This video, released last week and currently gone viral (as of this writing it’s received almost 114,000 views in four days), stars Francis Chan. It’s a commercial for his new book, Erasing Hell: What God Says About Eternity, and the Things We’ve Made Up, due out in early July. Erasing God is clearly meant as a refutation of Rob Bell’s Love Wins.
Slickly produced by David C. Cook, Erasing Hell‘s Christian publishing house, there are a great number of things about this video that I don’t like, most of it having to do with its almost astounding pretentiousness: the all-white, faux-heaven set; the astral, Muzak-from-heaven background music; the posing pretending to be pondering; the fact that it’s all about how Francis is prayerfully writing this book, when the cover of the book itself shows that it was, in fact, written by Francis Chan and Preston Sprinkle. (That “and” is everything. In displaying the name of a book’s co-author, publishers have four choices: don’t show the name anywhere in or on the book; show it only on the book’s copyright page; show it on the book’s cover in such a way that it reads [Author] with [Co-Author]; or show it on the book’s cover so that it reads [Author] and [Co-Author]. “And” signifies maximum involvement of the co-author. In fact — and I know this because I’ve been in book publishing for years, and have myself co-authored five books — if on a book jacket you see and before the name of the co-author, you can pretty much bet that’s the person who really wrote that book. Whether or not that’s true in this particular case, it’s at the very least disingenuous of Mr. Chan to not once so much as mention Mr. Sprinkle’s name.)
But the primary problem I have with this video is that while in every last way pretending to be about practicing love, it’s really about instilling fear. What Chan is really saying here — as subtly as it’s hidden beneath his humble, searching, open-minded attitude — is, “Be afraid. Being wrong about hell has terrible, terrible consequences. It’s not something about which you can afford to be mistaken.” (Hence the very title of the video: “Hell: We Can’t Afford to Get It Wrong.” It can’t get more fear mongering than that.) [Update: It's now eight days later, and I see they've changed the name of the video.]
And this is exactly where he, and every other Christian leader who preaches that hell is real, gets it so extraordinarily and harmfully wrong.
Evangelicals who believe in and preach hell fail to realize that it does not matter whether a Christian is right or wrong about hell. Because every Christian, regardless of their beliefs about hell, is entirely safe from going there.
Christians who believe in hell go to heaven; Christians who don’t believe in hell go to heaven. No Christian argues that. All Christians agree that if you are a Christian—no matter what you believe about hell—you go to heaven when you die. Nowhere in the Bible does it say anything about the proper understanding of hell being a prerequiste for admission into heaven.
I think it’s reasonable to say (and it’s certainly been my experience writing about Christianity for The Huffington Post) that nothing keeps more people shunning Christianity than does the doctrine of hell as a literal place. People just can’t get on board with a God so cruel and unfair that he would condemn to eternal physical torture anyone who, for any reason whatsoever, dies without first believing in him. Most non-Christians don’t see the Christian god as loving and all-powerful. Due primarily to the doctrine of hell being real, they see him as an egomaniacal psychopath. Most find it simply baffling that anyone could believe in a God so insanely punitive.
And so they reject Christianity.
And thusly (according to the evangelical mindset) do they doom themselves to hell.
Now let us take great care to ensure that we’re here employing flawless logic.
If rejecting the Christian God condemns people to hell; and
If a Christian who is wrong about hell goes to heaven anyway; and
If preaching about hell significantly contributes to people rejecting Christianity;
Then why in God’s name would any evangelical ever preach or “sell” hell? There’s no reason to. It can only hurt.
A Christian preaching about the reality of hell is: A. Doing nothing whatsoever for Christians; and B. Significantly contributing to non-Christians remaining non-Christian.
This can only mean that any Christian who preaches about hell being real is broadcasting to the world that he or she cares more about being right than they do about actually saving anyone from hell.
If evangelicals sincerely want to do God’s work, and sincerely want to save people from hell, then they need to either radically rethink their concept of hell, or, at the very least, remain entirely quiet on the matter.
