AS FOR THE UNBELIEVING LIVING AND DEAD…

For historical and cultural (not to mention theological) reasons, Lutherans do not fit neatly within the American Evangelical community.  Indeed, many for the controversies which so agitate Evangelicals have little interest for Lutherans.  Thus, for the most part, the raucous squabble occasioned by one Rob Bell's particular departure from typical conservative Evangelical views for more the enlightened view common in progressive Christianity barely has taken little notice within the American Lutheran communion. 

For those unfamiliar with the matter of Rob Bell, here is a brief summary:

After receiving his  M.Div. from Fuller Theological Seminary, Rob Bell spent some time under the mentorship of Dr. Ed Dobson--one time executive at the Moral Majority and  Dean of Men at Jerry Fallwell's Liberty University--established Mars Hill Bible Church  in  Grandville, Michigan which grew the one of the largest mega-churches in the country.  It seems clear that Bell himself with firmly within the moderate mainstream of American Christianity by the time he started Mars Hill and preached many of the standpoints which would get him into trouble years later. After it was published, his book Love Wins led to a fallout with the congregation and forced him on a "search for a more forgiving faith.   In September 2012. Bell left Mars Hill.

The particular subject within Love Wins which has led to Bell's estrangement from the Evangelical community is his belief that it is quite possible and logical that no one shall be condemned to spend an eternity in Hell.  While Bell says he is not a universalist, he has put out several strong arguments in its favor and concludes "Whatever objections a person may have of [the universalist view], and there are many, one has to admit that it is fitting, proper, and Christian to long for it."

The Evangelical community has found it difficult to believe that such a successful Christian minister could say such a thing.  Albert Mohler, John Piper, and David Platt have been Bell's most vocal critics with Mohler saying that the book was "theologically disastrous" for not totally rejecting universalism.  Other such as  Brian McLaren, Greg Boyd and Eugene Peterson have spoken up in Bell's defense but they represent a minority.

For the vast majority of the Lutheran laity, pastors and theologians, the "Bell tempest" has been of scant interest.  Universalism has little purchase historically among Lutherans and one knows Martin Luther would have had little patience for Bell--although for more subtle reasons than one might suppose.  Nevertheless, universalism has gained a foothold among some Lutherans in recent years.

Otherwise orthodox theologian Carl Braaten in 1983 suggested all mankind (both the living and the dead) would eventful be reconciled to God in his book Principles of Lutheran Theology.  Braaten made this proposition somewhat gingerly and has largely avoided any further comment since.  Still, many if not most his fellow orthodox Lutheran clergy and theologians expressed disappointment that Braaten included this speculation in his otherwise excellent text.  Indeed, Braaten was somewhat vague on how universalism can be harmonized with the classic, historical teaching of the Church on salvation.  What his comments do bring to mind are Pope John Paul II remarks in which he firmly insisted on the existence of Hell, admitted that there was very little indication in the Bible or Catholic tradition all would escape eternal damnation, but it was perfectly acceptable within Christian piety to pray that Hell would be empty.

In a similar fashion, Pastor Peter Marty made a more insistent avocation for universalism in the March 2014 issue of The Lutheran.  Marty never uses the word "universalism" itself and he does not exactly come out and say there are many ways in other religions to receive salvation; yet he uses in his fashion many of the same historic objections to the singularity of Christianity.  To his credit, Marty does not use the prophylactic weasel word mode so many theologians employ to avoid charges of heresy. 

What is especially offensive in his article Who gets saved? Marty compares the belief in the exclusively of Christianity to the images of a Jesus bouncer admitting only to select people into a velvet-roped VIP entrance of a popular, celebrated night club.  And those holding onto the orthodox, historical teaching of the Church are selfishly believing they and they alone as Christians have the ticket into heaven.

Marty goes on to write: What you are hearing is some version of the idea that if you practice religion in a particular way, you will be saved. Yet no religion can save us. God alone saves. We Christians do not believe in Christianity. We believe in God. God alone has the truth. God is truth. No religion possesses the whole truth on God. In our best moments, we know that Jesus is larger than any single religion.

Note that no Lutheran worth his salt would say that if you practice religion in a particular way, you will be saved.  Yet it is this pejorative straw man image employs throughout his article.  Likewise, those who pay attention to their catechism would maintain that we don't possess the truth--rather the Truth possesses us.  This is a vital distinction Christianity teaches us, yet Marty gives no credit to orthodox Christians sharing in believing thus.

Marty then goes on to write:

God loved the world enough to gift this world with God’s son. That’s the claim of John 3:16. We may be tempted to believe that God so loved Christians, that God gave all who name Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior exclusive rights into a special club. But Jesus is universal Lord and Savior, not just my personal Lord and Savior. He saves the whole world, and this doesn’t happen through tribal membership.   [Emphasis mine]

Without using the word "universalism", this is an outright admission that Marty is in fact a universalist.  Exact how Christ is to save those who are not his disciples--and those who do not believe in God at all--is not explained.  One wonders about what Christology is implying; but it cannot be harmonized with Luther's Theology Of The Cross.  Just where does the cross come in this universalism?

