Carlton Pearson and the problem of hell
I remember seeing Carlton Pearson (and many other preachers) when I used to have UHF on my old black and white TV to tune in on Trinity Broadcasting Network on channel 49 (now on channel 26) on Buffalo, New York's WNYB in the early to mid 1990's. As my theological perspectives have changed over the years, so has Bishop Pearson's. While I have embraced much of the theological orthodoxy of essential Christian faith, Bishop Pearson has accepted a more heterodox view. Some will argue that he has accepted a heretical view or is a heretic, plain and simple. It is over the touchy issue of hell. It is a very emotional and argumentive issue over many Christian theologians whether they believe in the conditionalist or traditionalist view of hell. Bishop Pearson believes in a form of universalism, that nobody goes to hell. Instead we go through hell (with the trials and suffering on earth) as opposed of being consigned to hell. Bishop Pearson also says, ""The bitter torment of the idea of an angry, visceral, distant, stoic, harsh, unrelenting, unforgiving, intolerant God is hell. It's pagan, it's superstitious, and if you trace its history, it goes way back to where men feared the gods because something happened in life that caused frustration that they couldn't explain." Bishop Pearson has a paid a price for his newfound teachings. Besides the heretic label, he lost his associate ministers who resigned and a congregation that dwindled from 6000 to 300!
Where do I stand in the midst of this? I can sympathize with Bishop Pearson's sentiments but I cannot agree with his conclusions. I believe his conclusions do not in anyway solve the problem of fighting evil. What happens with people like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh---or Charles Manson---how about the fanatical con-men of certain XCG splinters ---or the child molester, the pedophile, the sexual promiscous stripper who uses and manipulates men sexually and financially, the greedy and narcissistic corporate executive---or the abusive boss at work---all get a free pass to heaven? Their lives on earth was of no consequence? What they did on earth was okay? God said in the book of Nahum that he will in no way acquit the wicked. Will God just change their natures to good? If that is the case, God was joking about free-will and prefers robots. To me, that god is just as immoral as the "harsh, angry and vindictive" god. Therefore, a hell must exist to restrain or eliminate evil on a permanent basis. I believe that hell is the choice of man, I have stridently opposed the Augustinian-Calvinistic view that there are those who are predestined to hell and I have took the scripture from II Peter 3:9 that, "God is not willing anyone to perish but for all come to repentence" very seriously and at take it at face value. At the same time Hebrews 10:26 warns of unimaginable eternal consequences for those who want to live a life of sin and want to be an a "spirit of independence" from God after receiving the knowledge of the truth. Therefore, there must be a hell as a demonstration of God's ulimate love for the righteous and his ultimate fight against the wicked. As C.S. Lewis described that in the final judgement, the righteous say, "Your will be done!" and God says to the wicked, "Your will be done!"
Where do I and Bishop Pearson have common ground? We both do struggle with the restrictivist view that the unevangelized dead count as automatically "unbelievers" and "the wicked" and will automatically go to hell, whether or not they heard the gospel or not. Bishop Pearson had relatives who were "unevangelized" and it cannot not be argued that this can make him (and other people) struggle with the idea of how this can be a "loving God?" Many people have known that I have always believed that Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to salvation, I have at the same time believed that it is possible that God (the Father, the Son and the Spirit) CAN make a righteous provision for the unevangelized dead who did not hear nor understand the gospel through no fault of their own but this is where the similiarities end. I cannot believe that everyone goes to heaven. If one has a problem with the conditionalist view of hell (annhilationism) and the Western view of hell (literal eternal torment by fire taught by Protestants and Catholics), I hope that Bishop Pearson may spend some time on what the Eastern Orthodox believe in heaven and hell and I think this is probably the most humane treatment on the topic for those that believe that the spirit in man is conscious after death. I provided the link here before and I will do it again: http://aggreen.net/beliefs/heaven_hell.html . It is my hope that Bishop Pearson does re-read his Bible again (as I had to do many times and I will be doing it many times over for years and maybe perhaps some decades to come) and can reconcile the love of God and his judgement against evil as a single unit. His current theology as it stands will present some very serious problems and dire consequences that he probably never intend to create but nevertheless have been created by faulty theology.
Read about the controversy about Bishop Pearson at ABC News at http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3362554
Labels: Carlton Pearson, faulty theology, heaven and hell, heresy, heterodox views, restrictivism, traditionalist view of hell, universalism, wider hope view
The one good thing about Armstrongism now carried on by the churches of God but no longer by the WCG, is the doctrine of the second resurrection during which all of humanity will have a chance to learn about God the Father, Jesus Christ and salvation. It is to be a period of a life time or so, followed by the Great White Throne Judgment in which the good will be transformed to spirit and the bad will be thrown into the lake of fire to be burned up -- mercifully and not live on in misery for eternity.
It is a premise which is supported by a very thin number of Scriptures which may or may not have relevance.
Nevertheless, it neatly solves the difficulties associated with eschatology mired with emotionalism about the fairness of God. All other religions have grave difficulties in coming to grips of how a merciful God could allow terrible suffering forever.
One thing is clear in Biblical terms: All have sinned and the wages of sin is death. Just what sort of death? Life forever? In pain and suffering? That just doesn't seem right and traditional religions just don't have a satisfactory answer -- except for atheism.
Posted by
Douglas Becker |
Monday, July 16, 2007
In all fairness Douglas, the evangelical WCG still believes in a righteous provision of the unevangelized dead. You can look at their statement of beliefs at http://www.wcg.org/lit/AboutUs/beliefs/default.htm#Judgment
At the end of the age, God will gather all the living and the dead before the heavenly throne of Christ for judgment. The righteous will receive eternal glory, and the wicked will be condemned to the lake of fire. In Christ the Lord makes gracious and just provision for all, even for those who at death appear not to have believed the gospel.
(Matthew 25:31-32; Acts 24:15; John 5:28-29; Revelation 20:11-15; 1 Timothy 2:3-6; 2 Peter 3:9; Acts 10:43; John 12:32; 1 Corinthians 15:22-28)
So the WCG hasn't embraced Calvinistic restrictivism yet (and I hope never!).
Posted by
Felix Taylor, Jr. |
Monday, July 16, 2007