the reality of His righteous standing before God. That reality was assured by God’s promise alone. What Abraham’s obedience did accomplish was to show that his faith was not “useless”. It showed that his faith was “made complete” (James 2:22). The word “complete” literally means “mature”.
A maturing faith is the exact opposite of a useless, unprofitable faith. It is a faith that is actively involved in showing the world something of who God is. It is a faith that is growing in the abundant life Jesus offers. And while James points to this as an impetus for his audience to live out their faith in tangible ways, he would be horrified to know that many centuries later, Christians were using his words to insinuate a litmus test for the so-called legitimacy of faith in a believer’s life!
LS advocates routinely contrast the fictitious terms “saving faith” with “non-saving faith”, insinuating that James is talking about two kinds of faith here. But when we understand his terminology in its context, we find that the issue is not actually about two kinds of faith – but two kinds of justification. One kind is justification before God which only He sees and which is by faith alone. The other kind is justification before our fellow man – which can be observed, which is by works and which can “save” a person from the earthly consequences of rebellion – up to and including the death he warned about in 1:15.
Simply put, having basic orthodox beliefs about Christ – while a crucial part of what it means to trust Christ for eternal life – cannot “save” you from the consequences of sin in this life. Only obedience to Christ will enable a person to experience the kind of fulfillment God offers in this life to anyone who pursues and rests in Him as a response to His lavish grace.
The sole qualifying factor for our justification is faith (i.e. trust) in Christ’s sacrificial death and resurrection. When a person exercises this trust, he or she is irreversibly adopted into God’s family and is secure in that relationship (Romans 8:38-39). The Bible makes no such distinction between so-called “saving faith” and “non-saving faith”. Scripture does not delineate between “head” Christians and “heart” Christians. This is another reality we glean from the Gospel of John, in which every time the word “faith” is used, it is in reference to “saving” faith. There is no other kind of faith in Christ – period. If it were not for this solitary passage in James 2 being so grossly misunderstood, this concept would never have been inserted into the realm of Christian theology.
The Faith of Demons
Another fallacy advanced by proponents of LS concerns James’ mention of the faith of demons. Earlier we noted that part of James’ argument is stated as follows in James 2:19:
You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that – and shudder.
Many will claim that the purpose of these words are to compare and contrast this so-called “saving faith” with “non-saving faith” – which basically amounts to “mere intellectual assent” to a set of facts, according to LS. This line of reason falls short for a variety of reasons. For starters, this so-called “faith” in God is clearly not faith in the Gospel, since it is merely an affirmation of monotheism (belief in one God). Nowhere in the Bible is it suggested that monotheism is equated to the faith through which humans receive salvation. Many people believe in God (just like the demons) yet are not saved since they refuse to trust in Christ alone and His finished work of redemption.
This is another affirmation that eternal life is not in view here – and besides, the argument breaks down even further when we consider that demons cannot be saved anyway. The New Testament repeatedly affirms that fate demons is already sealed (Matt. 8:29; 25:41; Jude 6), so it is highly unlikely that the author would use demons as a hypothetical element to his argument if indeed he were talking about eternal life. What this text does show is that faith in the Christ is faith in Christ – period. If anything, the emphasis is not placed upon different kinds of faith, but different objects upon which faith can be placed.
Secondly, if the author is indeed arguing that good works are a litmus test for true assurance of salvation, it is a curious reality that Satan and his demons actually have the power to do good works in order to deceive people. If outward works are a litmus test for assurance, then perhaps we should presume that Satan and his demons are in fact saved, since they are able to perform counterfeit signs and wonders (2 Thess. 2:9-11). Additionally, we might be persuaded to believe that members of various pseudo-Christian cults – based on their high quantity of visible “good works” should also rest assured of their salvation. Ironically, many people from legalistic cults do in fact believe they are saved, viewing their good works as both a requirement and result in "proving" it.
The essential reality remains that whenever our assurance of salvation rests upon our performance rather than upon the promises of the Gospel of grace alone – we are setting ourselves up for an experience of the Christian life that is contrary to what God intends for us to enjoy. As Charles Bing rightly observes,
James 2:19 should not be used to argue that works are needed to prove saving faith. This verse shows that demons have a real faith. They believe in one God and know that God has sealed their fate in judgment, therefore they tremble. But they do not and cannot believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior. While good works are God’s purpose for us, are useful to others, and give us a good evaluation at the Judgment Seat of Christ, they cannot prove or disprove the reality of saving faith. Eternal salvation is by grace alone through faith alone—apart from any works at any time.[i]
Are There Any Other Views?
In his excellent book The Naked Gospel, pastor Andrew Farley would disagree with the way I look at this passage. Nonetheless, his view demonstrates that even if a person cannot bring themselves to agree with the contextual arguments I have just presented, there are other solid ways to view what James is saying without affirming the erroneous LS view.
Farley contends that James is indeed talking about salvation (from sin) in this passage – and has no problem with James’s assertion that we are saved by works and not by faith alone. The key, he argues, is in understanding what James means by “works”. He explains…
“Rather than assuming that works should be understood as a lifelong record of religious activity, one should consult the biblical text and let the writer himself define the term. James’s own use of the term “works” is quite different from how we use it today.”[ii]
We will get back to that in a moment, but here it is interesting to note that only a few verses later, James acknowledges that “we all stumble in many ways.” (James 3:2). James seems to be agreeing with Paul’s confession in Romans 7, that there were behaviors in his life (and every believer’s life) that often contradict the desire to serve Jesus with whole-hearted consistency. In fact, the entire book of James is a call to live a righteous life, practically speaking. If “obedience to Jesus as Master” is the automatic disposition of those whose faith can be said to be genuine, then why would James (or Peter, Paul, John, etc.) have spent so much time seeking to correct the sinful and selfish behaviors and attitudes of genuine believers in their letters? Clearly, LS misses the mark in its assertion that the truly saved will always live in increasing victory over sin throughout their experience in this life.
If “surrender” is required for salvation, another series of questions arises. How surrendered is surrendered? Is it enough to be fifty percent surrendered? How about seventy-five percent? Ninety-nine percent? At what point are we able to discern what God accepts as surrender to Christ’s lordship? Obviously nobody is 100 percent surrendered to Christ as master or we would never sin!
But now back to James 2 and the issue of James’ use of the word “works”. Farley goes on to explain his belief that by using Abraham (and also Rahab) as illustrative of genuine faith, James is making the point that they “actively responded to God’s message.” He elaborates,
“They didn’t sit back passively and claim that they believed God. Rahab decided to open her door to the spies (Joshua 2:1), and Abraham chose to offer his son on the altar (Genesis 22:3). They went beyond mere intellectual assent and did something in response to God’s message. But how many times did Rahab open the door? Once. And how many times did Abraham hoist his son Isaac to the altar? Once. Hence, works in this passage is really not about a lifelong track record of good behavior. It’s actually about the importance of responding to truth – an act that goes beyond intellectual agreement.”[iii]
While Farley’s ideas on James 2 are among very few things I took issue with in his wonderful book, I include his perspective here to illustrate that even someone who affirms the view that James is in fact talking about faith in relation to salvation from eternal judgment can also remain true to the overall awareness that James is not and cannot be demanding that works are a litmus test in determining whether a person’s faith is genuine. Simply put, works may be and often are an indicator of genuine faith, but using James to prove that they must be goes beyond the scope of the Scriptural Gospel of salvation by grace through faith alone.
I welcome your thoughts....
“(14) What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such a faith save him?...(17) In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead…(19) You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that – and shudder…(21) Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered Isaac on the altar?...(24) You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. (25) In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? (26) As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.”
Admittedly, these are some strong statements which at first seem to stand in contradiction to an abundance of clear Biblical promises about salvation being available only by grace through faith (including John 3:16, Romans 3:28, Romans 4:5, Ephesians 2:8-9 and dozens of others). This apparent contradiction is so strong that Martin Luther actually wanted the letter of James to be eliminated from the New Testament canon!
In an effort to reconcile this apparent contradiction between James and Paul, theologians have attempted all kinds of theological and mental gymnastics. The most popular idea among those from Reformed and Evangelical persuasions is that James is teaching that outward “deeds” are the necessary evidence in assuring that our faith in Christ is genuine rather than phony. This is the clear teaching of Lordship Salvation (LS). But is this really what the passage is saying?
