Loading ...The Gospel You’ve Never Heard: Who Really Goes to Hell? by David Rudel
Do you ever struggle with how limited our contemporary understandings of the gospel seem? How Jesus and Paul sometimes seem to be saying different – indeed, opposite – things about the ‘good news’? About why there seems to be the good news of Jesus and good news about Jesus? If so, then The Gospel You’ve Never Heard by David Rudel is for you.
The Gospel You’ve Never Heard makes a lateral move away from conventional descriptions of the Bible’s teachings in a way that allows the reader to view modern dogmas of the Left and Right alike through a fresh lens. The book’s first two chapters raise questions evangelical Christianity has considerable trouble answering. Rather than attempt incredible rhetorical acrobatics to explain away these very real issues, the author asks the reader to entertain, at least provisionally, that there might be genuine Biblical problems with the gospel portrayed by the modern church.
Questions like:
Why are the dozens of descriptions of the Judgment conveyed in Matthew, Mark, and Luke so at odds with the version(s) described by modern Christians?
In light of Jesus’ teaching (Judge not and you will not be judged and By the same measure you judge others, you shall be judged yourself), what does the former of these say about non-believers who do not judge others…or believers who do? How does the latter compare with the claims of modern Christians that God has no choice but to judge everyone against the same standard of perfection?
Rudel does not merely bring up these and many other difficulties; he also describes how the message of the modern Christian church matches neither the prophecies of the Old Testament specifying the work of the Messiah nor the evangelism of the early apostles showcased in the book of Acts.
Even so, this book is no attack on Christianity or the Bible. Rather, it describes the myriad problems caused by trying to scrunch the ancient Christian gospel into a Western, human-centered, 21st-century mindset. For fans of scholars of like N.T. Wright, E.P. Sanders, and James Dunn, Rudel brings clarity to Christ’s purpose by appealing to the Jewish framework the New Testament was written within. In Rudel’s estimation, Jesus’ teachings, Paul’s writings, and God’s Judgment all make sense and come alive once we let God’s work and desires speak more clearly than Western philosophy and human insecurity. In getting ‘judgment’ right, God’s work in Christ and Christ’s work as Judge become clear.
Rudel convincingly claims that most of the modern gospel is based on “natural theology” rather than the Bible. In opposition to this, The Gospel You’ve Never Heard provides an understanding of salvation and the final judgment that is rooted in the Bible’s native tongue, as narrative rather than scattershot verse pastiche. Rather than twist and reinterpret Jesus’ words to fit within a framework dictated by a few choice passages written 20 years later by Paul, Rudel shows Jesus’ teachings on the Judgment and Paul’s ostensibly opposed writings on salvation can peacefully coexist once we understand what each refers to.
The Gospel You’ve Never Heard is intended to act as a bridge among disparate seekers of spiritual truth. Conservative Christians, those traditionally in favor of a ‘literal’ reading of scripture, can mature spiritually by grappling with very real, very important, and very biblical issues. Progressive Christians, who may long ago have eschewed a serious esteem for the Bible, will be challenged to reconsider their evaluation of scripture’s place and value. Non-Christians will find a refreshing vision of Christianity here that is less easily dismissed for the simple reason that it makes far more sense and avoids the cardboard-cutout versions of God many accuse evangelicals of portraying.
The book responds to a lot of questions people have, questions that are not often presented in church and are seldom engaged satisfactorily when someone is brave enough to bring them up. Rudel’s vision exhorts all Christians to better engage and value this world, the creation they are called to transform into a Kingdom where the oppressed are uplifted while justice, truth, peace, and love reign.
About David Rudel
David Rudel was a theoretic mathematician; now he’s a writer, editor, mathematical modeler, and theologian working on church reform. He’s written three chess books and this one on Christian theology.
godgrown
Most folks don’t think about what will happen to them when they die. Most of the folks who do quickly dismiss it when the next text message comes in, or their favorite show comes on. When we are forced to think about our mortality and the Great Beyond it is usually in conjunction with a near-death experience or the death of a loved one. Unfortunately, it is in these moments when we most need to draw upon the strength of our convictions about what death and life really is.