See also: Is Hell Real? What Are We, Six?
***************************************
Additional Reading in Christian Issues...
- From hell to Crazy Town
- They’re here; they’re queer; they’ve plenty to fear: LGBT students form secret club at conservative Christian university [now including updates]
- When evil is serious, it reaches for a Bible and cross
- Guest post: “A Good Week to Hate Christians”
- From gay-hating fundie to righteously angry lesbian. Now what?
![John Shore on The Huffington Post](http://johnshore.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/huffpost.jpg?w=120 "John Shore on The Huffington Post\")
{ 235 comments… read them below or add one }
← Older Comments
I’ll give you that. Maybe I didnt word my statement correctly. I think the greater picture that I thought was being painted was that you stated that you think Chan’s viewpoint on hell was wrong based on a assumed pretense you saw in his video. Im not saying I agree with his viewpoint on hell or yours, it was the air of divisiveness and I felt was exactly what you fight against, the exclusionary “I’m right and youre not,” without even knowing where Chan stood on hell.Im honestly not trying to incite anything, I just know you have a large following and quite a bit of influence (whether you like it or not
and I felt you did your fellow christian brother a disservice that I know you wouldn’t, as an author to be done to you. But in the end, thats my opinion, and it means as much as its worth.
Sorry, this was supposed to be a reply to John’s reply below , to my reply
But I didn’t base any thought I expressed about Chan’s thoughts on a “presumed pretense.” I based it upon what he actually says in this video.
And I don’t have a problem with explaining why I believe someone is wrong when I’m confident they are. As a moral being, in fact, I believe it’s my obligation to do so, particularly around matters having to do with God. Whether or not that ends up being “divisive” is simply not a huge concern of mine.
@Diane- He didnt need to, he was stating that he knew what Chan’s viewpoint on hell was before he wrote the book, and was trying to vilify Chan because he didnt agree with Chan’s stance on hell based on assumed “pretentiousness” of the video. Again I admire John and his compassion and understanding of many issues but I felt he did his fellow brother a disservice by lambasting his view on hell, not only before KNOWING his viewpoint, but basing it on an assumed pretense of Chan, not by the actual content of the book. As much as John fights against exclusivity (which I think he does quite well) many followers, for lack of a word “groupies,” are so in awe of John that they fight anyone who may disagree with him. This is the kind of mentality that is, and will continue to separate the followers of Christ. Instead of seeking God for understanding we seek out “like thinkers,” establish a comfortable doctrine, and defend that doctrine til death. I dont need to explain myself to any of you, but I believe God is so much bigger than John Shore, Francis Chan, or Rob Bell, and I truly believe that God uses the humility that these and others writers and thinkers possess, and creates dialogue that produces thought, not divisiveness within believers, for the greater good of God’s kingdom. Those who defend a certain theology/doctrine so stubbornly become the same narrow-minded Apathetics they fight so hard against.
See my answer above.
But real quick (and again): everything I wrote was in response to something Chan very clearly says in the video: I didn’t presume or assume anything at all.
And it’s absurd to think it’s more important not to be divided than it is for people to do and say what they think is morally correct. I don’t care if Christians are divided about whether or not there’s a hell, or whether or not gay people are necessarily destined for it. I’d rather be with half the people who believe what I do than have to pretend I’m in any way okay with beliefs that inevitably end up victimizing people who deserve better.
I hate that creepy, soft, wishy-washy, spineless “conviction” that values “getting along” above doing and saying what’s actually right.
And I don’t have “groupies.” I have readers who share my values, and like the way I tend to write about them. They’re a long way from mindless, swooning followers.
Wow John,
I know you dont care and you dont need to, but this saddens me. I dont know why, but some how you have turned a statement in which I was trying to state that I thought you were being unrightly unfair to another author, you have somehow labeled me, judged what I believe and fought against me.
