I sometimes listen to AM religious talk radio because I’m amazed at the sorts of the things I hear. Today, while listening into local St. Louis 24/7 “TruthTalk” Christian radio station KJ SL in my car, I heard a bit of contentious discussion between a radio host and a caller. I believe that the host of the radio show was Bob Dutko. Dutko has long held the position [1] that “Jesus really is the only way and He really did rise from the dead, physically and historically.”
When I first tuned in, the caller was talking, saying something much like this: I believe that the spirit of God resides in every person, and that people can live good and meaningful lives without belonging to any church. I believe that God will reward them based upon the good things that they do, and based upon how they treat others, regardless of whether or not they follow any religion. Good-hearted people who do not believe in Jesus or follow a religion will not go to hell.
The host told the caller that his “new age” religious outlook was hopelessly naïve, and that he needed to read the Bible, whereupon he would see that there is only one way to avoid hell is by accepting Jesus Christ as Savior.
The caller protested that there are plenty of “new age” religions out there, “including Catholicism and many forms of Protestant religions,” all of which ignore that there really is only one commandment and that is “love your neighbor as yourself.” If you do this (said the caller) you will be living a good life. The caller argued that religions have been responsible for war and needless pain, and that people would be better off without these organizations. He accused the host of being a mean-spirited small-minded man, whose approach has encouraged wars and whose goal is to convince Christians to hate Muslims and to hate anyone else who’s beliefs differed from their own.
The host lashed into the caller again, again calling him naïve and “new age,” and indicating that it is written in the Bible that God would turn family member against family member, and that this is the way it must be, and that only those who follow a religion. Here’s the passage he mentioned (Matthew 10:34-35 [2])
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. I came not to send peace, but a sword. … A man’s foes shall be they of his own household.” 10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
The caller hung up. The host chuckled at the caller and assured the audience that there is indeed a hell, and that those who don’t accept Jesus Christ are headed there.
[3]Hearing this conversation reminded me of a recent article about (the lack of) hell in Time Magazine [4]. Pastor Rob Bell is the head of a Baptist church in Michigan. A few years ago, after receiving a written comment that Gandi was “in hell,” Bell did a lot of thinking about hell, and then wrote a book called Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived. In his book, he proposed this blasphemous idea:
He suggests that the redemptive work of Jesus may be universal — meaning that, as his book’s subtitle puts it, “every person who ever lived” could have a place in heaven, whatever that turns out to be.
After proposing this idea, well–you guessed it–all hell broke lose [5]. Preacher Bell’s ideas have been intensely criticized by those who want to save hell. Here’s how Jon Meacham’s Time Magazine article [6] describes the debate:
Bell insists he is only raising the possibility that theological rigidity — and thus a faith of exclusion — is a dangerous thing. He believes in Jesus’ atonement; he says he is just unclear on whether the redemption promised in Christian tradition is limited to those who meet the tests of the church. It is a case for living with mystery rather than demanding certitude.
From a traditionalist perspective, though, to take away hell is to leave the church without its most powerful sanction. If heaven, however defined, is everyone’s ultimate destination in any event, then what’s the incentive to confess Jesus as Lord in this life? If, in other words, Gandhi is in heaven, then why bother with accepting Christ? If you say the Bible doesn’t really say what a lot of people have said it says, then where does that stop? If the verses about hell and judgment aren’t literal, what about the ones on adultery, say, or homosexuality? Taken to their logical conclusions, such questions could undermine much of conservative Christianity.
This discussion and radio show reminded me of how starkly different conservative Christians see the world, compared to the way I see it. Many Christians believe that hell is necessary to keep most people in mind. I disagree. Many non-theist societies are model communities where people very much care for each other. In fact, many non-human animals (dogs, cats, chimpanzees) do exemplary work taking care of their young and supporting each other, even though they are certainly not motivated by the fear of hell. There are deep biological roots to human empathy. [7] And there is quite a good case that God is not very good. [8] In fact, His creation of hell would be Exhibit A.
I’ll admit that there are at least a few people out there who probably be are deterred from wrongdoing thanks to the threat of hell. But isn’t it amazing that so many people assume that so many of us are motivated by the fear of eternal torture? Such a sad view of human nature. How different it must be to walk around seeing one’s fellow human beings in this light. Such an outlook might lead one to think that severe physical punishments and wars are justified–that one can treat humans with indignity because they can’t be trusted to act with decency on their own. Why would we have any need to treat such beings with any respect? Why, indeed?
Print this post [9]
[10]