When reading through Who Really Goes to Hell, by David I. Rudel, it struck me as I was reading just how much of my beliefs on death, and what comes next has remained unprocessed and uninteresting to me. Truth be told, I like many others in my generation, have allowed my own mortality to conveniently slip past the frontal cortex and reside primarily in my hypothalamus – good for when a bus cuts in front of me as I’m biking down Milwaukee Ave.
But Rudel forces me with great persistence that life and death do matter. In fact, they garner within them the very meaning of life itself, and what happens to us after death has everything to do with how we live while we’re still sucking wind.
Rudel takes a critical look at the Evangelical view of salvation and judgment. He presumes a conservative stance on the bible in that he sees it as holding truth in its words (not just allegory) and wants to unpack for Evangelicals their tidy notions of the afterlife. And you know what? He does a fabulous job.
Salvation has remained a murky vocab word for most evangelicals – mostly referring to the afterlife and making it through the Final Judgment and into Heaven. Rudel proposes that Jesus and Paul emphasized two different understandings of salvation: Jesus focusing mostly on salvation as “deliverance” and Paul seeing salvation as mostly an “indwelling of the Spirit.” In addition, Rudel scandalously makes the claim that it is possible for Jesus to be “the Way, the Truth and the Life” and yet find many who are not Christians as citizens of the New Jerusalem in the age to come. This is because Jesus also said, “Anyone who does the will of my Father is my mother, sister or brother…” Not only this, but look through the Bible and you find examples of folks not a part of God’s covenant linked up with God’s favor, even his forgiveness of sins. (Naaman in 2 Kings 5 being one example.)
All this goes to show that no one can fit God in a box – not even God! Jesus is the Way, the only Way to God – any yet those who never heard the Gospel and yet do from their hearts things to the core of God’s heart, they “make a Law unto themselves” (Rom 2). And what more, the Gospel was preached by the disciples BEFORE the death, burial and resurrection of their rabbi Jesus! What did they say? We know it focused on (1) repentance – a commitment to a radically different way of living and (2) that a strange and compelling Kingdom was near.
Page 100 of Rudel’s book was particularly intriguing to me, as it drew out a chart of all the sermons preached in Acts. In the sermons there are various reoccurring themes and concepts, but “believers go to heaven,” and “others go to hell” (two core concepts for evangelical eschatology,) were not in the chart at ALL! What’s going on here? What Acts does say is that Jesus will judge ALL. “Jesus chooses citizens for the New Jerusalem whose histories demonstrate that they will contribute to its purpose. All others are left outside the gate (in hell.) (Titus 2:14)”
Rudel makes the case that substitutionary atonement and propitiation are not the CORE doctrines of the Bible. God’s covenant with Abraham and subsequently with Israel and ultimately with ALL nations is the central thrust of the Biblical Narrative – this is the “mission of God.” Many modern Christians take Jesus death too individually, making the act all about their personal ticket into Heaven. Jesus’ death was about more than atonement (truly, God had no wrath that needed satisfying) it was also about obedience to God’s will, love for the world, perseverance to live out the life he was called to, and faith that God’s story would continue. In Christ, God replays the Exodus story, even giving the Spirit to the Church, just as God gave the law – exactly 50 days after Christ’s ascension (“Exodus”) from earth.
Rudel finishes by hinting that Jesus will reconcile the WHOLE WORLD through himself. This explains much of the High Priestly prayer in John, as well as verses like 1 Timothy 4:10 “He is the Savior to all men, especially those who believe.” There is a complete salvation that awaits those who believe and have faith in Christ, but the real salvation comes from living into that salvation through acts of charity, in living out the Sermon on the Mount, and experiencing John 12:25: giving up your life in order to find true life!
Folks unaccustomed to a mathematician dolling out theology should beware – but honestly, there is more compound theology than fractions. The writing felt at times choppy and gave the sense that he was building up for one big argument that never really found its voice. The build-up however turned out to have some great morsels in it! I’m hoping he’ll continue to write and give us more deep thinking on this subject. It’s a matter of life and death.
Apr 20th, 2010
drmikekear
David I. Rudel asks the best questions! As a questioner myself, I have great respect for people who are willing to ask the hard questions. Rudel asks whether Jesus and Paul proclaimed different gospels. He asks about the huge differences between Jesus’ admonition to “do good,” i.e., to love God and love neighbor, and Paul’s letters which are concerned with “having faith” in order to be saved. He points out how a modern evangelical Christian cannot find their version of the gospel in the synoptic gospels. He asks some very serious questions about the judgment and how we interpret it. Great questions! In fact, the questions themselves are probably worth your time in reading and pondering.