I never said it was more important to not be divisive than loving, I just believe unity between believers is just as important pragmatically as it is biblically. Im not saying everyone should agree, but that we should come together with humility, not arrogance.
I separated myself from the conservative church of which I grew up, and am currently fighting against it for the same reasons you do it John, but you are using the same words that they use, like “…it’s absurd to think it’s more important not to be divided than it is for people to do and say what they think is morally correct,” and “I hate that creepy, soft, wishy-washy, spineless “conviction” that values “getting along” above doing and saying what’s actually right.” I could see a conservative fundamentalist easily saying those same words about their theology.
You have made me reconsider a lot of doctrines I previously considered correct, also seeing the kind of compassion you have for people that have been hurt by the “fundamentalist” Christianity has been amazing, and I would never want to take that away from you, but your reaction to my comments are a mirror image of the kind of reaction I get from my fairly fundamental family members when I post YOUR articles on FB. It is an air of arrogance and “assurance”, that they are correct in their theologies. What saddens me about both, and what definitely saddened Jesus, was when dogma was given priority over human beings.
I respect the fight and passion that you have to remove the misconceptions of God, christianity and all that surrounds that, but we are all susceptible to believing that we understand God fully and know exactly where he stands on everything, but I am reminded daily by Corinthians 13 “For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.” Also just as Chan quoted in the video that has caused all this disunity, “My thoughts are nothing like your thoughts, says the LORD. And my ways are far beyond anything you could imagine.”
Finally, I didnt say that your “followers” are mindless and swooning, but I have read the blog long enough to see that if someone disagrees with you, there tends to be alot of criticism aimed at them.
Annnnnnd now I give up. (And if you want to be generous to me, Ian, please do me the favor of not again responding here. I just don’t have the time/energy for it. Thanks.)
I dont want to go into such an amazing day tomorrow with any of this negativity, I want to release any resentments, conscious or not, and I apologize if Ive caused you to be defensive in any way. We are all in the same family and I need to be reminded of that daily. I pray for a blessed Resurrection day for you, John.
“I apologize if I’ve caused you to be defensive”. Unbelievable. How about you apologize for the behavior *that caused* the reaction. It’s called “taking responsibility for the impact of your words”.
The passive-aggressive nature of Christians is astounding.
So you put words in his mouth and paraphrased him instead of addressing his points verbatim. That would annoy just about anyone, but a writer? Don’t do that to a writer. It’s really simple.
And frankly, I disagree with John all of the time, sometimes aggressively. I just don’t like it when people here jump into a conversation, insert meaning into his (or anyone’s mouth) and then ask said person to defend the point they didn’t make. The point *you said* they made. It’s crappy to do but it’s really crappy to do with a writer. See that point or not, up to you. But debate people on their actual words, not what you think they are saying.
PS you’re a dick for calling people “groupies”. Why those of you think it’s ok to do that and then quote a bunch of scripture is so unsettling to me. It’s passive-aggressive behavior. Check yourself. And before you dismiss me because I called you a dick, consider who threw the first name out and don’t give yourself a pass for it.
Im sorry that I insulted you DR, and anyone else who I insulted. And john, ill respect your request and not respond on your blog any longer.
Thanks Ian, I appreciate that. I was tough on you with intention – reading carefully and debating that point that was actually offered is a huge, huge part of the online experience here. Christians often feel like we can just kind of “gloss over” someone’s perspective and insert our own meaning – it’s part of our privilege – and sometimes it takes someone yelling at us a little to wake us up. You seem really great and I hope we’ll connect better on another topic (John seemed to say that he preferred you not respond on *this particular topic) but I’m sure he’ll be happy to clarify. My first comment here caused me to be blocked by him! But it was because I was being such a jerk myself. So give it another go, you were clearly well-intended. Happy Easter!
No, I don’t care if you respond on my blog; you’re welcome to. I just didn’t want you to respond to that one particular exchange we were having. But that little thread is over. It seems like you guys are engaging well.