At this point, Marty begins to offer a heterodox interpretation of John 14: 6:  “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.  Marty does this by asserting Jesus was merely comforting His disciples in the face of His soon to be suffering and crucifixion.  That Jesus was not disclosing any cosmic truth beyond that loving reassurence. 

We are not given permission to shrink the cross to suit our own version of God. This may not be easy medicine for some in the Christian fold to swallow. Yet, the apostle Paul writes, “In Christ, God was reconciling the world to himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19). This is not the Christian world that God is putting back together through Christ. It is the whole world. “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth,” says Jesus of his pending death and resurrection, “will draw all people to myself” (John 12:32). Not some people. Not Christian people. All people  [Emphasis his own].

Marty begins his conclusion by repeating a familiar, sentimental objection to the particularity of Christ in a man's and woman's eternal destination:

I happen to have been born in Chicago into a Christian family. I didn’t ask to be born into this family that practiced the Christian faith; I just was. Someone else was born in Delhi, India, on the same day I was born, but into a Hindu family. That kid didn’t ask to be born into his Hindu-practicing family; he just was. Surely we cannot claim that God privileges certain ones of us with an eternal home because of our birthplace or cultural background. Nor would we want to argue that we receive a club access card because we uttered a theological formula about Jesus. 

Marty concludes stating that God is bigger than our imaginations and bigger than any one religion. 

His ways are not our ways and how He saves all is beyond our understanding.  Our job as Christians is to trust ourselves in Christ and testify to the sweet sunlight that comes with loving Him.  Note that that testifying doesn't necessarily mean going out into all nations making disciples.  Or does it?  The ambiguity of these words leaves it up to question--and doubts.

If these notions were entertained by a few in the Lutheran fold, this would cause little concern except for those individuals themselves.  But it appears that these notions are exactly uncommon among Lutheran clergy and theologians.  Especially troubling is the fact that Marty's article appears in the ELCA's flagship publication.  And The Lutheran has a habit of floating teachings that may be coming down the pipe to laity from where the ELCA leadership wants to go.

The image of orthodox Christians as snotty insiders is an insult to the martyrs of the past and present who suffered for the sake of Christ.  What exactly did they suffer for if a particular Christ was not alone the way, the truth, and the light?  Was the Church simply wrong all those centuries to preach that it is only in Christ that we are to find our hope?

What about the "unfairness" of the damnation to those faithful to other gods?  Isn't it unjust for God to condemn those who never heard the Gospel?  For that matter, isn't unreasonable for God to send to an eternal Hell those who had heard the Gospel and rejected the faith based on a single decision made in this lifetime?  It seems to "our" notion of justice that a truly loving God would not cast them into the outer darkness.  Or is this rationalizing what we feel is right?

The testimony of the apostles was the same as that of Peter as he stood before the rulers, the elders and the teachers of the law of Jerusalem:  "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”  (Acts 4:12)  Are we to believe that what Peter testified wasn't exactly what he meant?

Consider Hebrews 4: 1-3:  Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it. ² For we also have had the good news proclaimed to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because they did not share the faith of those who obeyed. ³ Now we who have believed enter that rest, just as God has said,

“So I declared on oath in my anger, They shall never enter my rest.’”

It is clear that apart from faith all is sin.  God is a holy God and He will allow no unclean thing into His presence. 

Let us end on a slightly different note.  The aforementioned Rob Bell made the claim that Luther was open to the idea of the universal salvation of all men and women.  But this is what Luther actually said:

If God were to save anyone without faith, he would be acting contrary to his own words and would give himself the lie; yes, he would deny himself. And that is impossible for, as St. Paul declares, God cannot deny himself. It is as impossible for God to save without faith as it is impossible for divine truth to lie. That is clear, obvious, and easily understood, no matter how reluctant the old wineskin is to hold this wine–yes, is unable to hold and contain it.

It would be quite a different question whether God can impart faith to some in the hour of death or after death so that these people could be saved through faith. Who would doubt God’s ability to do that? No one, however, can prove that he does do this. For all that we read is that he has already raised people from the dead and thus granted them faith. But whether he gives faith or not, it is impossible for anyone to be saved without faith. Otherwise every sermon, the gospel, and faith would be vain, false, and deceptive, since the entire gospel makes faith necessary.    (Works, 43, ed. and trans. G. Wienke and H. T. Lehmann [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1968], 53-54; WA 10.ii, 324.25-325.11)

That God may give the unbelieving dead a "second chance" and faith will be given to all is only unsupported speculation.  It attempts to look into the "left hand" of God--that which He does not disclose to us and remains hidden from us.  That which God has hidden will not be discovered.  And speculation is a dangerous thing and many times has led the Church down evil and regrettable paths.   Speculation has led many away from the faith.

As for the unbelieving living and dead…to the living we are to proclaim the Gospel and make disciples in His name.  As for the dead, we leave to God, His mercy, and His justice.