While there is some variance among those who interpret this text in light of Free Grace (FG) perspective, upon careful examination it becomes clear that James’s words cannot mean that the life of every true believer will be characterized by a litmus test of “good works”. For a basic understanding of a FG perspective on this passage, I invite you to consider the following realities…
Three Huge Questions:
In considering the context of James’ words, we must ask three significant questions: 1) What does James mean by his use of the word “save”?, 2) What does James mean by his use of the word “dead”? and 3) In what sense does James use the concept of “justification”? A simple look at the overall argument of the letter is indispensable for us here.
James uses the term “save” on five different occasions in his letter, initially in 1:21, where he writes, “Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you.” It is crucial to note that James is clearly addressing this letter to those who are already genuine believers in Jesus Christ. He refers to his audience with such terms as brothers, beloved, believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, righteous, etc.. Additionally, he speaks to them as those who are having their “faith tested” by trials (1:2-4). Clearly, these thoughts and titles do not apply to anyone other than those who are already genuine Christians.
So if James is speaking to those who are already “saved” in the eternal sense – that is, they have been rescued from judgment and forgiven of their sins through faith in Christ – then his use of the word “saved” in 1:21 cannot be used in that same sense. Because this word “saved” is used of in terms of something that “can” happen rather than as something that has “already” happened, James is clearly speaking about an aspect of salvation other than that of receiving eternal life by grace through faith.
Combine this reality with the fact that James stated earlier in 1:14 that “…sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.” The book of James is not an evangelistic book seeking to educate people about the essence of so-called “saving faith.” Rather, it is an admonishment to Christians about the futility of persisting in sin, affirming that “sin…gives birth to death” – that is, physical death, death to relationships, death to the opportunity of a more abundant life, etc. He sets his entire letter up along the lines of practical living, not eternal life.
Having established this contextual foundation, we can move into the latter part of chapter 2 with a better understanding of James’ crucial question: “What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him?” Clearly, James is not suggesting that his audience use the presence of good deeds in their life as a litmus test for whether they are genuine Christians! He is using “save” in the same sense in which he has earlier introduced it – as something practical that can rescue or spare a person from the deathly physical, relational and emotional consequences associated with living in rebellion against the Source of abundant life!
The fact is that no one – whether Christian or otherwise – will experience a fulfilling life when living principally to gratify their own hedonistic desires. The pursuit of selfishness always ends in emptiness – futility – and how much MORE for the Christian who has the opportunity to walk with and rest in God!
This sheds light on James’ use of the word “dead” also. He says three times that faith without works is “dead”. To understand his usage, we must look no further than the immediate passage. In 1:15, he gives a hypothetical scenario. “Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, ‘Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?” The word translated “good” in the NIV is the word “profit”. He is asking “what profit” is this kind of faith?
Clearly, the context points to the fact that “dead” faith means “profitless” faith in terms of practical impact. It does not suggest “phony” or “non-existent” faith, as the LS position insists. In 2:20, he confirms this analysis with the statement, “You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?” Furthermore, James illustrates his intentions when he writes, “As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead” (2:26). No one would suggest that a dead body is a phony or non-existent body. Rather a dead body is a very real body that lacks vitality. It is “profitless” or “useless” for making any practical impact in the world – as is clearly seen in the context of James’ argument.
Finally, the statements in this passage which typically cause the most confusion are related to the issue of justification. Some critics will accuse the teaching of Paul and James of contradiction based on this passage. By way of review, Paul’s teaching on justification is about God the Judge “ruling in our favor” – declaring us to be righteous based on faith in Jesus alone apart from any works of the law (Rom. 3:21-25; 4:1-5; Gal. 3:1-14, etc.).
Meanwhile, James says the following in chapter 2 of his letter: “Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous (justified) for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? (verse 21). And again in verses 23-24, he adds, “And the scripture was fulfilled that says, ‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,’ and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.”
Lifted out of context, it is no wonder skeptics point to these words as a blatant contradiction of Paul’s Gospel! Yet, both Paul and James appeal to the same Old Testament verse (Genesis 15:6) in making their point. Paul says in Romans 4:2-3, “If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about – but not before God. What does the Scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.’” (emphasis added).
By their joint appeal to Genesis 15:6, both Paul and James affirm that they understand the doctrine of imputed righteousness before God – that being in “right standing” with God comes through belief (faith) alone. What James does – in the context of the practical focus of his book – is to introduce a second type of justification. This second type of justification has nothing to do with a Christian’s imputed righteousness before God – but rather, with practical righteousness before men.
In spite of his fame, Abraham made many mistakes – several of which glare at us from the pages of Genesis. Clearly James’ readers knew this and were aware that God had declared Abraham to be righteous by faith (Genesis 15) decades before he ever offered Isaac on the altar (Genesis 22). Abraham’s obedience neither initiated nor proved the reality of His righteous standing before God. That reality was assured by God’s promise alone. What Abraham’s obedience did accomplish was to show that his faith was not “useless”. It showed that his faith was “made complete” (James 2:22). The word “complete” literally means “mature”.
A maturing faith is the exact opposite of a useless, unprofitable faith. It is a faith that is actively involved in showing the world something of who God is. It is a faith that is growing in the abundant life Jesus offers. And while James points to this as an impetus for his audience to live out their faith in tangible ways, he would be horrified to know that many centuries later, Christians were using his words to insinuate a litmus test for the so-called legitimacy of faith in a believer’s life!
LS advocates routinely contrast the fictitious terms “saving faith” with “non-saving faith”, insinuating that James is talking about two kinds of faith here. But when we understand his terminology in its context, we find that the issue is not actually about two kinds of faith – but two kinds of justification. One kind is justification before God which only He sees and which is by faith alone. The other kind is justification before our fellow man – which can be observed, which is by works and which can “save” a person from the earthly consequences of rebellion – up to and including the death he warned about in 1:15.
Simply put, having basic orthodox beliefs about Christ – while a crucial part of what it means to trust Christ for eternal life – cannot “save” you from the consequences of sin in this life. Only obedience to Christ will enable a person to experience the kind of fulfillment God offers in this life to anyone who pursues and rests in Him as a response to His lavish grace.
The sole qualifying factor for our justification is faith (i.e. trust) in Christ’s sacrificial death and resurrection. When a person exercises this trust, he or she is irreversibly adopted into God’s family and is secure in that relationship (Romans 8:38-39). The Bible makes no such distinction between so-called “saving faith” and “non-saving faith”. Scripture does not delineate between “head” Christians and “heart” Christians. This is another reality we glean from the Gospel of John, in which every time the word “faith” is used, it is in reference to “saving” faith. There is no other kind of faith in Christ – period. If it were not for this solitary passage in James 2 being so grossly misunderstood, this concept would never have been inserted into the realm of Christian theology.
The Faith of Demons
Another fallacy advanced by proponents of LS concerns James’ mention of the faith of demons. Earlier we noted that part of James’ argument is stated as follows in James 2:19:
You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that – and shudder.
Many will claim that the purpose of these words are to compare and contrast this so-called “saving faith” with “non-saving faith” – which basically amounts to “mere intellectual assent” to a set of facts, according to LS. This line of reason falls short for a variety of reasons. For starters, this so-called “faith” in God is clearly not faith in the Gospel, since it is merely an affirmation of monotheism (belief in one God). Nowhere in the Bible is it suggested that monotheism is equated to the faith through which humans receive salvation. Many people believe in God (just like the demons) yet are not saved since they refuse to trust in Christ alone and His finished work of redemption.
This is another affirmation that eternal life is not in view here – and besides, the argument breaks down even further when we consider that demons cannot be saved anyway. The New Testament repeatedly affirms that fate demons is already sealed (Matt. 8:29; 25:41; Jude 6), so it is highly unlikely that the author would use demons as a hypothetical element to his argument if indeed he were talking about eternal life. What this text does show is that faith in the Christ is faith in Christ – period. If anything, the emphasis is not placed upon different kinds of faith, but different objects upon which faith can be placed.
Secondly, if the author is indeed arguing that good works are a litmus test for true assurance of salvation, it is a curious reality that Satan and his demons actually have the power to do good works in order to deceive people. If outward works are a litmus test for assurance, then perhaps we should presume that Satan and his demons are in fact saved, since they are able to perform counterfeit signs and wonders (2 Thess. 2:9-11). Additionally, we might be persuaded to believe that members of various pseudo-Christian cults – based on their high quantity of visible “good works” should also rest assured of their salvation. Ironically, many people from legalistic cults do in fact believe they are saved, viewing their good works as both a requirement and result in "proving" it.