Having said that, I found that I did not agree with Rudel’s answers. I won’t give away the punch line by going into his conclusions. I will say that if you are satisfied with modern evangelical theology you will find Rudel’s hermeneutical methods strange and probably disconcerting. I come from the other end of the spectrum (I’m more of a liberal) so I found his efforts intriguing but ultimately felt that he was forced to conclude with the answers he did due to an adherence to the inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture and a desire to make the Scriptures, particularly the very different salvation messages of Jesus and Paul, mesh.
One thing that I really agree with is Rudel’s point that modern evangelicalism does not depict Christ in a biblical enough way that rejecting their version of the gospel is equal to rejecting Christ. He asks, “How accurate a gospel do you have to reject before it counts as rejecting Christ? … If I’m correct and Christians today are not proclaiming an accurate gospel, is anyone really rejecting it? … Christian are representatives of Christ. If our lack of love towards others, our pitiful record at modeling Christ, or a history rife with hypocrisy and corruption in the church cause people to reject Christ, .. they were not shown Christ [at all], so how could they reject Him?” (page 81).
Finally, let me say that Rudel has caused me to go back and re-read the Gospel of Mark. When we compare that early gospel to American cultural Christianity, the difference is amazingly evident.
Apr 22nd, 2010
Dan
I like books that make me question my long held pet-beliefs. Who Really Goes to Hell? – The Gospel You’ve Never Heard: What a Protestant Bible written by Jews says about God’s work through Christ (A book for those in the church and those offended by it) does that not only from the first page, but even in the title! If you are struggling with questions or need to stir up the cobwebs in your theology this is a book for you.
http://edan0889.blogspot.com/2010/04/gospel-youve-never-heard.html
Apr 24th, 2010
chadbrooks
This book, written by mathematician David I Rudel addresses many of the questions that folks drawn to religion but uncomfortable with the current Evangelical situation find themselves with. His style of writing is akin to mine, in that he enjoys asking questions as much as he does answering them.
The book is structured around the idea that when we read the Bible, we find a very different version of salvation than we hear coming out of the average conservative pulpit. Rudel presents this book as part of a personal journey of faith and scripture reading. Defining salvation is a key theme, especially in relation to judgment and hell. He writes the book in an attempt to rationalize a literal faith that is neither conservative or liberal, placing a high level of importance upon the words of Christ and the New Testament interpreters.
As much as this should be resonating within me, it doesn’t at all. I find Mr Rudel’s book frustrating on multiple examples.
1. There are editorial and grammatical mistakes. This is made evident on his site (more on that later) and in the front of the book noting that I hold a revision that should be correcting previous mistakes. The main frustration with this was with simple things. When Mr. Rudel is explaining his belief around “eternal” life (αἰώνιος ) his scripture reference is wrong (referring to John 17:13 instead of John 17:3). There were a few other instances of these things happening in the book.
2. I find the typesetting and the print to be distracting and confusing. This book is physically hard to read. Changing typefaces and fonts throughout kept me on my toes. While this style works great for notes (I do it sometimes) and possibly blog posts, it doesn’t translate well to book form. It is normal to use a serif font for scripture, but to combine bolding, italics, and different fonts on the same page just looks bad.
3. At times, I don’t think this book is good theology. Yes- his attempt to rethink the term heresy and heterodox is good. It recognizes how institutional oppression and the more empirical developments of theology have contributed at times to Church History and the development of doctrine. However, part of our faith is the belief that the “right” things have been passed down through time. Mr. Rudel has enough knowledge to get around Greek and Hebrew terms and other academic forms of theological work, But I think that some of his conclusions are sloppy and are not up to the form they should be for a published book.
Upon further investigation, it seems that this book is a just a few steps away from self-publishing. There isn’t a problem with this, and in some situations it is a great idea. But I think that this book could have benefited from an editor. The content of the book is good, albeit the issues raised above. There is to much content in the work. At times, I found myself seriously agreeing with the questions raised, but I was consistently disappointed in how answers were given and rational proof was made. It seems as though the work could be held as a great example not of “post”, but instead of “hyper-modernity”.
