Just posting here for the moment to set up a spot for the book review of “Dropping Hell and Embracing Grace: Answering those questions they didn’t want us to ask concerning heaven, hell and hope for the ultimate salvation of all humanity.” by Ivan A. Rogers.
In all, I think although this book takes a similar (but not identical) approach to “The Hour We least Expected”, it is a much more concise and well-presented version
Stay tuned.
After a long and busy week of transition into a new schedule, I finally have a few minutes to start in on the review. Here we go:
Dropping Hell and Embracing Grace, (hereafter referred to as DHEB) is an interesting book in many respects. Firstly, it gets endorsements from some well-recognized names in the Universalist community; Gerry Beauchemin (Hope Beyond Hell), Paul Cole, Harold Lovelace, Gary Amirault, Glenn Klein, and Gary Sigler. It even gets an endorsement from a non-universalist; Roger E. Olson (Professor of Theology; Truett Theological Seminary at Baylor University). Roger has the following to say about this book: “…is a thought provoking book by a church pastor who is also a retired executive officer of an evangelical denomination. While I do not agree with its central tenet – that eventually all will be saved (universalism) – I do think Rogers’ arguments are worth considering. The book will make many people angry and many others happy, but most importantly it will make people think about why they believe what they do.”
Not bad for someone who disagrees with the idea of universalism…
Secondly, this book (as Roger Olsen points out above) comes from someone who is both a pastor and retired Evangelical denomination officer; so from someone who has been as steeped and invested in modern Christian tradition as is possible.
Before I get into the chapter reviews, I want to say a few things about the foreword. This was written by another Evangelical pastor/ author and published columnist, Glen Moyer. I think his foreword is excellent partly due to the fact that his experience in coming to the realization of universalism is very similar to many of our own on this forum, myself included. I just want to hit some highlights from it here:
Glen recalls that in the midst of a successful career as an evangelical pastor/ speaker, etc, that he was becoming concerned because he had a serious and secret problem, with no one he felt he could turn to. He was beginning to question the traditional view of hell. He recalls that it began when he was preaching a sermon series through Romans, during which he continually found himself saying, “I know this is what Paul says, but what he really means is…” Part of what disturbed him about this is that he’d always made it a point to have scripture shape him rather than the other way around. Yet here he was, constantly shaping what he saw in scripture to fit his orthodox doctrine. Glen was certain the Bible, church fathers and history all conclusively taught of a literal hell, and yet…
Glen goes on to say that he was very surprised when upon closer examination, none of these authority sources seemed to support the hell doctrine, rather, continually disproved it. And so it was with great reluctance that he found himself doubting hell more and more and feared becoming a “closet heretic”. So, unwilling to accept this new identity he was being dragged into, he did what many of us have done; he set out to find better arguments in support of hell. Alas, however; all this did was to strengthen him in where he was already headed: the more he learned about hell the less he believed in it. Glen confesses here that part of him actually wanted hell to be real because of the personal cost to someone in his position to reject it; which actually scared him more than the reality of a hell in the afterlife; though another part of him was starting to become excited about the implications on the other side of the coin.
The new and improved arguments he sought to reassure himself of the traditional view of hell weren’t any better than the originals, and he finally found himself unable to believe it any longer. Glen had told no one of this struggle (not even his wife) for quite awhile until one day he couldn’t stand it any longer. This was when a friend that he also confided in told him about the author of this book, Ivan Rogers; who had similarly been in the same position as he. Glen learned that Ivan had been studying the doctrine of hell for many years and had come to the same conclusions, though he had kept them to himself. This came as a great surprise to Glen, because he knew Ivan Rogers to be an “extremely careful and trustworthy theologian”.
Glen asks us to consider where our belief in hell comes from, citing some of the many examples he’s heard when posing this question, but points out that he can count on one hand the number of people who have been able to say that their belief in hell came from an in-depth study of the Bible and history. Glen also recalls his initial reaction to reading Thomas Talbott’s The Inescapable Love of God; citing it as the first book he read challenging the traditional view, and how it made so much sense to him, though he felt guilty reading it. He cautions us not to have the same reaction to this book that he did to Talbott’s, saying to yourself “Wow, Rogers really makes sense”, Then stop yourself and say “Wait, I can’t agree with that, it goes completely against everything I’ve been taught about hell and God.” (This was almost verbatim what went through my mind when I first began to read on the subject and began to question the traditional view). Glen then commends the book to us, saying that it picks up where Love Wins left off…
A very promising start, indeed.
Next up: The author’s introduction highlights.
Ivan’s Introduction is put forth as an open letter to the church, in which he makes known his purpose for this book; which is to offer some observations and suggestions out of his love for people, who are in fact the true church (vs. a building). He wants the book to be a “clarion call” toward appreciation of God’s inexhaustible love and grace for all. He also thinks it will demonstrate what he considers to be one of the greatest impediments to acceptance of the gospel, the reading into scripture of a bad news for most. He wonders if perhaps declining participation in church gatherings these days isn’t a sign of a problem emanating from inside the church, rather than from without.
He makes the point that the world will not be impressed by dragging more stuff into the church, but by tossing old stuff out; the “dog-eared dogmatisms” as he puts it. He doesn’t want to suggest a list of these items, preferring to leave that to our imaginations, but does recommend including those things that have a divisive and excluding influence on those who haven’t yet discovered the extent of God’s grace and acceptance. The last thing we should be guilty of is division of people from people, and people from God!
He also recommends we throw out such divisive terms as “godly” vs. “ungodly”, “saved” vs. “unsaved”, “saints” vs. “sinners”, etc.
The message he wants people to hear from his book is that Christ loves everyone unconditionally despite the fact we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God; and that Christ has fully and finally accomplished everything necessary to assure the forgiveness and salvation of all humanity. Christ said from the cross that it is finished, and that which he has finished can’t be improved upon, added to, or undone.
He adds that we need to learn to view and treat every person as a redeemed child of God, whether they know it yet or not.
Next: Chapter 1; God’s Covenant of Adoption.
Sorry I have been lax in getting to the chapter 1 review. I’ve been exceptionally busy with “stuff” lately and I haven’t been able to finish it. I’m nearly done with the chapter 1 review, so I should have that up soon.