Most of you likely have never heard of Jitsuo Morikawa, a Japanese American who was born 110 years ago and died on July 20, 1987.
It was about 25 years before his death that I heard Morikawa speak for the first time—and the main thing I remember from that occasion is what he said about hell.
Jitsuo Morikawa was born in British Columbia, Canada, in
1912. His Japanese parents were Buddhists, but when he was 16, Jitsuo
became a Christian. After graduating from UCLA, he enrolled in The Southern
Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS).
The year after graduating from SBTS in 1940, he was interned
in a relocation center for Americans of Japanese ancestry. From 1944 to 1956 he
was a pastor of the First Baptist Church in Chicago and then served for 19
years in the headquarters of the American Baptist Churches.
In 1976-77 Morikawa was the interim pastor of the prestigious
Riverside Church in New York City, and I had the privilege of attending a
Sunday morning service there and hearing him preach during that time.
Morikawa came back to SBTS to speak when I was a
graduate student there. I don’t remember what his talk was about, but during
the discussion that followed he was asked a question, or perhaps questioned,
about hell.
I have never forgotten his response. He said that it was
strange to him that so many Christians seemed to be disappointed and
disapproving whenever he or anyone suggested that perhaps there was not a
literal hell where non-Christians are punished forever.
Morikawa was questioned, and his views on hell were opposed,
by many who heard him that evening, for, as was included in the revised Baptist
Faith and Message in 1963, Southern Baptists generally believed that after
death, “The unrighteous will be consigned to Hell, the place of everlasting
punishment.”
I have dealt with the issue of hell
in two previous blog posts. The most recent was on Jan. 20, 2019. In that article,
I raised a question that was similar to what I heard Morikawa say in the early
1960s:
Here is the biggest question of all: Why do conservative Christians get so upset with the idea that most of the people of the world—that is, all who do not trust in Jesus as their Savior—might not be punished in Hell for all eternity?
Then back in 2011, I made a blog post titled “Bell
on Hell.” It was related to Rob Bell’s controversial book titled Love
Wins. I encourage you to read that article (again).
Brian McLaren writes briefly about hell on pages 193-4 of
his new book Do I Stay Christian? Hell, however, is the underlying theme
of The Last Word and the Word After That (2005), the third volume of
McLaren’s A New Kind of Christian trilogy.++
The 17th chapter of that book is called
“Deconstructing Hell.” That chapter, and that book, and that trilogy are well
worth reading with thoughtful consideration. It was reading those books that led
me to become a firm “fan” of McLaren.
In his new book, McLaren speaks of “repurposing hell.” That
means that he is thinking hell “is not a threat of divine retribution in the
afterlife but a dire warning about the inevitable negative consequences of
harmful behaviors in this life—like war, ecological overshoot, or gross
economic inequality.”
Partly because of hearing what Morikawa said in the early
1960s, through the years I have questioned the traditional Christian belief
about hell. And because of McLaren’s 2005 novel, I questioned that traditional
position even more.
The first sentence of McLaren’s introduction to that book is
straight to the point: “I believe that God is good.” And then in the 17th
chapter he has Casey, one of his characters, say that “if hell seems to have
the last word, there’s got to be a word after that.”
Pastor Dan, the central character, asks her what that would
be, and Casey says, “Grace . . . I think the last word is always grace” (p.
101).**
_____
++ This month I have reread this book and
(again) found it to be of great value. If any of you harbor troubling questions/doubts
regarding the traditional (conservative) doctrine of hell, I encourage you to
read this book (which is a serious theological book written in the form of a
novel).
** I didn’t
consciously remember those words when I wrote my book Thirty True Things
Everyone Needs to Know Now (2018), but the last chapter of that book is
“#30 God’s First and Last Word Is Always
Grace.”
.jpg)
While I assumed that most of my blog readers would not know the name Jitsuo Morikawa, I was quite sure Thinking Friend Bruce Morgan would know who he was. Here are comments about Morikawa from Bruce, who is a retired ABC minister:
ReplyDelete"Thanks for honoring Jitsuo Morikawa, Leroy. He was a hero for progressive Baptists, always thought provoking, and intellectually grounded in good theology. Proud to have him in the ABC family. He was particularly revered in the Japanese American community.
A few minutes ago, I received the following email from Thinking Friend Glenn Hinson in Kentucky:
ReplyDelete"'Do you believe in Hell?' was one of the test questions inerrantists asked me and other faculty. I never answered them, but I’ve always been amused by Henlee Barnette’s response to the question in an article he wrote for state papers. He cited three reasons: (1) Because I’ve been there (as pastor of a mission on Market St. in Louisville). (2) Because the Bible speaks about it. (3) Because some people ought to get some someday."