“I was pleased to learn this post, and my e-book ‘Hell No!’, are offered as resources on the webpage for the upcoming Kevin Miller documentary ‘Hellbound’ (which I was originally scheduled to be IN, actually).” So, I’m glad your writings are being offered as resources but how come you’re no longer in the movie? Did your section just end up on the cutting room floor or is there more too the story than that? Or is it none of my business?
Kevin scheduled a shoot with me last October. But when the time came he ended up already having enough footage for his movie, so he didn’t need me. When he first booked me there was a lot of energy around the work I was doing on the subject of hell; six or so month later, I think, honestly, that (besides the truth of how much film he already had) he may have felt that I wasn’t quite famous enough to make room for, basically. I mean, I just figure that. But it’s cool. I know he’s kicking himself for not using me now.
Ian, John didn’t make a single reference to the book.
I got 3/4 of the way through Crazy Love and put it to rest. I found that taking my focus off of Jesus was tragic. Francis Chan’s attempt to get people to act better and do more “for God” is a diversion. I have no doubt that Francis Chan is well-meaning, but his focus on the physical realm is disturbing. How can he seriously say he can stand at a funeral and KNOW if the person in the coffin is heaven bound and if their friends and family are covered by the blood of Christ? Does he have a magic mirror? Does the Bible not clearly state that man looks on the outside, but God looks at the heart? Does it not say, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved”?
Lordship Salvation is a big part of Chan’s background as a McArther student. While some great insight is found in his book and doctrine, I find it hard to accept the Lordship Salvation blend which basically says, “to be REALLY saved, you need to accept Christ AND be and act a certain way. If not, you can’t be saved.” I am simplifying this to fit this venue, but it’s really a Grace + Works stand and to me, who believes when Jesus said, “It is Finished” He meant it. When Jesus said we can never be stolen from His hand, that there is no condemnation in Christ, I believe Him. So to hear or read “you can lose your salvation is you don’t do x, y, z” found in books like Crazy Love, I cringe. And I have read these books. So that is MY take on it, though I would never say NOT to read these books as I also know Christians have the Holy Spirit inside to guide and show them Truth.
I don’t understand how seeing God as bi-polar angry-loving can be a “nice change.” A change from what?
Weirdly enough, most of the fundies I know would argue the opposite point: why would anyone want to become a Christian if you didn’t first scare them into being terrified of going to hell?
I don’t follow their argument and I agree with yours. But the thing is, apparently their argument makes sense to them. Not all people are the same, some people are natural authoritarians, and to those people, doing the right thing is something you only do because otherwise you will be punished. These are the people who truly and honestly believe that if being gay isn’t illegal, straight people will turn gay because nothing will stop them. There’s a long history of preachers successfully converting people by preaching hellfire and damnation. It provably works – for some people.
My question then would be, does it really work? Is what those people convert to truly Christianity? The Bible says we are called to be children, not slaves, to act like our father because we understand his goals, not because he ordered us and will punish us if we disobey. How can a terror of going to hell lead to an understanding of the love of God?
When I was very young, like 6 or 7 years old, every so often someone would start a “secret club”. There were always requirements to having a secret club: A place to meet, a charter stating What We Were For and What We Were Against, and most of all, a clearly-defined roster of who was allowed in and who was not. The basis for a secret club could be as simple as the fact that I knew four other kids who watched Speed Racer, and we’d come up with a way to identify with each other, and there would be an exhaustive trivia challenge that someone would have to pass to be able to join (if you didn’t know that Racer X was secretly Speed Racer’s brother, you were laughed out of the meeting place). There were always kids who took these things WAY too seriously, and wouldn’t socialize with anyone outside of our Super Awesome Speed Racer Fan Club and looked down on those outside of our circle.