The essential reality remains that whenever our assurance of salvation rests upon our performance rather than upon the promises of the Gospel of grace alone – we are setting ourselves up for an experience of the Christian life that is contrary to what God intends for us to enjoy. As Charles Bing rightly observes,
James 2:19 should not be used to argue that works are needed to prove saving faith. This verse shows that demons have a real faith. They believe in one God and know that God has sealed their fate in judgment, therefore they tremble. But they do not and cannot believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior. While good works are God’s purpose for us, are useful to others, and give us a good evaluation at the Judgment Seat of Christ, they cannot prove or disprove the reality of saving faith. Eternal salvation is by grace alone through faith alone—apart from any works at any time.[i]
Are There Any Other Views?
In his excellent book The Naked Gospel, pastor Andrew Farley would disagree with the way I look at this passage. Nonetheless, his view demonstrates that even if a person cannot bring themselves to agree with the contextual arguments I have just presented, there are other solid ways to view what James is saying without affirming the erroneous LS view.
Farley contends that James is indeed talking about salvation (from sin) in this passage – and has no problem with James’s assertion that we are saved by works and not by faith alone. The key, he argues, is in understanding what James means by “works”. He explains…
“Rather than assuming that works should be understood as a lifelong record of religious activity, one should consult the biblical text and let the writer himself define the term. James’s own use of the term “works” is quite different from how we use it today.”[ii]
We will get back to that in a moment, but here it is interesting to note that only a few verses later, James acknowledges that “we all stumble in many ways.” (James 3:2). James seems to be agreeing with Paul’s confession in Romans 7, that there were behaviors in his life (and every believer’s life) that often contradict the desire to serve Jesus with whole-hearted consistency. In fact, the entire book of James is a call to live a righteous life, practically speaking. If “obedience to Jesus as Master” is the automatic disposition of those whose faith can be said to be genuine, then why would James (or Peter, Paul, John, etc.) have spent so much time seeking to correct the sinful and selfish behaviors and attitudes of genuine believers in their letters? Clearly, LS misses the mark in its assertion that the truly saved will always live in increasing victory over sin throughout their experience in this life.
If “surrender” is required for salvation, another series of questions arises. How surrendered is surrendered? Is it enough to be fifty percent surrendered? How about seventy-five percent? Ninety-nine percent? At what point are we able to discern what God accepts as surrender to Christ’s lordship? Obviously nobody is 100 percent surrendered to Christ as master or we would never sin!
But now back to James 2 and the issue of James’ use of the word “works”. Farley goes on to explain his belief that by using Abraham (and also Rahab) as illustrative of genuine faith, James is making the point that they “actively responded to God’s message.” He elaborates,
“They didn’t sit back passively and claim that they believed God. Rahab decided to open her door to the spies (Joshua 2:1), and Abraham chose to offer his son on the altar (Genesis 22:3). They went beyond mere intellectual assent and did something in response to God’s message. But how many times did Rahab open the door? Once. And how many times did Abraham hoist his son Isaac to the altar? Once. Hence, works in this passage is really not about a lifelong track record of good behavior. It’s actually about the importance of responding to truth – an act that goes beyond intellectual agreement.”[iii]
While Farley’s ideas on James 2 are among very few things I took issue with in his wonderful book, I include his perspective here to illustrate that even someone who affirms the view that James is in fact talking about faith in relation to salvation from eternal judgment can also remain true to the overall awareness that James is not and cannot be demanding that works are a litmus test in determining whether a person’s faith is genuine. Simply put, works may be and often are an indicator of genuine faith, but using James to prove that they must be goes beyond the scope of the Scriptural Gospel of salvation by grace through faith alone.
I welcome your thoughts....
Saturday, April 9, 2011
What Kind of Church Do You Pastor?
It is a question I hear more than you think. As I am out doing something in the community - coaching, volunteering or just hanging out - people inevitably ask me the same question they ask everybody: "What do you do for a living?" I have to confess, I sometimes get a little nervous to come right out and say "I am a full-time pastor."
The reason I say I get nervous is not because I am the least bit ashamed about my calling. In fact, quite the opposite! However, I realize that while many folks still view the clergy in an honorable light - it can make others feel awkward. They suddenly start thinking, "Is this guy judging my every move? Is he one of those 'hellfire and brimstone' preachers? Have I ever accidentally dropped an f-bomb in front of him? Does he really like me for me or is he trying to secretly convert me?" And the list goes on.
But their question is a good one. And it makes me think from the perspective of a new guest or a person who is sincerely interested, "What kind of church DO I pastor?" Thankfully, I can say with confidence that I am privileged to pastor what I would call a "grace-saturated" community of faith in Jesus Christ. An article I read awhile back (which I have footnoted at the bottom) inspired me to write the following about the church we are....and are becoming....
At Valley, we desire to be more than just a church that talks about grace. We desire to practice God’s revolutionary grace in the way we do life and ministry together as a body of believers. The following is a summary of our aims as a grace-saturated community of faith in Christ’s finished work of redemption:
1 – We seek to teach and preach the grace message consistently. We believe that salvation is available only as a totally free gift from God – through faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the sins of humanity. This gift is to be viewed as precisely that – a gift! It is not a loan, a bribe or a conditional offer based on any good works humans might attempt in order to “earn” it on the front end or to “prove” it on the back end. We also believe that assurance of salvation is available to all who trust in the promise of the Gospel. Likewise, our subsequent spiritual growth is also based upon grace just as our initial salvation experience was and is. (John 1:12-16; Romans 3:23-24; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 2:11-12)
2 – We seek to encourage and equip believers to grow in grace. As we begin to truly understand and experience God’s unmerited, unconditional favor through Christ, we are motivated by gratefulness in response to His grace. Grace not only nurtures spiritual growth by creating a deep-seated sense of gratefulness, but also allows for believers to make mistakes in their growth process without fear of being condemned by the self-righteous attitudes of others. Contrary to what some may assume, a grace-saturated environment does not minimize a focus on discipleship – but actually magnifies it! We do not view the Christian life in terms of “debt-repayment” as so many Christians have been manipulated to believe (in other words “God gave everything for me, therefore I need to give everything for Him). We believe that this type of thinking is a recipe for burn-out. Instead, we remember that Christ paid the debt of our sin by giving us a gift, not a loan. He is not asking for us to pay Him back as though His sacrifice were a second mortage – nor could we come close to doing so even if we tried! He is simply desiring a response of thankfulness – gratefulness – which can then bear fruit in the way we live. (Romans 12:1-2; Galatians 2:20-21; Ephesians 4:1-16; Colossians 2:6-7; 1 Peter 2:1-3; 2 Peter 3:18)
3 – We seek to accept people as they are. We often remind our people that we are a church where it is “Okay to not be okay.” We welcome people to seek and explore the grace and truth of Jesus Christ no matter what background they come from, and regardless of the hurts, habits and hang-ups they bring with them. We seek to model God’s love and grace not only toward those who are in the exploration process of faith, but also after they trust Christ and enter the spiritual growth process through Him. We accept that there will be differences among us in various areas of culture, personality, opinion, giftedness, and individual preferences regarding secondary or non-essential matters of doctrine and personal conscience. (Romans 14:1-13; 1 Corinthians 13:4-7)
4 – We seek to allow love to guide our liberty in Christ. Because of grace, we are free to love and serve God and others. While grace frees us completely from the realm of legalism, we do not view our freedom as a license to live selfishly or sinfully. We affirm that in matters of personal conscience or questionable things, maturing believers should be mindful of how their actions may affect those who are not yet believers or are weaker in faith. Often our freedom to abstain from certain practices in specific situations for the good of others is just as important as our freedom to engage under other circumstances. By definition, grace is open to the possibility of abuse. If this were not true, grace would at that moment cease to be grace! However, those who are growing in their experience of grace do not view God’s unconditional favor as a license for sin and selfishness, but as a life-changing state of existence whereby we can truly love God and others. (Mark 7:1-23; Romans 6:1-23; 14:1-23; 1 Corinthians 8:1-13; 10:23-33; Galatians 5:13-15; Colossians 2:20-23; Titus 2:11-12)
5 – We seek to emphasize “being” ahead of “doing”. Simply put, we believe that maturity is the fruit of security – not vice-versa. It is very common for Christians to become busy doing religious things, believing that their busyness equates to godliness. As a grace-saturated church, we desire for our people to serve the Lord as a by-product of their security in the new-identity He has given them through Christ. We are not to view ourselves as “sinners saved by grace” trying to repay God for all He has done for us. Instead, the Bible describes New Covenant believers as “saints”, “chosen ones”, “children of God”, “dearly loved”, “brothers and sisters”, “the Bride of Christ”, “the Body of Christ”, “new creations”, and in many other wonderful ways. Never is a believer in Christ referred to in the Bible as a dirty, rotten sinner. As we grow in the security of who we are in Christ (being), the fruit of His Spirit working through us begins to take care of itself (doing). We believe there is ONE Person in the entire universe who can successfully live the Christian life, and His name is Jesus Christ. Therefore, our life as believers is not about us "trying hard" to live for Him. Rather, it is about resting in His finished work and allowing Him to live His supernatural life through us. (Luke 10:38-42; Ephesians 5:1-2; Colossians 2:6-7; 2 Peter 1:2-11)
6 – We seek to deal with sin biblically. Rather than display a condemning or critical spirit toward believers who are caught up in some form of sin, we seek to handle this through loving and prayerful confrontation with the goal of restoring any relationships that have been broken by the sin, wherever possible. We desire to nurture a healing environment of humility, honesty and restoration. (Matthew 18: 15-20; 2 Corinthians 2:6-8; Galatians 6:1; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15)
7 – We seek to share the message of grace with the world! We believe that the “God of all grace” wants humanity to be saved through faith in Jesus Christ. In grateful response to the treasure we have been given in Christ, we desire to share that same hope with the entire world! While we seek to contextualize our approach to the diverse cultures in which we minister globally, we remain uncompromised in our presentation and demonstration of the Gospel of grace plus nothing through faith plus nothing in Christ plus nothing. (Matthew 28:18-20; John 17:18; Acts 1:8; 1 Timothy 1:12-16; 2:1-7)
So there you have it. The kind of church where I am privileged to serve as a pastor! Are we perfect in all these areas yet? YES WE ARE! (Just kidding....of course we're not!). But these are seven realities we hold dear and seek to allow Jesus to manifest in the way we do life together at Valley. If you have been wounded or disillusioned by the joy-robbing huffing and puffing of man-made religion and you're looking for something that reminds you more of the Jesus you were first attracted to, I would invite you to join us soon! I offer this invitation not because we always hit these seven marks for which we aim - but simply because we actually ARE aiming!
