Brian McLaren's post
I'm delighted to have
Brian McLaren as a guest on this journal today. Brian wrote the following post, and he will be engaging here over the next couple of days. Ask him any questions you want, raise issues, enjoy and practice a generous orthodoxy (other sites on the blog tour: Tallskinnykiwi, Jordan Cooper, Jen Lemen, Paradoxology, and Pomomusings).
peace, dwight
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Hi, everyone - it's an honor to be your guest and have a bit of conversation about my newest book, "The Last Word and the Word After That."
I thought I'd offer a bit of personal information about the book. I felt a good bit of excitement and intellectual/spiritual energy about writing and publishing "The Last Word and the Word After That." I also felt a good bit of fear and trembling.
I knew that it would be controversial, and I knew that many Christian sisters and brothers would consider me an enemy for writing it. The timing of the book's release was also somewhat disadvantageous in my mind, because "A Generous Orthodoxy," which I didn't expect to be seen as controversial, ended up eliciting some pretty harsh response. That meant I was coming out with two highly controversial books in less than a year. I'm not by nature a controversialist, so I didn't look forward to a hornet's nest being stirred up.
But at the same time, I have felt for a long time that Western Christian theology (in its Catholic and Protestant forms) had somewhere become preoccupied with getting individual souls out of hell after death, and had too often lost a sense of God's continuing love for all creation in this life - in other words, we had substituted something else for the gospel of the kingdom of God, which was at the heart of Jesus' message. It was as if the doctrine of the fall had eaten up the doctrine of creation. The issue of hell-avoidance became the centerpiece of salvation, and I felt this perspective was neither true to Scripture nor healthy. So that was the origin of the book.
I'd be interested in knowing if any of you have read the book, and how it seemed to you. Did it seem shocking, or tame? Did it present new information, or were you already familiar with the content of the book? I'll do my best to respond to some of your questions/comments in the next couple days.
I thought I'd offer a bit of personal information about the book. I felt a good bit of excitement and intellectual/spiritual energy about writing and publishing "The Last Word and the Word After That." I also felt a good bit of fear and trembling.
I knew that it would be controversial, and I knew that many Christian sisters and brothers would consider me an enemy for writing it. The timing of the book's release was also somewhat disadvantageous in my mind, because "A Generous Orthodoxy," which I didn't expect to be seen as controversial, ended up eliciting some pretty harsh response. That meant I was coming out with two highly controversial books in less than a year. I'm not by nature a controversialist, so I didn't look forward to a hornet's nest being stirred up.
But at the same time, I have felt for a long time that Western Christian theology (in its Catholic and Protestant forms) had somewhere become preoccupied with getting individual souls out of hell after death, and had too often lost a sense of God's continuing love for all creation in this life - in other words, we had substituted something else for the gospel of the kingdom of God, which was at the heart of Jesus' message. It was as if the doctrine of the fall had eaten up the doctrine of creation. The issue of hell-avoidance became the centerpiece of salvation, and I felt this perspective was neither true to Scripture nor healthy. So that was the origin of the book.
I'd be interested in knowing if any of you have read the book, and how it seemed to you. Did it seem shocking, or tame? Did it present new information, or were you already familiar with the content of the book? I'll do my best to respond to some of your questions/comments in the next couple days.
Thanks!
To my utter surprise, I find myself believing these days like Caseys Dad who said, "That dogll hunt!"
For me, one doctrine that has hunted (and caught me) is hellology. It started at age 9 when the traveling evangelist stopped by to light up the fire and toast me until I screamed, "PLEASE, NO, PLEASE NO. ILL DO ANYTHING. JUST DONT SEND ME TO HELL. PLEASE!!!" Then I filled my cub scout canteen full just in case. Now THAT dog hunts.
I read your book the first week it was out and agree that the way we believe in hell and use it on each other is way more dangerouse than going there. But it works. It got me to say "I Do" to Jesus.
The worst thing I can think of that its done to me is like Amittai (Johans father), it has produced a Jonah. But at least Ive been to Ninevah with the not-so-good news, seen some old fashioned repentence, and now have a chance to think under the grace gourd. I even had a chance to read about the first Jonah and repent from some of my evil ways, seeing the hell of it all. So the news I preach now is "better news" if not 100% good news.
But Im stuck with a dog that hunts and doesnt know how not to hunt. When I told my story about the last word and word after that (as a form of confession and correction to the traveling evangelist) to kids interested in getting baptized yesterday, my dog hunted them down until they were all shuddering and begging for a one way ticket to heaven without stopping in hell.
What do I do with this damn dog? Hes been faithful. I cant just shoot him. (Comment this)
"No, this is no escape. There is no heaven with a little of hell in it No plan to retain this or that of the devil in our hearts or our pockets. Out Satan must go, every hair and feather."
Thanks Brian.
Liz (Comment this)
Ever since your name (and beautifully balding head) appeared in Time Magazine with 24 other influential evangelicals, and since your appearance on Larry King Live I have been sensing an invitation to pray even more consistently for both you and Grace. So much is being called of you and the more you are called to step into the more controversy seems inevitable; even though you are the very picture of a gracious and spacious person. Of course conflict avoidance isnt the goal, but how one chooses to engage the other . . . well that is applied theology.
