Help with Responding to Emerging Church's View on Hell

[danmpem]

I've been coming across this a lot recently. Several of my Christian friends are struggling with the doctrine of hell, but what's interesting is that their problems with it are very much like Brian McLaren's view on hell (found on this thread). In short, they see hell as purely being used as coercion to scare people into being Christian. Does anyone have any input in regards to this?

 

[RamistThomist]

Well, if someone is using hell simply to scare someone into being a Christian, I don't think that is right. I don't think someone should become a Christian simply to escape hell. Of course, that doesn't negate the doctrine of hell or a final judgment.

 

[raekwon]

Finding the "Emerging Church's" view on anything is kind of like trying to nail Jell-O to a wall. Every time you think you've got it, it moves. Not only that, but there's a pretty wide spectrum of churches that may (to some degree or another) either identify as "emerging" or exhibit traits that distinguish them as "emerging" to others. (Heck, some folks might even suspect my church of being "emergent" for some reason or another.)

Anyway, regarding these guys . . . I wonder what their reaction would be if they were told that Hell is spoken of more in Scripture by Jesus himself than anyone else. (Since Emergent guys love all the stuff that Jesus said, even when they're not too fond of the rest of the Bible.)

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

Probably the same way they react after they tell you how much they love the Sermon on the Mount, then when you show them the things Jesus actually said in the Sermon on the Mount they babble about Love and Tolerance, or some such thing...

 

[danmpem]

I guess I just want to help my friends see beyond the "either you do x, y, and z or else" dilemma.

 

[ahavah7]

Using hell in evangelism is quite appropriate. How is a sinner going to embrace a Savior until they realize the need one? When Jesus talks to the woman at the well, he brings her sin to the forefront of the conversation, then presents himself as her Savior. When Peter preaches at Pentecost he convicts the crowd of their sin in murdering God, then presents that God as their only hope for salvation.

Confronting someone with their sin before presenting the Gospel, is clearly a biblical model. Since Hell is the consequence of sin, it seems only natural that you would bring it up in evangelism.

 

[a mere housewife]

I read Lewis' poem today that 'God in His mercy made the fixed pains of Hell'.

This is not only because evil cries out for judgment (jugdement on evil is good), but because the fear of punishment keeps evil in bounds. I agree with ahavah that when we are outside of Christ we should have a fear of hell: it's simply denying every reality of God's justice and of our own depravity to ignore that point. It also helps in understanding the depth of Christ's love and so gratitude, not just fear, becomes an incentive to flee to Him. To ignore hell would be unfaithful to Scripture, but I think that every evangelization effort should leave people focused on Christ.

 

[Tirian]

Luk 12:5 "But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear Him who, after He has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I say to you, fear Him!

Heb 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

I think the fear of God and His judgment are things that don't sit well with a "social gospel". It's hard to combine the message of "come as you are, be loved and accepted for who you are" and the one of "we are totally depraved, deserving of every punishment and saved only because of the work of Christ and must repent and believe in Him."

I feel deeply for my friends who are also caught up in this. Their case seems hopeless - but yet Christ can and does overcome. It is to His throne of Grace we must appeal in intercession.

Matt

 

[a mere housewife]

I had been thinking of this thread, and read this section in Hugh Martin's Abiding Presence which seemed applicable as regards doctrines of judgment leading us to Christ [italics mine].

'Here; then, is the full glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ -- the glory of a rectitude that cannot move aside a hairsbreadth, though its onward march involves the slaying of the Lord of glory, made sin for us.... "And Moses prayed unto the Lord and said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory." And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed: "The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty." Where but in the face of Jesus does this glory shine?'

Not only does an objection to the doctrine of divine punishment in hell mean evil has the upper hand (which seems tantamount on an earthly justice level to saying we shouldn't punish, or talk about punishing, child molesters even though it gives some sort of redress to the party wronged, because it makes people afraid to molest children) but we lose 'the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ'.

Here is how Hugh Martin applies the doctrine of divine justice as revealed in Christ:

"What can your fitting attitude or answer be, but the full, immediate, free confession of all your iniquity? For, see how safely you may in faith acknowledge all your sin, when Infinite Justice stands ready to exclaim, ‘I am fully satisfied for it all’ — and Infinite Love to say, ‘I freely save thee from it all!’
"Oh! deal faithfully and frankly with your God in such a case; for satisfied Justice can in no wise harm you; saving Love can in no wise cast you out. Is not this the glory of the Lord?"