Thanks for your comments, Dr. Hinson--but I wonder how you got by without having to answer the "test questions" of the inerrantists. -- I hadn't heard that about Dr. Barnette, but it sounds just like him.
DeleteWell, I'm a theological liberal, so I don't have any use for any traditional concept of hell. Even though I had a born-again experience in a very fundamentalist, Southern Baptist church at 17 and started preaching at 18, that idea that people who didn't believe or embrace what I did would be condemned to eternal punishment never set well with me. And I'm pretty sure I never endorsed the idea in a sermon or even during altar calls. :-) I think that insofar as we liberals use the concept at all, it is in the same vein of McLaren's re-purposing as you describe it above. I had a theology professor in seminary who would define hell as "estrangement from God," which is not the same thing as separation from God and which had no implication for such a state after death.
ReplyDeleteCurrently in my thinking I would raise questions about re-purposing traditional doctrines and concepts, a favorite practice of neo-reformed and moderate evangelical theologies. It seems to me one has to ask whether the doctrine/concept can be made useful anymore at all before choosing to repurpose it. Is it better to repurpose and keep it or simply toss it out as no longer redeemable and maybe even harmful? I'm thinking of our last exchange regarding your previous blog and the concept of paradigms. Kuhn's book that detailed revolutions in scientific paradigms pointed out that new paradigms sometimes appropriated old concepts, sometimes abandoned them altogether. For example, no scientist today tries to repurpose "phlogiston." It's simply gone. With regard to Christian theology, I can think of two doctrines/concepts off the top of my head that I would argue have no use because they are unredeemable and probably harmful. One is the substitutionary doctrine of atonement, and the other is obedience. Both need to be discarded, in my view.
P.S.: Thanks for the introduction to Morikawa.
DeleteThanks for your thought-provoking comments, Anton. In my first years (or decades) of being a pastor I don't remember ever questioning the "doctrine" of hell, but I never emphasized (or even talked about) it either--and was sometimes criticized for that.
DeleteOne of my main seminary professors used to say that "hell is Love's rejection of the Love," and I have quoted that many times--but I don't see that as a particularly good statement now.
The way McLaren explained "repurposing hell," made sense to me. But I agree that there are some (many) biblical concepts that need to be discarded rather than repurposed--such as demon possession, perhaps. But it seems to me non-religious (and more and more even the religious) people are the ones who now repurpose hell the most--as in "hell of a (helluva) . . . ." Why should those words be used to describe a good time, or a good game or the like??
Here are comments from a woman, an M.D., whom I knew as a girl in Japan many years ago.
ReplyDelete"I agree that the last word has to be grace, or the message of love/grace makes no sense to me. Is our God more interested in judgment or loving all creation back into the divine mystery of that love? I believe grace has to be the last word but oh, is it hard for people to accept. We want rewards for our righteousness, our faithfulness, our Christianity. To think that in the end, all might be welcome PERIOD is hard to accept--that's why so many dislike the parable of the vineyard where the owner doles out the same wages to those who agreed to work for an hour as well as those who worked 12. It's one of my favorite parables!
"I also agree with the idea that hell is more of a warning for how to live this one precious life and not focus so much on what happens on the 'other side.' I haven't read Bell’s novel so appreciate the recommendation and will read it soon."
I think she meant to say McLaren's novel ("The Last Word and the Word after That"). Bell's book "Love Wins" is not a novel, and it may not be as good a theology book as McLaren's novel.
DeleteLocal Thinking Friend David Nelson wrote, "'Judgement and Hell reflects the wish that somewhere the score is being kept' (Frederick Buechner in 'Wishful Thinking.' I agree with Buechner. I get no pleasure that anyone is going to burn or rot in hell. I do get much hope and pleasure in celebrating God’s amazing grace."
ReplyDeleteI usually like what Buechner says about things, but I don't find these words of his to be particular helpful. Yes, maybe the score being kept is the last word, but God's grace is the word after that--and that is what I want to emphasize.
DeleteAnd here are comments from Thinking Friend Charles Kiker in Tulia, Texas:
ReplyDelete"When I saw Brian McClaren's book, 'A Generous Orthodoxy' advertised several years ago, I thought, 'Yeah. Sure.' Orthodoxy as I had encountered it was anything but generous! I read the book, and saw that McLaren was moving away from the orthodoxy I had known. He was already moving away from a literal hell in that book. I have read some, but not the latest of his subsequent works.
"I did not hear Morikawa when he came to SBTS. That may have been a year before I arrived at SBTS. Didn't know he was interred with other Japanese Americans in WW II, but should not have been surprised. I suppose any mention of that in American History classes in public schools should be suppressed, along with slavery, Jim Crow, new Jim Crow etc."