I cant image anyone who has had the privilege of conversing with you fact-to-face coming away from such an exchange with a sense that you had sought to stir up controversy. Yet between A Generous Orthodoxy and this your latest offering, a hornets nest has been stirred. On the one hand, I guess we should expect nothing less. As your text seems almost to extend the conversation of William Blake (in The Marriage of Heaven and Hell), and C. S. Lewis (in The Great Divorce) by inviting your readers to see last things in a fresh light . . . but who really wants to see their own theological systems in fresh lights?
As you have thoughtfully pointed out, all too often the theology of the West has used the fall and sin as the starting point to understand humanitys relationship with God. Gods creation of humanity imago Dei has often been functionally lost to original sin.
Your willingness to engage with people holding differing hermeneutics, opinions, convictions and dogmas hints toward a more open-source theological future. Even a blog tour like this helps to level perceived separation between author and reader. Thanks for your courage and your wisdom, and your embodiment of Divine Love.
Ill say more later.
Peace, dwight (Comment this)
I finished the book about 2 weeks ago and enjoyed it (if I can say that about a book on hell). I see the need for Westernized Christianity to look at the "gospel" in light of the Kingdom instead of the polemic heaven/hell construct we have now. Thanks for sheding some light (Im sure the topic is endless) on the history behind the idea of an afterlife. In the end, whatever we believe about hell/heaven, if it doesnt help us love our neighbor and the Almighty more, then it probably isnt helpful. And I think you made that very clear with Dan and Carols characters.
I think the most important idea I picked up on is the idea of mercy/judgment tango. I know you quickly touched base with it, but could you enhance that theme a little more if you can. This morning I read James 2:13 that states "judgment will be w/o mercy to anyone who has shown no mercy; mercy triumps over judgment."
Thanks Brian for your voice and longing for justice and love in this world.
ps. i read your daughters blog every once in a while. you should be proud.
(Comment this)
Ive read two of your books and I dont think I need to read any more. You sound to me like a somewhat passive aggressive pastor or theologian (or whatever you are). Im sure youre a nice person as but niceness only gets you so far. Your apparent willingness to treat Holy Scripture and Christian tradition in a cavalier way should concern your readers and maybe even your publishers.
What gives you the right to redraw the boundary lines?
A concerned Jesus lover,
rob (Comment this)
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I am incredibly grateful for your books which have been of immeasurable assistance to me in my faith journey. Through people like you, Ive discovered a way to abandon the anti-illectual approach to faith I held so dear for so long.
I am grateful that you have challenged the boundaries of my faith ...
Keep up the good work.
Cheers. (Comment this)
I think it\s the Holy Spirit. :) Seriously, all of us have the right to redraw the boundary lines.
As a demographics and org behavior freak, I am puzzled by the current paradigm of Evangelical Protestantism, that only includes one sixth of the population.
Since we are called to \"make disciples\", maybe our \"hell theology\" should point that way? Thank you for making us think, we all win when that happens. And thank you for the graceful way you have presented.
cheers,
Mike O (Comment this)
I resonate with the more Eastern concept of Heaven and Hell as the same place.
For the record: My starting point in all theological reflection is that God is Living, Holy, Self-emptying, Relationality.
Thus place (Godself, creation:earth/heaven/hell) is always context for relationship, (this is what makes the incarnation God so powerful and particular), the after life, either heaven or hell would be a relational context. As such the afterlife will make clear what the reality of now is; the reality of now is that God is and we find life in its full only in and through God. As announced by Jesus the Christ life is the presence of God and this presence is at hand. Now we only see Divine presence through a glass darkly. But in the life to come which is a continuation of this life we will see the presence of God face-to-face as it were. We will fully see how all that is and moves and has its being, is in and through and connected to the God who is relationality and whose creation reflections Godself.
Heaven and Hell may both be understood as the very presence of God.
I often use example of a couple who are in love. When they are together time seems to stop as they simply enjoy being with one another. This reflects something of a relational vision of the afterlife. Love makes space for others, so much so, that self-emptying service and creative acts missionally extend love beyond the couple.
If this loving couple were to break-up. Lets say that one member (the man) decides to leave, and pursue self and his own self-interest. Separation begins to occur, relationship begins to breakdown and we witness sin. The relationship will work to convict to wayward man to return to relationship. But if the man in pursuit of self continues to live in opposition to relationship, it becomes hell for this man to be in the presence of the loving woman.
Have you ever seen a couple who were once in love but had since split-up in the same room? Its painful.
What might it be like if throughout eternity God relentless offered Gods perfect love through Gods presence to a person who didnt want relationship? . . . sounds like a self-made hell.
This is my working metaphor for the afterlife. Heaven and Hell as both the presence of God. When we relationally respond to the Divine invitation to dance with God in Gods co-eternal intrapenetrating, interanimating dance we find fullness of life in interconnectedness and the High Priestly Prayer offered by Jesus finds its fulfillment.
When we relationally reject the outstretch hand offered God by be choose oneness, and the very presence of the availably of love hardens our hearts to all others; including and especially God, and this is hell.
In this way we make our own hell but we forever co-create heaven.
Heaven and hell are the orthoparadox of the relationality God.
peace, dwight (Comment this)
I have tried to avoid thinking about hell. Though I dont know these categories well I guess Ive been leaning toward an idea of ceasing to exist as hell. Ive just never given it much thought.
Can hell ever be a hopeful thought? (Comment this)