I do respect Mr. Rudel and his mathematic vocation, especially how it has lead to a very thorough survey of the New Testament, but I think the mystery of sacred text has been taken out. I agree with many things he is trying to say, but other issues keep raising their head. It just seems amateur. This could be a good book, but it would take several volumes and some contribution from someone trained in theology to translate some of the content. I think in the enthusiasm to share what are great discoveries and a journey that many of us have been on, the gun was jumped.
Apr 28th, 2010
Chris Wiles
WHO REALLY GOES TO HELL: THE GOSPEL YOU’VE NEVER HEARD
Like Farley, David I. Rudel begins his book on an autobiographical note, explaining the circumstances that challenged him to more fully develop his commitment to his Christian faith. And, once again, I applaud this spirit.
Also like Farley, Rudel finds a contradiction in the writings of Paul and the words of Jesus. So, once again, it is Jesus versus Paul…Rudel emphasizes the Jewish character of Jesus’ teachings and context. In so doing, you hear Wright’s “New Perspective on Paul” coming through at full volume.
In examining Christ’s teachings, Rudel concludes that (1) “works of the law” refer to religious ceremony, therefore the gospel is not about righteousness but about community inclusion (which leads to a form of universalism). (2) Heaven and Hell do not exist. (3) The final resurrection is the future hope. Life is led in expectation of this.
Because of this, the Christian life is about defeating “injustice, oppression, poverty, and immorality” (91). Traditional views of righteousness through Christ is – according to Rudel – the equivalent of “God doing accounting tricks to let us into heaven” (45).
Other Biblical writers are dismissed entirely. John’s commentary in John 3:16-21 is dismissed (p. 27), showing Rudel’s considerable bias towards skeptical scholarship over the Biblical witness. Rather than seeking solutions to harmonize these seeming issues, Rudel seeks to read scripture through the lens of the New Perspective – a method I caution to be extremely unbalanced.
The New Perspective views “works of the law” as referring merely to ceremony, therefore meaning that “justification” is about being included in a covenant community. On the one hand, we may appreciate the social dimension of this approach, at least in contrast to the individualized gospel that many have grown up with. But in confronting the claims of the New Perspective, we must acknowledge several things:
(1)It is wrong to suggest that the early Jews were unconcerned with righteousness, as the Jewish texts even suggest: “The one who does righteousness stores up life for himself with the Lord” (Psalms of Solomon, c. 50 B.C.). “Miracles, however, will appear at their own time to those who are saved by their works” (2 Baruch, c. A.D. 100).
(2)Similarly, Jewish leaders were routinely criticized (by Jesus) for their commitment to righteousness and the Law. Paul addressed the Galatian problem by actively anathematizing the Judaizers. These approaches suggest an implicit condemnation of those who emphasize ceremony for distinctively moral purposes.
(3)How can ceremonial law condemn? Only moral law can bring actual moral condemnation.
The issue of the afterlife is a complicated one, but again reflects Rudel’s deference to contemporary scholarship over Biblical literalism.
Like Farley, I pray that the content and tone of his work do not reflect a spirit unwilling to continue to engage and study the issues.
CONCLUSION
Jesus versus Paul. For Farley: Jesus’ teachings are dismissed. For Rudel, Jesus’ teachings are ultimate. These men can both be wrong, but they cannot both be right.
The problems generated by this approach to scripture is good evidence of the dangers of pitting one author against another, rather than finding solutions toward harmonizing the Biblical message. [...]
There is simply no reason to pit Jesus and Paul against one another. The story of the tax collector and the Pharisee (Luke 18:9-14) defies the notion of covenant inclusion, but instead situates the gospel in the context of righteousness and mercy. Jesus and Paul must be therefore be said to complement, not conflict with one another, in presenting a God who in His great mercy, could love the unlovable.
[…] Farley and Rudel are both very intelligent and I cannot say more to affirm their search for truth in the midst of populist religion. But I am sorry to see that, in the absence of proper guidance, these writers have presented a gospel that is far less fulfilling than the gospel of Christ, and therefore have offered “no gospel at all” (Gal 1:7).
Both writers have provided online platforms for online discussion, which I again appreciate, though with the cautionary note that technological connectivity is not the same as academic accountability.
To that end I urge pastors and lay leaders to teach the hard issues – this will mean teaching some big words to your people. The benefits of a good, gospel-centered education far outweigh the difficulties, promoting spiritual health and discernment.
