Why are some many Christians abandoning what the Bible teaches about the wrath of God and eternal punishment? Al Mohler has some thoughts about this that are worth considering.
The wrath of God comes up in our text for today (Romans 2:1-5). It strikes me in reading through Mohler’s article, I need to hear Mohler’s warning that Bible believing preachers can too say they believe the doctrine of hell, but imply that it is less than good.
I really recommend reading Mohler’s article. You can learn a great deal from this one.
*********************
For those in our church who are in the midst of our Romans project, realize that if we don’t understand the reality of the wrath of God and eternal punishment, then we won’t be able to comprehend the message of Romans. Already, we have see that Paul believes the essential human dilemma is that all people are in danger of the wrath of God.
Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. . . .2:3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed.
The emphasis on God’s wrath (or hell) is not confined to Paul. One might turn to any number of passages including Christ’s summary statement in John 3:36.
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.
Al Mohler posits that such liberal thinking begins when Christians feel that they need to save Christianity from itself.
Theological liberals do not intend to destroy Christianity, but to save it. As a matter of fact, theological liberalism is motivated by what might be described as an apologetic motivation. The pattern of theological liberalism is all too clear. Theological liberals are absolutely certain that Christianity must be saved…from itself.
LIBERALISM: SAVING CHRISTIANITY FROM ITSELF
The classic liberals of the early twentieth century, often known as modernists, pointed to a vast intellectual change in the society and asserted that Christianity would have to change or die. As historian William R. Hutchison explains, “The hallmark of modernism is the insistence that theology must adopt a sympathetic attitude toward secular culture and must consciously strive to come to terms with it.”[1]
This coming to terms with secular culture is deeply rooted in the sense of intellectual liberation that began in the Enlightenment. Protestant liberalism can be traced to European sources, but it arrived very early in America—far earlier than most of today’s evangelicals are probably aware. Liberal theology held sway where Unitarianism dominated and in many parts beyond.
Soon after the American Revolution, more organized forms of liberal theology emerged, fueled by a sense of revolution and intellectual liberty. Theologians and preachers began to question the doctrines of orthodox Christianity, claiming that doctrines such as original sin, total depravity, divine sovereignty, and substitutionary atonement violated the moral senses. William Ellery Channing, an influential Unitarian, spoke for many in his generation when he described “the shock given to my moral nature” by the teachings of orthodox Christianity.[2]
Though any number of central beliefs and core doctrines were subjected to liberal revision or outright rejection, the doctrine of hell was often the object of greatest protest and denial.
Considering hell and its related doctrines, Congregationalist pastor Washington Gladden declared: “To teach such a doctrine as this about God is to inflict upon religion a terrible injury and to subvert the very foundations of morality.”[3]
Read more here.