If you're starving for uncompromised grace, come check out the community here at Valley Church. We meet Sundays at 8:30am, 10:00am and 11:30am with great modern music and relevant Bible teaching that you can understand and apply to real life. We also offer a Traditional Venue service which meets in our Student Center simultaneously to our 8:30 service - where you will hear the same message live via video but can worship in a more traditional format with older hymns, etc.
(Many of the concepts in this document were inspired by the article "Characteristics of a Grace-Oriented Church" by Dr. Charles Bing. Permission to use the original document as a guide has been granted by the author).
The reason I say I get nervous is not because I am the least bit ashamed about my calling. In fact, quite the opposite! However, I realize that while many folks still view the clergy in an honorable light - it can make others feel awkward. They suddenly start thinking, "Is this guy judging my every move? Is he one of those 'hellfire and brimstone' preachers? Have I ever accidentally dropped an f-bomb in front of him? Does he really like me for me or is he trying to secretly convert me?" And the list goes on.
But their question is a good one. And it makes me think from the perspective of a new guest or a person who is sincerely interested, "What kind of church DO I pastor?" Thankfully, I can say with confidence that I am privileged to pastor what I would call a "grace-saturated" community of faith in Jesus Christ. An article I read awhile back (which I have footnoted at the bottom) inspired me to write the following about the church we are....and are becoming....
At Valley, we desire to be more than just a church that talks about grace. We desire to practice God’s revolutionary grace in the way we do life and ministry together as a body of believers. The following is a summary of our aims as a grace-saturated community of faith in Christ’s finished work of redemption:
1 – We seek to teach and preach the grace message consistently. We believe that salvation is available only as a totally free gift from God – through faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the sins of humanity. This gift is to be viewed as precisely that – a gift! It is not a loan, a bribe or a conditional offer based on any good works humans might attempt in order to “earn” it on the front end or to “prove” it on the back end. We also believe that assurance of salvation is available to all who trust in the promise of the Gospel. Likewise, our subsequent spiritual growth is also based upon grace just as our initial salvation experience was and is. (John 1:12-16; Romans 3:23-24; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 2:11-12)
2 – We seek to encourage and equip believers to grow in grace. As we begin to truly understand and experience God’s unmerited, unconditional favor through Christ, we are motivated by gratefulness in response to His grace. Grace not only nurtures spiritual growth by creating a deep-seated sense of gratefulness, but also allows for believers to make mistakes in their growth process without fear of being condemned by the self-righteous attitudes of others. Contrary to what some may assume, a grace-saturated environment does not minimize a focus on discipleship – but actually magnifies it! We do not view the Christian life in terms of “debt-repayment” as so many Christians have been manipulated to believe (in other words “God gave everything for me, therefore I need to give everything for Him). We believe that this type of thinking is a recipe for burn-out. Instead, we remember that Christ paid the debt of our sin by giving us a gift, not a loan. He is not asking for us to pay Him back as though His sacrifice were a second mortage – nor could we come close to doing so even if we tried! He is simply desiring a response of thankfulness – gratefulness – which can then bear fruit in the way we live. (Romans 12:1-2; Galatians 2:20-21; Ephesians 4:1-16; Colossians 2:6-7; 1 Peter 2:1-3; 2 Peter 3:18)
3 – We seek to accept people as they are. We often remind our people that we are a church where it is “Okay to not be okay.” We welcome people to seek and explore the grace and truth of Jesus Christ no matter what background they come from, and regardless of the hurts, habits and hang-ups they bring with them. We seek to model God’s love and grace not only toward those who are in the exploration process of faith, but also after they trust Christ and enter the spiritual growth process through Him. We accept that there will be differences among us in various areas of culture, personality, opinion, giftedness, and individual preferences regarding secondary or non-essential matters of doctrine and personal conscience. (Romans 14:1-13; 1 Corinthians 13:4-7)
4 – We seek to allow love to guide our liberty in Christ. Because of grace, we are free to love and serve God and others. While grace frees us completely from the realm of legalism, we do not view our freedom as a license to live selfishly or sinfully. We affirm that in matters of personal conscience or questionable things, maturing believers should be mindful of how their actions may affect those who are not yet believers or are weaker in faith. Often our freedom to abstain from certain practices in specific situations for the good of others is just as important as our freedom to engage under other circumstances. By definition, grace is open to the possibility of abuse. If this were not true, grace would at that moment cease to be grace! However, those who are growing in their experience of grace do not view God’s unconditional favor as a license for sin and selfishness, but as a life-changing state of existence whereby we can truly love God and others. (Mark 7:1-23; Romans 6:1-23; 14:1-23; 1 Corinthians 8:1-13; 10:23-33; Galatians 5:13-15; Colossians 2:20-23; Titus 2:11-12)
5 – We seek to emphasize “being” ahead of “doing”. Simply put, we believe that maturity is the fruit of security – not vice-versa. It is very common for Christians to become busy doing religious things, believing that their busyness equates to godliness. As a grace-saturated church, we desire for our people to serve the Lord as a by-product of their security in the new-identity He has given them through Christ. We are not to view ourselves as “sinners saved by grace” trying to repay God for all He has done for us. Instead, the Bible describes New Covenant believers as “saints”, “chosen ones”, “children of God”, “dearly loved”, “brothers and sisters”, “the Bride of Christ”, “the Body of Christ”, “new creations”, and in many other wonderful ways. Never is a believer in Christ referred to in the Bible as a dirty, rotten sinner. As we grow in the security of who we are in Christ (being), the fruit of His Spirit working through us begins to take care of itself (doing). We believe there is ONE Person in the entire universe who can successfully live the Christian life, and His name is Jesus Christ. Therefore, our life as believers is not about us "trying hard" to live for Him. Rather, it is about resting in His finished work and allowing Him to live His supernatural life through us. (Luke 10:38-42; Ephesians 5:1-2; Colossians 2:6-7; 2 Peter 1:2-11)
6 – We seek to deal with sin biblically. Rather than display a condemning or critical spirit toward believers who are caught up in some form of sin, we seek to handle this through loving and prayerful confrontation with the goal of restoring any relationships that have been broken by the sin, wherever possible. We desire to nurture a healing environment of humility, honesty and restoration. (Matthew 18: 15-20; 2 Corinthians 2:6-8; Galatians 6:1; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15)
7 – We seek to share the message of grace with the world! We believe that the “God of all grace” wants humanity to be saved through faith in Jesus Christ. In grateful response to the treasure we have been given in Christ, we desire to share that same hope with the entire world! While we seek to contextualize our approach to the diverse cultures in which we minister globally, we remain uncompromised in our presentation and demonstration of the Gospel of grace plus nothing through faith plus nothing in Christ plus nothing. (Matthew 28:18-20; John 17:18; Acts 1:8; 1 Timothy 1:12-16; 2:1-7)
So there you have it. The kind of church where I am privileged to serve as a pastor! Are we perfect in all these areas yet? YES WE ARE! (Just kidding....of course we're not!). But these are seven realities we hold dear and seek to allow Jesus to manifest in the way we do life together at Valley. If you have been wounded or disillusioned by the joy-robbing huffing and puffing of man-made religion and you're looking for something that reminds you more of the Jesus you were first attracted to, I would invite you to join us soon! I offer this invitation not because we always hit these seven marks for which we aim - but simply because we actually ARE aiming!