It is also worth mentioning that the New Perspective has now moved from the writings of Wright to a popular audience. This means that there will be an increased need for familiarity with this issue, given that the definition of justification is now on the debate table (incidentally, this is the focus of the next ETS conference). […]
View the original (and complete) review at: http://thornscompose.wordpress.com/2010/04/29/jesus-versus-paul-new-perspectives-on-the-gospel/
Chris Wiles is an avid writer and speaker. You can visit his blog at http://www.thornscompose.wordpress.com, where you can read, subscribe, or book him to speak.
Apr 29th, 2010
jd234512
As I’ve noted on another post here, I signed up for a website where you can get books so long as you blog/review(revog?) them after the fact. By doing this, they are getting publicity in all sorts of places that may not otherwise get, etc. I really appreciate this and enjoy reading books I otherwise may not read. This book is through a program called viralbloggers.com. This does not seem to be limited to a specific publisher but rather gets books from different ones.
The first book I received was The Gospel You’ve Never Heard: Who Really Goes to Hell? by David Rudel.
A brief synopsis given to me that engaged me enough to choose this over others:
Do you ever struggle with how limited our contemporary understandings of the gospel seem? How Jesus and Paul sometimes seem to be saying different – indeed, opposite – things about the ‘good news’? About why there seems to be the good news of Jesus and good news about Jesus? If so, then The Gospel You’ve Never Heard by David Rudel is for you. The Gospel You’ve Never Heard makes a lateral move away from conventional descriptions of the Bible’s teachings in a way that allows the reader to view modern dogmas of the Left and Right alike through a fresh lens. The book’s first two chapters raise questions evangelical Christianity has considerable trouble answering. Rather than attempt incredible rhetorical acrobatics to explain away these very real issues, the author asks the reader to entertain, at least provisionally, that there might be genuine Biblical problems with the gospel portrayed by the modern church.
How poignant! I figured this would be great as much of these questions and issues are essentially a major part of where I find myself right now. Additionally, I looked forward to this because it appeared to be much less weighty than other books I have read recently(with portions going over my head) which have brought me to my current state. After reading this, however, I found it was not weighty enough. While the main thrust of his points I found solace in(namely there are too many doctrines read into the text rather than text truly forming cohesive doctrines), I found his approach to be extremely frustrating and lacking in scholarly grounding.
His approach was very critical of groups of people and he tended to make broad brush strokes in his critiques. Throughout the book he said how “evangelicals,” “conservatives,” “liberals,” and “commentators” were incorrect for various reasons. I put these in quotes because I can only assume what he means by these different words are found mostly in the COUSA(church of United States of America) and we are to blindly follow his assumptions that different viewpoints fit the whole group. I wish we would have been more direct in truly wrestling with a specific person or doctrinal statement. He spends more time saying what he doesn’t agree with and less on what he actually means and this is very unfortunate.
In addition, while I don’t need an endless bibliography or footnotes taking over pages, it would have been helpful for him to note the study he did in preparation for the book. Instead by mostly citing Scripture only and not having much outside help we are left with a book that is trying to make many points written by someone who has not established themselves in the world of biblical scholars.
This was just too difficult a pill to swallow and combined with his unfair critiques, typos(citing James Dunn as “James G. D. Dunn” was the kicker ), and eyesore of Scripture quotes all bolder made this a frustrating read. It was especially frustrating because I wanted to like this. I wanted this to be a book that would appeal to a larger audience so that necessary questions will be asked. I still think some of this will happen, but if done at the “evangelicals” expense, the tradeoff for perpetuated disunity is unfortunate and discouraging.
http://learningbyunlearning.blogspot.com/
May 6th, 2010
sheyduck
David Rudel’s Who Really Goes to Hell? The Gospel You’ve Never Heard is an interesting read, though I don’t recall that it ever gets around to answering the title question. Don’t let that get you down, however; Rudel offers at least this answer to his question: according to the Bible, it is not as cut-and-dried” as typical American Evangelicals would have us believe.
I found the argumentation and discussion of Rudel’s perspective enticing and adventurous; having also come up with some conservative-evangelicalism of my own, I know how much of a challenge he is up against to re-frame questions as well as scripture.
