Love Wins

Question: Do you believe in hell? Tell us plainly.

Answer: Yes, I believe in hell.

Q: Excellent! So you believe in a place of eternal conscious torment where God will punish the unregenerate.

A: No of course not.

Q: (confused surprise)

A: I am sorry, when I say I believe in hell, I am of course referring to a radical redefinition of hell that has no Scriptural foundation and which I have invented based on philosophical assumptions about the nature of God's love. I think hell as a place of eternal conscious torment is offensive and evil.

Q: But when I asked the question, "do you believe in hell," you must have known that I was referring to the Biblical conception of it.

A: Yes I did.

Q: Then why did you say yes? Because you actually do not believe in that, or anything remotely resembling that. You actually think that it is evil. For you to say yes to my question when you clearly knew what I meant was actually deceptive.

A: Yes. My conception of hell is so far removed from what everybody means when they say hell, that it would be constructive to clear communication if I called it something else. After all, the way I have defined hell is more or less equivalent to "pain and suffering as a result of living in a fallen world."

Q: Why don't you call it something else then? Since the goal of writing and preaching is clear communication, it would greatly help all of your listeners understand what you really meant if you didn't toy with words.

A: Yes.

Q: So why don't you? The only conclusion that I can make from this is that you don't actually particularly care about clear communication.

A: That is true. I find if I can use ambiguous words, or redefine words, it gives me a great deal of latitude in dealing with criticism. For example, if someone accuses me of saying there is no hell, I can say that I do believe in hell. This takes the winds out of the sails of his criticism. Then if he tries to pin me down to a precise meaning of words, I can accuse him of being needlessly critical and obsessed with doctrine at the expense of charity.

Q: But this isn't helpful to the church at all! If I asked you if you were allergic to peanuts, and you said yes, you'd expect that when I said peanuts, I meant the thing that you are actually allergic to. If I had redefined peanuts to mean wheat, I could actively harm you through my miscommunication! Communication is difficult enough already in this fallen world, why hinder it further?

A: I don't know. I like being popular. I am afraid of total rejection by the evangelical world.

Q: Why do you have such a great reputation as a communicator? Even your enemies say this. But communication is about preciseness of language and the actual exchange of ideas. You seem more interest in ambiguous impressions that your audience can interpret however the will, or at least, that gives you flexibility to defend yourself from critics on both sides.

A: The root of my reputation is from my story-telling ability and my personal charisma. Both of those are undeniable.

Q: Such qualities are possessed by many in the world. Both are neutral gifts which the possessor has an obligation to use for the glory of God. True communication, after all, is an unfolding of the mind of God by the power of his Spirit. This done only through the Word of God. It is practical, for the aid of the listeners, to encourage them unto obedience and perseverance. It is done with humility and care.

A: I use the Scriptures in my preaching and writing.

Q: Do you use them to defend a position you have already arrived at? Or do you develop your argument exegetically?

A: Without question the first.

Q: Then you have no power in your words, since they are your own. They may have a form of power, a temporary response to your natural giftings. But the true power of all teaching and preaching is the Holy Spirit operating through his Word. You are but an instrument.

A: I don't have the same motivations for my writings and my preaching. I am interested in helping people, but in a slightly different way. I want to create a form of Christianity that allows men to silence their conscience while giving their sin free reign.

Q: Come now, even your harshest critics don't accuse you of that. Surely that can't be your conscious object!

A: No, not my conscious object, but since this is the result of all false religion, it is what ultimately motivates my heart. I have a hard time telling people that haven't repented and sought salvation in Christ that they will be punished for it. Also, many of the people in my church who are attracted to my doctrine-light and permissive form of teaching struggle to comprehend such harshness. Since they think little of their own sin, they have trouble thinking much of it in others.

Q: But you will be judged not on the attractiveness of your doctrine, but on its fidelity to God's Words! These aren't small things that you are trifling with!

A: Well, to comfort myself, I would rather believe in a God who would show mercy to me in all things, even over and against his Word.

Q: What do you make of the many warnings against false teachers and the specific warning to teachers, that they will be judged more severely? Don't these give you pause?

A: No. I trust in his mercy.

Q: But faith goes out to a spoken word! We trust his mercy because of the assurance he gives in laying hold of the means by which he shows us grace! We trust his Word first, and foremost!

A: Why do you challenge my vague sayings? Why do you disturb the peace I have spoken to myself?

Q: Because the minister is not under obligation to falsely comfort his listeners, but to guide them safely to Christ! How dare you speak peace to men where God has not?

A: I knew that there would be doctrine police who would try to pick apart my teaching!

Q: Do you distrust my motives? Do you think I am trying to score points for myself here? Do you think that I might be legitimately concerned about the effect of your teachings? Could you extend charity also to me and assume that if I criticize your writings it is out of concern for your soul and the souls of your many readers?

A: That is the charity that I ask of you. I see no reason to extend it back.