If you're starving for uncompromised grace, come check out the community here at Valley Church. We meet Sundays at 8:30am, 10:00am and 11:30am with great modern music and relevant Bible teaching that you can understand and apply to real life. We also offer a Traditional Venue service which meets in our Student Center simultaneously to our 8:30 service - where you will hear the same message live via video but can worship in a more traditional format with older hymns, etc.
(Many of the concepts in this document were inspired by the article "Characteristics of a Grace-Oriented Church" by Dr. Charles Bing. Permission to use the original document as a guide has been granted by the author).
Sunday, April 3, 2011
If It's May 22, 2011, Read This!
Greetings! If you are reading this post on May 22, 2011 or later - you have either missed the Rapture, or the Rapture did not occur on May 21 as Bible teacher Harold Kamping and his adoring followers have been predicting. I realize this news must be extremely disappointing for you by any measure.
On the one hand, if the Rapture has occurred and you missed out, it means that crap's about to hit the fan BIG TIME and you were not really saved in the first place. Bummer! On the other hand, if the Rapture did NOT in fact occur on May 21 as your guru predicted - then you have to admit to the fact that you've been following a false prophet for all this time. Another bummer!
Of course, false prophecy is nothing new to the history of Harold Kamping, who predicted Jesus was going to return in 1994. When He did not, Kamping simply apologized for getting a few calculations wrong, but assured his trusting flock that he WOULD eventually come up with the correct figure. Conveniently, that re-calculation is scheduled for this coming May!
If it sounds as though I am being sarcastic or condescending, you got me! The fact is that Kamping is just one of an endless list of cultic personalities who have miscalculated the time frame for the end of the world. In just about every case, these self-proclaimed teachers of the Bible have blamed their miscalculations on any number of things in order to save face. As for me, I'm just crazy enough to believe that their calculations were wrong for another reason. On what grounds, you ask? Oh, merely that pesky little teaching Jesus gave in Matthew 24:36 when He was speaking about His return: "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."
Call me a party-pooper, but I'm betting that if Jesus Himself said that nobody knows the day or hour of His return, then Jesus is most likely telling the truth. I spent about 45 minutes dialoguing with a group of four men this evening who were holding signs in the city where I live which read: "Jesus is Coming on May 21, 2011."
I asked them a few questions that I've been wanting to ask these Kamping-followers if I ever had the fortune of meeting one in person. First I asked "What if you are wrong about this? If you wake up on May 22 and you are still here, aren't you going to feel a little silly for following this guy's teachings?" Their answer verbatim: "We are not wrong about this. The Rapture WILL happen on May 21, 2011. If I am still here on May 22, it means I am not saved and I have missed the Rapture, because it WILL happen no matter what." Uh......okay...
So I moved on to the next logical question: "How do you answer critics like me who would say that Kamping is a proven false-teacher because of the fact that he's already made this same prediction once and got it wrong?" Their answer (I kid you not): "Doctors and scientists don't always get their vaccinations correct on the first attempt. Sometimes it takes numerous tries before they get it right. We wouldn't call someone a bad scientist just because their calculations were wrong on the first attempt." Yes, you read that answer correctly and I am not making this up.
After a number of other caveats in the discussion, including them telling me that God hates many individuals on this planet, that He did NOT die for the sins of the whole world and that He hates the nation of Israel - I decided to ask one final question. I said, "If you're so sure of this, why don't you write me a check for the entire balance of your bank account, post-date it for May 22, and if you're not here you won't have anything to worry about. If it turns out you ARE here, I'll cash the check and give the money to charity."
Without answering my question, one of the fellows said, "Well now you're mocking me." Ya' think? Perhaps as Jesus mocked the Pharisees for placing heavy religious burdens on peoples' backs and misrepresenting the truth of God's unconditional love? Perhaps as Paul mocked the legalists at Galatia for turning the Gospel of grace into a religious code of circumcision, referring to them as the "mutilation" sect?
The great thing about paying careful attention to what the Bible actually DOES say rather than inventing calculations about the return of Jesus is that I get to live the ACTUAL Christian life rather than a neurotic, fear-based roller-coaster ride of manipulation. Because I actually believe Jesus words, I am free to live each and every day with the expectation that He could return for His beautiful, interdenominational Bride at any time. I am also free to proclaim and demonstrate a Gospel of love, grace and truth rather than arm-twisting, shouting and religious fear-tactics.
So if you're a follower of the teachings of Harold Kamping and you are reading this on May 22, 2011 or later - don't fear! You've believed a lie, but you don't have to despair. Christians who actually love people really DO exist - and God has not let you down simply because the false-teachings of a mere man have deceived you. Jesus loves you so much that He would rather die than live without you for eternity. That's the God revealed in the Bible. That's the God we worship at Valley Church along with so many brothers and sisters interdenominationally throughout our city and around the globe. You are welcome here. Don't let your disappointment in a man turn you away from God... :)
On the one hand, if the Rapture has occurred and you missed out, it means that crap's about to hit the fan BIG TIME and you were not really saved in the first place. Bummer! On the other hand, if the Rapture did NOT in fact occur on May 21 as your guru predicted - then you have to admit to the fact that you've been following a false prophet for all this time. Another bummer!
Of course, false prophecy is nothing new to the history of Harold Kamping, who predicted Jesus was going to return in 1994. When He did not, Kamping simply apologized for getting a few calculations wrong, but assured his trusting flock that he WOULD eventually come up with the correct figure. Conveniently, that re-calculation is scheduled for this coming May!
If it sounds as though I am being sarcastic or condescending, you got me! The fact is that Kamping is just one of an endless list of cultic personalities who have miscalculated the time frame for the end of the world. In just about every case, these self-proclaimed teachers of the Bible have blamed their miscalculations on any number of things in order to save face. As for me, I'm just crazy enough to believe that their calculations were wrong for another reason. On what grounds, you ask? Oh, merely that pesky little teaching Jesus gave in Matthew 24:36 when He was speaking about His return: "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."
Call me a party-pooper, but I'm betting that if Jesus Himself said that nobody knows the day or hour of His return, then Jesus is most likely telling the truth. I spent about 45 minutes dialoguing with a group of four men this evening who were holding signs in the city where I live which read: "Jesus is Coming on May 21, 2011."
I asked them a few questions that I've been wanting to ask these Kamping-followers if I ever had the fortune of meeting one in person. First I asked "What if you are wrong about this? If you wake up on May 22 and you are still here, aren't you going to feel a little silly for following this guy's teachings?" Their answer verbatim: "We are not wrong about this. The Rapture WILL happen on May 21, 2011. If I am still here on May 22, it means I am not saved and I have missed the Rapture, because it WILL happen no matter what." Uh......okay...
So I moved on to the next logical question: "How do you answer critics like me who would say that Kamping is a proven false-teacher because of the fact that he's already made this same prediction once and got it wrong?" Their answer (I kid you not): "Doctors and scientists don't always get their vaccinations correct on the first attempt. Sometimes it takes numerous tries before they get it right. We wouldn't call someone a bad scientist just because their calculations were wrong on the first attempt." Yes, you read that answer correctly and I am not making this up.
After a number of other caveats in the discussion, including them telling me that God hates many individuals on this planet, that He did NOT die for the sins of the whole world and that He hates the nation of Israel - I decided to ask one final question. I said, "If you're so sure of this, why don't you write me a check for the entire balance of your bank account, post-date it for May 22, and if you're not here you won't have anything to worry about. If it turns out you ARE here, I'll cash the check and give the money to charity."