If I remember correctly, McLaren was invited to speak at some Baptist meeting in Kentucky, but when Al Mohler (pres. of our alma mater, alas) read what he said in "A Generous Orthodoxy," he was able to get McLaren invitation to speak cancelled. (Sorry I didn't have time to look this up to make sure I got it right, but I think it is.)
DeleteA Thinking Friend in Arizona promised to send more comments later, but in an email received a few minutes ago, she wrote,
ReplyDelete"I don’t need a hell in my theology. Hell was over rated in my country church but not later ones. Scaring people to follow Jesus makes no sense to me! Thanks for your positive views."
Thank you very much for this blog posting, Dr. Seat. I too have been thinking a lot about the notion of Gehenna...which I guess would be in terms of what Jesus preached would be the 'trash heap of history'. I do wobble back and forth on this. Jesus did (according to the gospel accounts) speak of Gehenna as a real place after death. Yet also, we are told to love and to forgive our enemies -- otherwise God will not forgive us. Yet the way that Hell is posited in the many sermons I heard as a child and teenager, it seems that God does not forgive his enemies, ever. I understand from my Church history readings that there have been at least three views on Hell among Christians. Some see Hell as a place of eternal punishment, others as a place of annihilation -- of non-being...others see Hell as self-imposed suffering with the possibility of ultimate reconciliation...more recently some don't believe in Hell at all. The mainstream view certainly worked for Christendom to keep people in line, but I am left with a feeling that I hope the notion of ultimate reconciliation is right, and that eventually our Loving Creator gets back and restores all that was lost. Origen, of course, speculated that even Satan would be reconciled. Well, not knowing really about the nature of the afterlife is an opportunity to walk (stumble, really) in faith.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your thoughtful comments, Greg. I know you have a lot to read, but I think you would find McLaren's "The Last Word and the Word after That" to be of great interest. It seems to have been written for thoughtful people (such as you) who want to think through the various aspects of hell.
DeletePerhaps "Hell" is what one thinks about the day before knee surgery. I pray all goes well for you tomorrow and during your recovery. In general, I have no problem with repurposed theology, as long as it is well done. Sometimes ideas just fit in an unexpected new slot. Perhaps there are people in France and Spain thinking of the fires of hell right now. Not that USAmericans should rest easy. Fire season is heating up out west, where I now live. I hear there is even a little heat in the midwest, where I just left. Perhaps that is what inspired Harry Truman's famous quote, “I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments, Craig. -- It is puzzling to me how many religious words/concepts are not just repurposed but trivialized. Those who suffer great loss because of extreme weather conditions no doubt see "hell" as a fit metaphor for their suffering, but even in Truman's day, "give 'em hell" was expressing something completely different from those who believed in hell as a literal place of everlasting torment.
DeleteLeroy, like you I've been criticized for not preaching enough on hell. I do not have an ultimate answer regarding hell. The theologians that I respect most emphasise that all theology and doctrines are provisional and most likely imperfect, since human beings are imperfect. Therefore I ask the question to those "liberals" who are certain that there is no hell the following question: What does God ultimately do with the Hitlers, Stalins, Putins, etc. of this world?
ReplyDeleteGarth, I mentioned my Jan. 2019 blog post about annihilationism, and even though it is not the "solution" most "liberals" would forward, it seems to me that it is a reasonable answer to the question you raised. Here is the link to that post:
Deletehttps://theviewfromthisseat.blogspot.com/2019/01/what-about-annihilationism.html
AS A LIBERAL, I would respond to Garth's legitimate question. There is a problem, however, with lberals and nonliberals (by which I mean here neo-reformed and moderate-evangelical persons) exchanging views. Simply stated, we're usually talking past each other. Because the liberal and the nonliberal theologies are altogether different paradigms, they have different problems and ask different questions. "Hell" in a liberal's mind does not conjure up a place in the afterlife at all. Neither does "heaven." Our focus is on the kindom (spelling deliberate) of God in this life in human history. (Neo-reformed and evangelical thinkers view it as a mistake of liberals to seek to spread the kindom of God in history, although I don't know how one can know for sure before the end of human history.) If pressed by a nonliberal to make some kind of stand on "hell" or "heaven" with regard to the afterlife, typically, for me, and probably most liberals, I fall back on the trust that that is in God's hands, not ours (which, by the way, is in ironically coincidental agreement with orthodox Calvinism).
ReplyDeleteI have a very close and very fundamentalistic Baptist friend who will confront me with the question Garth asked: What about the afterlife and the Hitlers and Stalins of the world? Sometimes I'll switch to his paradigm for the sake of conversation, and I'll say, "John, if heaven is a matter of conscious souls gathering in some paradise, you'll find yourself sitting across the dinner table from the Hitlers and the Stalins of history." And I laugh. He's baffled, and neither of us has understood each other. We just go on loving each other.