Here is Rudel’s main point: Jesus doesn’t teach the “modern Gospel” of salvation by faith alone. His solution, as far as I can figure it, is to differentiate between salvation and judgment. Salvation is renewing of life available through the gift of the Holy Spirit. Judgment is an accounting at the end of time for what one has done with one’s life.
I found the book provocative but was only able to read it comfortably with an open bible along side. Most of his citations encouraged me to look at the context.
If you have ever thought the Gospel was as clear as Four Spiritual Laws, this is an excellent book for you to read and wrestle with.
May 10th, 2010
mhasty
The Gospel You’ve Never Heard really depends on who you are and the semantics of the whole thing. David Rudel writes this book on the basis that as you read the scriptures the “modern gospel” does not appear. Rudel is clear that Jesus death and resurrection are important but struggles to find much support for the fact that one must believe in this to escape “Judgement”. He focuses more on Jesus words to his disciples and the gospel that He preached before He died.
Rudel brings up some great questions that have caused me a fair bit of chewing and digging deeper into these texts. My one major criticism of the book is that over and over Rudel seems to attack the “Evangelical” gospel that says if we believe in Jesus death burial and resurrection we’ll all be saved from Hell. While I believe Jesus calls us to follow His teachings mainly being saved from Hell or “Judgement”, as Rudel likes to call it, is a benefit of following Christ and believing that He is the risen Lord. Rudel however continually goes after the “Evangelical” mindset, gospel, you name it. Even though he gives a disclaimer in the beginning that He knows not all Evangelicals hold to the stereotypes he throws out there, he speaks of Evangelicals as if they are ignorant and too stubborn to change their minds about any issue.
I’m an Evangelical. I hold to some core truths about Jesus and the Gospel. I agree and disagree with some of Rudel’s points made in the book. However, after reading the book I feel more like Rudel cares so little about me and looks down on me as inferior for even lumping myself in with this category of believers. RUDE-L lives up to his name.
A big plus in the book is that Rudel uses LOADS of scripture references. This is possibly the main reason I didn’t put the book down after being textually assaulted time and time again in the first two chapters. Rudel has done his homework. The reading level is not for the faint of heart. There are times when I felt overwhelmed after reading a chapter just because there was so much to process. This is not a light read so bring your shovel because I would encourage some of your own digging along with Rudel’s proof texts.
May 10th, 2010
jrmccar
Interested in being bullied out of grace as you’ve known it?
No?
Then I can’t recommend: The Gospel You’ve Never Heard.
Put out by the Biblical Heresy Press, author David Rudel attempts in two hundred-ish pages of Scripture quotes, explanations, and footnotes to show that Jesus & Paul disagreed, and that we should believe Jesus.
His subtitled hook is very interesting. I agreed to this book review in a vain of genuine curiosity: “Who really goes to hell?”
But I think his hook should be edited to reflect what he’s really doing in the book: “Was Paul a whack job?”
Rudel does some good things with this book, in that he encourages a level of study that may be novel and highly beneficial to readers; and he poses very well thought-out questions. But it reads like a dissertation defense, every thought footnoted to such an extreme that a reader is either bullied into belief of what is presented or emotionally hijacked into long hours with pencil and paper at the breakfast table in an attempt at reason. It’s a convincing strategy. Trouble is, I think it comes up short.
And rather than taking Rudel to task on Scriptural points, I’ll leave it at this:
Many years ago, my husband and I were out cavorting around on a private golf course. A golf cart began furiously honking from the road and I thought that we were probably in trouble- but my assumption was wrong. Upon looking up, I saw that a man dressed as Santa was simply waving delightfully, wishing us a merry Christmas.
Rudel’s book is a bit of a golf cart honk. It’s God-Girl interrupted, Rudel shouting out from his sweet ride that, “Hey! You’ve got this all wrong! Salvation is for people who do good works! Read the flippin’ Beatitudes!” So instead of joyfully walking with Jesus as I’ve done all along, I stop in my tracks and eye Him suspiciously, wondering if I’m in trouble, even backpeddling.
I’m a pretty good person! I remind Him.
Oh yeah, Jen? You want to explain 3:32 p.m.?
Argh.
And I’m squirming again.
Well, then who the heck can enter the Kingdom?
How much is going to be enough?
But He comforts.
Tetelestai.
It is finished.
I didn’t earn that.