Someone’s mom would always suggest that we should be more inclusive but we’d collectively roll our eyes and scoff at how grown ups didn’t get it, because the secret clubs would only function if there were people on the OUTSIDE who we could be AGAINST. The kids who watched Scooby Doo, or Batman, for example. They didn’t get it, and half our meeting time would be taken up by talking about how those other cartoons sucked and those other kids were idiots and how we were just glad not to be like THEM. If you weren’t nice or someone in the club didn’t like you or you dressed weird or didn’t share your lunch, you weren’t allowed in the club no matter how much you knew about Speed Racer, because you weren’t one of us. And in the end it became less about Liking Speed Racer than it was just closing our circle and not letting anyone else in. We defined ourselves more by what we were against than by what we stood for.
To me, that’s what the traditionally-held belief in Hell is all about. It’s about “The Other,” the one we’re against, the one not like us, who isn’t allowed in the Clubhouse. We may talk about Grace as being God’s unmerited favor, something we can’t earn and don’t deserve, but that only covers US. We can live our lives free from worry because we believe the right way and go to the right church. It doesn’t count for Muslims, or gays, or poor people. They’ll always be excluded unless they get on board with our entire belief system, our politics, and our social agenga. This is what drive our belief in Hell, because we can’t stand the thought of having to spend Eternity with people who we don’t like or agree with.
Yup. Mark nails it!
John, I love ya man, I read your blog and books, but I gotta say for the first time, you got it wrong dude. I believe you are doing exactly what you say you dont like done, judging a book by its cover. I have read Chan’s Crazy Love and Erasing Hell, and the statements you make are quite false, some of his stuff is hard to swallow, but he makes some really good points and things to ponder on, just as Rob Bell makes some good points in his book. I have a hard time believing you had already read Erasing Hell when you posted this blog, and I would hope thats not the case since I know you wouldnt want someone critiquing your books without having read them. Still love ya, John!
Ian: I was very careful not to say a single word about the book itself. I addressed only the video. So I can’t have actually been “quite false” about the book, cuz, as I say, I didn’t say anything about the book.
The awesome scary part of salvation is not the consequences but the grace. A belief that really will make you stretch to reach it is the belief in Grace. It is the concept that the author of our salvation gives it so generously.
The only reason to focus on the fear of hell is to foster a fear of going against the crowd. The only reason to focus on grace and acceptance is to set people free to follow their spirit and work out their own salvation. That is scary because then God becomes their God and you are just another one of His kids. Our personal power gets reduced to reality.
Humility: the real hell on earth we would do anything to avoid while we wear a fake version to look like the good guy as we harass others.
AGREED. Oh, I cannot agree enough, John.
I’ve been through so many stages of belief and nonbelief and back and forth again and again. This topic is one of the top reasons I struggle with the faith. There are others, of course, but I have never believed in hell. Even in times when I do believe in some kind of hell, my concept of it has always been this: We either go to Heaven, or our corpses rot in the ground until there’s nothing left of us. The thought of there being absolutely no afterlife is a pretty disturbing and HELLISH thought for me. How does one’s brain completely wrap itself around not existing anymore?
I’ve never read a Bible verse that said we had to “get it,” just that we had to believe. We’re also thankfully allowed to question. Good thing, because I definitely do. Constantly. Whether I mean to or not. God gave us these amazing brains- I should hope He meant for us to use them.
John, I can’t tell you how many times that I come back to this. This, my brother, is incredibly rich and wise. Thank you thank you thank you.
The logic you use is so profound and yet still quite simple. It’s hard for me to find grace with and for so many Evangelicals that act with such stupidity.
You have really outdone yourself here! (this and What Are We, Six?! Another favorite of mine!)
Blessings to you as you remember, reflect and continue to hope in the redeeming power of a loving Daddy.
For those of us who like him, here’s a link to get 3 of his books for kindle free! http://www.couponing101.com/free-francis-chan-kindle-ebooks-crazy-love-forgotten-god-and-erasing-hell/
← Older Comments