Without answering my question, one of the fellows said, "Well now you're mocking me." Ya' think? Perhaps as Jesus mocked the Pharisees for placing heavy religious burdens on peoples' backs and misrepresenting the truth of God's unconditional love? Perhaps as Paul mocked the legalists at Galatia for turning the Gospel of grace into a religious code of circumcision, referring to them as the "mutilation" sect?
The great thing about paying careful attention to what the Bible actually DOES say rather than inventing calculations about the return of Jesus is that I get to live the ACTUAL Christian life rather than a neurotic, fear-based roller-coaster ride of manipulation. Because I actually believe Jesus words, I am free to live each and every day with the expectation that He could return for His beautiful, interdenominational Bride at any time. I am also free to proclaim and demonstrate a Gospel of love, grace and truth rather than arm-twisting, shouting and religious fear-tactics.
So if you're a follower of the teachings of Harold Kamping and you are reading this on May 22, 2011 or later - don't fear! You've believed a lie, but you don't have to despair. Christians who actually love people really DO exist - and God has not let you down simply because the false-teachings of a mere man have deceived you. Jesus loves you so much that He would rather die than live without you for eternity. That's the God revealed in the Bible. That's the God we worship at Valley Church along with so many brothers and sisters interdenominationally throughout our city and around the globe. You are welcome here. Don't let your disappointment in a man turn you away from God... :)
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
History Repeats Itself...
As I was studying in preparation for teaching the Bible this coming weekend, I was reading Judges 2 - about how Joshua the great Hebrew general led the children of Israel to repent of their idol-worship and turn to the Lord. Then it says they took possession of their various plots of land and began to prosper. These were really great times for Israel - as it finally looked as though the people would begin to fulfill God's plan for them to become a prosperous and righteous light to the nations, pointing humanity to the worship and knowledge of the one true God.
But as the story continues, it says that after Joshua and his generation died, the next generation "forsook the Lord" and didn't know Him, nor what He had done for them in bringing them out of Egypt. Imagine that. In only ONE generation, the people had completely drifted away from their knowledge of God. As I read on, I noticed three specific parallels to the generation God has called me to reach out to with the grace and truth of Jesus.
First, they were born into excessive PROSPERITY. Because of the hard work of their parents, those of the younger generation were handed a very prosperous nation as their inheritance. The prosperity itself was not the problem. In fact, it was a blessing from the Lord. But rather than using the prosperity to serve the Lord, they became greedy and distracted. Sound familiar?
Secondly, they were blinded by esoteric SPIRITUALITY. The whole "Yahweh is the only Way" system seemed much too narrow and intolerant for them. So they began to worship idols and the false gods of power (Ba'al) and pleasure (Ashtoreth). Much like today, spirituality was en vogue. But nobody wanted to be trapped into that narrow-minded claim that there was only ONE true God - so they opted for the smorgas-board approach.
Finally, they were burdened with educational DEFICIENCY. Despite the command of Deuteronomy 6:7 in which their parents were to pass the truth of their faith along to their kids as a matter of first priority - the ball was dropped and this generation had no understanding of the miraculous ways in which God blessed them. Rather than carrying the faith of their fathers into the next generation and beyond, they allowed the false promises of the broken culture around them to convince them to leave their first Love.
Yes, they were living under a completely different Covenant. And yes, God was gracious (just as He is with His New Covenant community) to never leave them or forsake them even though they failed miserably to obey Him. But can you see the relevance here? The modern American church is often addicted to material prosperity, all too willing to blend mystic spirituality with their faith in Christ, and severely lacking in basic knowledge of the Gospel of grace.
We will explore these issues more deeply this weekend at Valley. As always, we'll be celebrating the Good News of God's unrelenting grace toward us in Christ - and we'll be asking the Holy Spirit to further illuminate to us His life-changing power to be IN the world but not OF the world. Hope you can make it...
But as the story continues, it says that after Joshua and his generation died, the next generation "forsook the Lord" and didn't know Him, nor what He had done for them in bringing them out of Egypt. Imagine that. In only ONE generation, the people had completely drifted away from their knowledge of God. As I read on, I noticed three specific parallels to the generation God has called me to reach out to with the grace and truth of Jesus.
First, they were born into excessive PROSPERITY. Because of the hard work of their parents, those of the younger generation were handed a very prosperous nation as their inheritance. The prosperity itself was not the problem. In fact, it was a blessing from the Lord. But rather than using the prosperity to serve the Lord, they became greedy and distracted. Sound familiar?
Secondly, they were blinded by esoteric SPIRITUALITY. The whole "Yahweh is the only Way" system seemed much too narrow and intolerant for them. So they began to worship idols and the false gods of power (Ba'al) and pleasure (Ashtoreth). Much like today, spirituality was en vogue. But nobody wanted to be trapped into that narrow-minded claim that there was only ONE true God - so they opted for the smorgas-board approach.
Finally, they were burdened with educational DEFICIENCY. Despite the command of Deuteronomy 6:7 in which their parents were to pass the truth of their faith along to their kids as a matter of first priority - the ball was dropped and this generation had no understanding of the miraculous ways in which God blessed them. Rather than carrying the faith of their fathers into the next generation and beyond, they allowed the false promises of the broken culture around them to convince them to leave their first Love.
Yes, they were living under a completely different Covenant. And yes, God was gracious (just as He is with His New Covenant community) to never leave them or forsake them even though they failed miserably to obey Him. But can you see the relevance here? The modern American church is often addicted to material prosperity, all too willing to blend mystic spirituality with their faith in Christ, and severely lacking in basic knowledge of the Gospel of grace.
We will explore these issues more deeply this weekend at Valley. As always, we'll be celebrating the Good News of God's unrelenting grace toward us in Christ - and we'll be asking the Holy Spirit to further illuminate to us His life-changing power to be IN the world but not OF the world. Hope you can make it...
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Jesus Paid It All (No, REALLY!)
Early this morning on my drive to church, I was blasting one of my favorite Christian songs on the freeway – “Jesus Paid it All”. It’s an old hymn that has been re-vamped for modern worship. I absolutely LOVE the song…except for one word in it. There is a particular line that goes…
“Jesus paid it all, all to Him I owe.
Sin had left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow.”
Beautiful. And so true.
Almost.
If you are a believer in Christ, perhaps you can guess which word I’m talking about. It is the word “owe.” Is it true that as believers we owe Jesus everything? Do we owe Him anything at all? What are we actually saying when we sing that line?
Oh, think I understand what we MEAN when we sing it. What we mean is that God has been so good by bringing us the gift of salvation, we naturally feel indebted to Him for such amazing love. We subconsciously tell ourselves things like “Jesus gave His life for me, and I owe Him my life in return.”
There is only one tiny problem with this idea. According to the Scriptures, it is nowhere to be found in the framework of the New Covenant way of life. Throughout the New Testament Epistles, we are reassured over and over that the relationship we have with God through Jesus Christ is a GIFT. And yet as clear as this is – many believers live the bulk of their Christian existence relating to God in terms of debt-repayment.
Make no mistake about it – before we received the gift of salvation, we were indeed debtors to God because of our sin. But Jesus didn’t come to give us a loan. His life, death and resurrection were not presented as a second mortgage in order to pay off the first. Jesus is our Savior – not a creditor. When He paid the debt of our sin, He did so as a free gift – the gift of forgiveness and new life both eternal and abundant.
How often do we mistakenly relate to God as cosmic bill collector more so than a Savior? Sure, we tell ourselves we understand the fact that we will never be able to “literally” pay God back for His grace – but so many of us live as though we believe He expects us to die trying.
Ask yourself this crucial question: What makes a gift a gift? What makes something a gift is when it is totally free. A gift actually ceases to be a gift the very moment there is even a HINT of the expectation of repayment attached to it. The New Testament Epistles never encourage us to see ourselves as debtors. Yet what we ARE repeatedly told is that we WERE debtors who are now “dearly loved children”, “saints”, “members of God’s family”, etc.
If I could change that song, I would only change one letter. I would add the letter “d” to the word “owe”. My debt to God is now in the past. I owe him nothing in the true sense of the word. Do I FEEL indebted to Him? I once would have told you “yes”. But the more I understand grace, the more I realize that God isn’t asking me to relate to Him in terms of debt-repayment. The greater response is simply thankfulness.
Dozens of times in the New Testament letters, thankfulness is described as being at the core of our response to God’s grace – not guilt or a sense of “owing” anything. “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery” (Gal. 5:1).