Thanks, Anton, for your response to Garth's question. There is much to which I would like to respond to what you wrote, but as this is the day after my surgery, I am lacking in time and energy to write much. But let me just say this in response to your sentence, "Our focus is on the kindom (spelling deliberate) of God in this life in human history. I think this is quite similar to McLaren's position in his book that I have touted so highly.
DeleteA story attributed--probably wrongly--to John Wesley. The narrator says, "I had a dream in which I died and went to heaven, where three surprises awaited me. First, I was surprised at who was there. Second, I was surprised at who was not there. And third, I was surprised that I was there."
DeleteI don't have any questions/doubts regarding the traditional doctrine of Hell. Are you implying in your ++ appendage that you don't encourage to read this book? Strange. Because if you guys are right and I'm wrong wouldn't I benefit the most from it? I don't want anyone to go to Hell. But if there is no Hell, what exactly did Jesus's death accomplish? What are we saved from and what exactly are the wages of sin? I like your articles they are very thought provoking.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Dave, for your comments and questions. (I wish I had your email address so I could write to you directly.)
DeleteWhat I meant by the ++ footnote is that people who are struggling with the troublesome aspects of hell and are will likely to consider new ideas will likely gain great benefit from McLaren's novel, but those conservatives who are sure their position is correct would likely be upset with much of what he says. But, sure, if you can read the book with a desire to learn about and thoughtfully consider new ideas, then certainly I would encourage you to read the book--and you would find the explanation McLaren makes regarding the doctrinal questions you raised.
Here are comments received this morning from Thinking Friend Virginia Belk in New Mexico:
ReplyDelete"I have often, recently thought that current events must be hell for victims of mass shootings, of climate change and global warming, of victims of rape or domestic abuse or workplace discrimination, or systemic racism, as well as war. I agree that our loving God continues to offer God's Grace!"
Thanks, Virginia, for your comments, which are very similar to what McLaren wrote about with regards to re-purposing hell. It may well be, though, that God's grace is offered to those in such hells primary through God's children who are the agents of grace.
DeleteThank you Leroy and Anton for your responses to my question. I don't know if I agree with either of your answers though, since I'm uncertain of hell, and sceptical that any human being has the ultimate, correct answer.
ReplyDeleteIn light of such historical events as the Holocaust, and what is going on in Ukraine today, I do however think that God has to deal with evil and sin in some way, if God is a just God as well as a loving God. How that happens, of course, is certainly up to God.
Yes, I agree that on the matter of hell as on all other theological issues no one has "the ultimate, correct answer." That is why for all of us theology is the endless quest for understanding and truth.
DeleteThinking Friend Eric Dollard in Chicago sent the following comments by email yesterday:
ReplyDelete"I read McLaren's book, 'Faith After Doubt.' He divides religious faith into four stages: Simplicity (dualistic worldview and the stage for most fundamentalists), Complexity (emphasis on success and the stage of those in megachurches or followers of prosperity gospel), Perplexity (critical approach to religion where those struggling with doubts can be found), and Harmony (emphases on inclusion and transcendence and where Richard Rohr can be found). McLaren is a great admirer of Richard Rohr, who has a somewhat different schemata. McLaren believes that doubt is critical in advancing spiritually."
Thanks, Eric, for your comments about McLaren's book. As I mentioned earlier, I haven't read it, but in 'Do I Stay Christian?' he writes briefly about the four stages of religious faith that you noted.
DeleteI have been a bit surprised not only about how much McLaren seems to admire Rohr but also how much Rohr seems to admire McLaren.
This afternoon I received the following comment from local Thinking Friend Linda Schroeder, quoting her deceased husband Ted, who was long a Lutheran pastor:
ReplyDelete"I often heard Ted say, 'Heaven is being with God (as is always God's gracious choice); Hell is being separated from God (which is never God's choice but our own).'"
As I read All the comments from far smarter people than me, it Gives me a sense of concern. I am Not going to comment on what I believe because in the end it doesn`t really matter what I think OR believe OR what Any human thinks and believes. What matters is what GOD claims is true and to that we need to go to His word-The Bible.
ReplyDeleteThe Bible in several places talks about Eternal punishment in a hell of Everlasting torment for the lost who have Not accepted JESUS and been born again.
One of the people did include that JESUS did talk about Gehenna and people in hell in his comments.
What bothers me is several of the commenters say, "Repurposing hell?"
We may Not like what JESUS says about hell, but should we be "Repurposing hell": the way We want it
to be?
I do hope what most of the commenters say happens and because of JESUS` Grace He will reconcile Everyone back to Him, but I will stick with what our Bible says and that there is a Literal hell.
This is my two cents worth and some reading my comments may think that`s All it`s worth?
Until All have Heard,
John `Tim` Carr