When we operate as free sons and daughters of God – motivated by a sense of deep thankfulness and gratitude – we are more aligned with God’s heart for us. A holy life becomes less about us “living for God” and more about Him “living through us.” Religion wants us to be operating from the mind-set of a debtor. Jesus wants us operating from the mind-set of His irreversibly beloved children.
If you know the tune, then sing the revised version with me…
“Jesus paid it all, all to Him I owed.
Sin had left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow.”
Isn’t the truth good?
“Jesus paid it all, all to Him I owe.
Sin had left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow.”
Beautiful. And so true.
Almost.
If you are a believer in Christ, perhaps you can guess which word I’m talking about. It is the word “owe.” Is it true that as believers we owe Jesus everything? Do we owe Him anything at all? What are we actually saying when we sing that line?
Oh, think I understand what we MEAN when we sing it. What we mean is that God has been so good by bringing us the gift of salvation, we naturally feel indebted to Him for such amazing love. We subconsciously tell ourselves things like “Jesus gave His life for me, and I owe Him my life in return.”
There is only one tiny problem with this idea. According to the Scriptures, it is nowhere to be found in the framework of the New Covenant way of life. Throughout the New Testament Epistles, we are reassured over and over that the relationship we have with God through Jesus Christ is a GIFT. And yet as clear as this is – many believers live the bulk of their Christian existence relating to God in terms of debt-repayment.
Make no mistake about it – before we received the gift of salvation, we were indeed debtors to God because of our sin. But Jesus didn’t come to give us a loan. His life, death and resurrection were not presented as a second mortgage in order to pay off the first. Jesus is our Savior – not a creditor. When He paid the debt of our sin, He did so as a free gift – the gift of forgiveness and new life both eternal and abundant.
How often do we mistakenly relate to God as cosmic bill collector more so than a Savior? Sure, we tell ourselves we understand the fact that we will never be able to “literally” pay God back for His grace – but so many of us live as though we believe He expects us to die trying.
Ask yourself this crucial question: What makes a gift a gift? What makes something a gift is when it is totally free. A gift actually ceases to be a gift the very moment there is even a HINT of the expectation of repayment attached to it. The New Testament Epistles never encourage us to see ourselves as debtors. Yet what we ARE repeatedly told is that we WERE debtors who are now “dearly loved children”, “saints”, “members of God’s family”, etc.
If I could change that song, I would only change one letter. I would add the letter “d” to the word “owe”. My debt to God is now in the past. I owe him nothing in the true sense of the word. Do I FEEL indebted to Him? I once would have told you “yes”. But the more I understand grace, the more I realize that God isn’t asking me to relate to Him in terms of debt-repayment. The greater response is simply thankfulness.
Dozens of times in the New Testament letters, thankfulness is described as being at the core of our response to God’s grace – not guilt or a sense of “owing” anything. “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery” (Gal. 5:1).
When we operate as free sons and daughters of God – motivated by a sense of deep thankfulness and gratitude – we are more aligned with God’s heart for us. A holy life becomes less about us “living for God” and more about Him “living through us.” Religion wants us to be operating from the mind-set of a debtor. Jesus wants us operating from the mind-set of His irreversibly beloved children.
If you know the tune, then sing the revised version with me…
“Jesus paid it all, all to Him I owed.
Sin had left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow.”
Isn’t the truth good?
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Is Rob Bell a Heretic? (Some Thoughts about "Love Wins")
Several weeks ago I began receiving messages and emails related to what I think about Rob Bell’s controversial new book “Love Wins”. Frankly, I tried to steer as clear as possible from reading or watching too much of the hubbub so that I could stay as “untainted” as possible prior to actually reading the book myself (a general practice I’ve tried to develop before making judgments about a book that hasn’t even been released yet).
Of course, in spite of my attempts to minimize any premature conditioning regarding my opinion of the book, there were viral videos and emails and social network messages that made that a difficult quest. One of the most frequently recurring was related to a tweet allegedly sent out by John Piper, pastor of the Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis. The tweet simply read, “Farewell Rob Bell.”
Granted, Bell and his publishers intentionally stirred the pot with a host of preliminary articles, videos and interviews (much the way Mel Gibson fed off of the allegations of “anti-semitism” he received prior to the release of 2004’s The Passion of the Christ). If Gibson made an extra half-billion dollars in revenue from curious Jews and skeptics who saw his movie simply to find out what all the commotion was about, I’m sure Rob Bell and Harper Collins will experience something similar on a lesser scale. I know they made an extra $10.99 from my Kindle download.
On the day of its national release, I went into our local Christian Bookstore asking for “Love Wins”. I was told that they would “not be carrying” the book – something I considered a little surprising given the wasteland of crappy material they actually DO carry. I then bolted over to Borders, which did not have the book in stock yet. That evening, I downloaded it on my Kindle and quickly read through it over the next couple of days.
Having just finished the book, I am very alert to a number of strengths and weaknesses I observed. If I were a reviewer I would begin with strengths, pointing out that Bell quickly and rightly draws our attention to the fact that many Christians have been trained to think of God’s redemptive purposes as being almost totally futuristic (i.e. about “going to heaven when we die”) rather than at least equally focused on living as agents of change in the here and now, bringing the values and qualities of God’s Kingdom into the broken spheres of THIS life. Point well taken.
Another strength was that in spite of Bell’s frequent appeals to human logic and emotion in raising his questions about the goodness of God, he goes much deeper in his use of Scripture than some of the “Christian universalists” I have read on a popular level. I commend Bell for trying to pay attention to some of the passages of Scripture which seem to contradict or at least challenge certain traditional assumptions about God.
In addition, it is hard not to be moved by Bell’s passion for keeping the good news focused on good news. His enduring commitment to present Jesus in light of the most expansive picture of beauty, love and grace possible is admirable in my opinion. It has long been my belief that one of the major reasons people reject Jesus at any given point in time is because the version of Jesus they have been presented with is less than the glorious Jesus of the Bible. Of course, some Christians would rather simplify this phenomenon by insisting that those who reject Christ simply aren’t elect – and therefore, who cares?
Now for a few weaknesses. In my opinion the Achilles' heel of this book is simple. While Bell indeed appeals to a vast array of Scripture verses to support his views, therein lies the problem. Rather than lengthen the book so as to present a sound exegetical defense of his views passage by passage, he cherry-picks from many often-unrelated Biblical texts, using verses, phrases and sound-bites to proof-text his opinions. While this analysis cannot in and of itself “prove” that Bell is wrong – I am simply pointing out that he spends very little time interacting with the opposing, sometimes “traditional” viewpoints he is either questioning or deconstructing.
In similar fashion, many sects and religious groups attempt to bolster their views about the Bible with sound-bite theologies designed to make the Bible say what they desire for it to say. I have no way of knowing whether Rob Bell has in fact dealt contextually and extensively with the dozens of verses he pulls from in support of his opinions – but if he has, then by excluding that documentation he’s simply telling the reader “just trust me” as he’s painting the traditional views on heaven and hell in the most negative light possible.
Therein lies another weakness of the book – namely, its brevity. I read the it cover to cover in just a few hours, and I’m a pathetically slow reader. I understand that Bell and his publishers are trying to reach a popular core audience by keeping his books succinct. But other than some extended comments about the “Prodigal Son” narrative, Bell does not spend any time contextually approaching or exegeting any of the passages from which he pulls his dozens of sound-bites. Again, I’m all for reaching a mass audience by “keeping it simple, stupid.” But could we have had just ONE – or TWO – or THREE extended treatments of a few of the most crucial passages?
By eisegeting (reading into the text) his “New Exodus”, restorationist theology, he is ignoring a number of other sound interpretive approaches to understanding the Storyline of the Bible and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In essence, I’m not interested THAT Bell thinks a Biblical author means something by a particular verse or phrase if I cannot also know WHY (contextually) he thinks the author meant it that way. To Bell’s credit, he does give a list of further suggested reading at the end of the book, but my guess is that very few of his fans will actually take the time to read those weightier writings and really think through the issues. Sadly, most will in fact simply “take Rob’s word” for it that he’s done his homework.
So in getting to the questions everyone began asking a few weeks ago – “Do you think Rob Bell is a universalist?” – having read his book cover to cover I can unequivocally say that Rob Bell himself tells us the answer is yes. Which raises another question. Is Rob Bell a heretic? Well, I guess that depends.
There is much disagreement among Christians about what is and is not within the pale of orthodox Christian beliefs and practices. A few years ago, the renowned Evangelical theologian John Stott shocked Christendom with his revelation that he now holds to the view of “annihilationism” – or the belief that hell is eternal in duration only, but not in consequence. In other words, unbelievers indeed are separated from God and confined to a placed called hell – but they will be eventually annihilated (put out of existence) and the conscious experience of the punishment will not last forever.
Did that startling revelation make John Stott a heretic? I remember reading the opinion of some who stated it does. My response was “really”? Are we sure of that? Has John Stott denied the substitutionary death and resurrection of Jesus Christ? Did he stop believing that Jesus is the Son of God and the only way to the Father? Did he deny that salvation is received only by grace through faith in Christ? Not that I am aware of.
Some would argue that Rob Bell’s views take things a giant step further – and that suggesting all of creation will eventually be reconciled to God in an eternal state of bliss is way out of bounds. I can see their point. Based upon my understanding of the Scriptures, I disagree with both Stott and Rob Bell in their beliefs about hell. But throughout “Love Wins”, Bell confirms again and again in various ways his belief that Jesus Christ is indeed the exclusive way to the Father. In the book he doesn’t say much about issues like the atonement or the Deity of Christ, so it is hard for me to comment on those issues.
Because I am a full-time pastor and not a scholar with the time on my hands to expound on every issue raised in Bell’s little book, having read it personally I am now at least prepared to more critically examine, review and participate in the plethora of theological dialogue – both for and against – that will inevitably surface in the days to come regarding “Love Wins.” This is not the first piece of work I’ve read on Christian Universalism, and I’m sure it won’t be the last. In any case, one reason I love Christ’s Church is precisely because it IS inter-denominational. While many see the different Christian sects, denominations and factions as a negative thing, I their existence is a positive thing. This actually strengthens the church against heresy because it encourages – rather than suppresses – robust dialogue.
The discussion of the eternality of hell is important. Does it rise to the level of determining Heresy with a capital “H”? Some say yes and some say no. What do YOU think?
Of course, in spite of my attempts to minimize any premature conditioning regarding my opinion of the book, there were viral videos and emails and social network messages that made that a difficult quest. One of the most frequently recurring was related to a tweet allegedly sent out by John Piper, pastor of the Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis. The tweet simply read, “Farewell Rob Bell.”
Granted, Bell and his publishers intentionally stirred the pot with a host of preliminary articles, videos and interviews (much the way Mel Gibson fed off of the allegations of “anti-semitism” he received prior to the release of 2004’s The Passion of the Christ). If Gibson made an extra half-billion dollars in revenue from curious Jews and skeptics who saw his movie simply to find out what all the commotion was about, I’m sure Rob Bell and Harper Collins will experience something similar on a lesser scale. I know they made an extra $10.99 from my Kindle download.
On the day of its national release, I went into our local Christian Bookstore asking for “Love Wins”. I was told that they would “not be carrying” the book – something I considered a little surprising given the wasteland of crappy material they actually DO carry. I then bolted over to Borders, which did not have the book in stock yet. That evening, I downloaded it on my Kindle and quickly read through it over the next couple of days.
Having just finished the book, I am very alert to a number of strengths and weaknesses I observed. If I were a reviewer I would begin with strengths, pointing out that Bell quickly and rightly draws our attention to the fact that many Christians have been trained to think of God’s redemptive purposes as being almost totally futuristic (i.e. about “going to heaven when we die”) rather than at least equally focused on living as agents of change in the here and now, bringing the values and qualities of God’s Kingdom into the broken spheres of THIS life. Point well taken.
Another strength was that in spite of Bell’s frequent appeals to human logic and emotion in raising his questions about the goodness of God, he goes much deeper in his use of Scripture than some of the “Christian universalists” I have read on a popular level. I commend Bell for trying to pay attention to some of the passages of Scripture which seem to contradict or at least challenge certain traditional assumptions about God.
In addition, it is hard not to be moved by Bell’s passion for keeping the good news focused on good news. His enduring commitment to present Jesus in light of the most expansive picture of beauty, love and grace possible is admirable in my opinion. It has long been my belief that one of the major reasons people reject Jesus at any given point in time is because the version of Jesus they have been presented with is less than the glorious Jesus of the Bible. Of course, some Christians would rather simplify this phenomenon by insisting that those who reject Christ simply aren’t elect – and therefore, who cares?
Now for a few weaknesses. In my opinion the Achilles' heel of this book is simple. While Bell indeed appeals to a vast array of Scripture verses to support his views, therein lies the problem. Rather than lengthen the book so as to present a sound exegetical defense of his views passage by passage, he cherry-picks from many often-unrelated Biblical texts, using verses, phrases and sound-bites to proof-text his opinions. While this analysis cannot in and of itself “prove” that Bell is wrong – I am simply pointing out that he spends very little time interacting with the opposing, sometimes “traditional” viewpoints he is either questioning or deconstructing.
In similar fashion, many sects and religious groups attempt to bolster their views about the Bible with sound-bite theologies designed to make the Bible say what they desire for it to say. I have no way of knowing whether Rob Bell has in fact dealt contextually and extensively with the dozens of verses he pulls from in support of his opinions – but if he has, then by excluding that documentation he’s simply telling the reader “just trust me” as he’s painting the traditional views on heaven and hell in the most negative light possible.
Therein lies another weakness of the book – namely, its brevity. I read the it cover to cover in just a few hours, and I’m a pathetically slow reader. I understand that Bell and his publishers are trying to reach a popular core audience by keeping his books succinct. But other than some extended comments about the “Prodigal Son” narrative, Bell does not spend any time contextually approaching or exegeting any of the passages from which he pulls his dozens of sound-bites. Again, I’m all for reaching a mass audience by “keeping it simple, stupid.” But could we have had just ONE – or TWO – or THREE extended treatments of a few of the most crucial passages?
By eisegeting (reading into the text) his “New Exodus”, restorationist theology, he is ignoring a number of other sound interpretive approaches to understanding the Storyline of the Bible and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In essence, I’m not interested THAT Bell thinks a Biblical author means something by a particular verse or phrase if I cannot also know WHY (contextually) he thinks the author meant it that way. To Bell’s credit, he does give a list of further suggested reading at the end of the book, but my guess is that very few of his fans will actually take the time to read those weightier writings and really think through the issues. Sadly, most will in fact simply “take Rob’s word” for it that he’s done his homework.
So in getting to the questions everyone began asking a few weeks ago – “Do you think Rob Bell is a universalist?” – having read his book cover to cover I can unequivocally say that Rob Bell himself tells us the answer is yes. Which raises another question. Is Rob Bell a heretic? Well, I guess that depends.
There is much disagreement among Christians about what is and is not within the pale of orthodox Christian beliefs and practices. A few years ago, the renowned Evangelical theologian John Stott shocked Christendom with his revelation that he now holds to the view of “annihilationism” – or the belief that hell is eternal in duration only, but not in consequence. In other words, unbelievers indeed are separated from God and confined to a placed called hell – but they will be eventually annihilated (put out of existence) and the conscious experience of the punishment will not last forever.
Did that startling revelation make John Stott a heretic? I remember reading the opinion of some who stated it does. My response was “really”? Are we sure of that? Has John Stott denied the substitutionary death and resurrection of Jesus Christ? Did he stop believing that Jesus is the Son of God and the only way to the Father? Did he deny that salvation is received only by grace through faith in Christ? Not that I am aware of.
Some would argue that Rob Bell’s views take things a giant step further – and that suggesting all of creation will eventually be reconciled to God in an eternal state of bliss is way out of bounds. I can see their point. Based upon my understanding of the Scriptures, I disagree with both Stott and Rob Bell in their beliefs about hell. But throughout “Love Wins”, Bell confirms again and again in various ways his belief that Jesus Christ is indeed the exclusive way to the Father. In the book he doesn’t say much about issues like the atonement or the Deity of Christ, so it is hard for me to comment on those issues.
Because I am a full-time pastor and not a scholar with the time on my hands to expound on every issue raised in Bell’s little book, having read it personally I am now at least prepared to more critically examine, review and participate in the plethora of theological dialogue – both for and against – that will inevitably surface in the days to come regarding “Love Wins.” This is not the first piece of work I’ve read on Christian Universalism, and I’m sure it won’t be the last. In any case, one reason I love Christ’s Church is precisely because it IS inter-denominational. While many see the different Christian sects, denominations and factions as a negative thing, I their existence is a positive thing. This actually strengthens the church against heresy because it encourages – rather than suppresses – robust dialogue.
The discussion of the eternality of hell is important. Does it rise to the level of determining Heresy with a capital “H”? Some say yes and some say no. What do YOU think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)