And I can’t now.
Thank You, Lord!
“Be watchful. Stand firm in your faith. Be courageous. Be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.” I Cor. 16:13-4.
See the original, full review here: http://www.theperfectumbrella.blogspot.com
May 10th, 2010
prolepticlife
I just finished reading “The Gospel You’ve Never Heard” by David Rudel, (subtitled “Who really goes to hell?). First, I appreciate Rudel’s attempt to ask difficult question and approach them from a different angle. He is clearly a smart guy, a math-man and chess-whiz; things I certainly can’t say about myself, although I did raise a son who is what I would call, in daddy speak, a math genius; if that counts for anything. From what I can determine in reading the book, Rudel has a high regard for Scripture. He builds his arguments by referring to the Bible and tries to harmonize the texts as he sets forth his views. The author also clearly has issues with the gospel as preached within Western evangelicalism and that seems to be a prime motivator for much of what he writes. These are all things I can applaud and appreciate.
Having said that, I can’t recommend the book. Not simply because I don’t agree with his conclusions, but because I find the book lacking in the depth and explanation necessary for something of this nature. In the book Rudel redefines “justification,” “salvation,” “judgment” and “atonement.” There is nothing inherently wrong with an open and thorough debate on these important subjects, but one would hope that such a radical departure would warrant a greater explanation.
I was troubled as well by the author’s use of the pronoun “it” in referring to the Holy Spirit. While he describes the Holy Spirit as one of the blessings that come to the believer, I am left wondering if he is Trinitarian in his view of God? Does he believe that the Holy Spirit is a thing and not a person? He never says, but his language suggests as much.
I get the impression that the method of writing was to just put pen to paper and write as the thoughts came. A better review and editorial process might have resulted in a better product. I did notice that the author’s web page had a link to download an updated version, but right now I don’t have time to reread this version.
After all is said and done the most glaring issue I have with the book is it never really answers the question posed on the cover: “Who really goes to hell?” It seems the author is proposing either a modified universalism, or a works salvation. In the book he says he rejects both, but at times that is the impression that one is left with.
Maybe Rudel will do a more extensive rewrite that will engage the issues he raises more fully. As for now I wouldn’t recommend this book.
May 13th, 2010
RyanBraught
The other week I received two books in the mail from the Ooze Viral Bloggers. One was The Naked Gospel and the other was “The Gospel You’ve Neve Heard” by David Rudel. I have been slowly reading both books at the same time to get a feeling for both books and the points they seem to be making.
What I noticed about the way Farley (Naked Gospel) goes about talking about the gospel relies heavily on Paul, and he reads Jesus through Paul. Rudel on the other hand, reads Paul through Jesus, though unfortunately I believe Rudel tries to drive a wedge between Jesus and Paul in regards to the Gospel. As one who is strongly Anabaptist I try to define the gospel through the 4 Gospels, and would much rather focus on those 4 books, but I believe it is wrong for us to say Jesus and Paul aren’t talking about the same gospel.
I believe Rudel is getting to the point that Jesus is about the kingdom of God being here and now and that Jesus came to bring about the good news which isn’t just about an end destination, but about the kingdom of God here and now and also henceforth. But I believe his arguments are badly written (either that or I was way too tired while reading the book). If I were to read a book about Jesus and the Kingdom of God, I would rather read Brian McLaren’s “Secret Message of Jesus.”
Also I found that his constant labeling of conservative Evangelicals as off-putting, even if I don’t necessarily define myself by that label. I agree with jd234512 when they say, “His approach was very critical of groups of people and he tended to make broad brush strokes in his critiques. Throughout the book he said how “evangelicals,” “conservatives,” “liberals,” and “commentators” were incorrect for various reasons. I put these in quotes because I can only assume what he means by these different words are found mostly in the COUSA(church of United States of America) and we are to blindly follow his assumptions that different viewpoints fit the whole group.”
As far as the way the book was structured, I had difficulty following his line of reasoning, whether it was the way the book was formatted, or whether I was too tired, or whether it was the weird text format (bold letters, normal letters, etc..)
All in all, I agreed with the chapters that focused on focusing on the Kingdom of God as our main priority instead of some end destination alone ala Secret Message of Jesus. But for the most part I didn’t resonate with him in much of his conclusions, which honestly I’m not even sure what they were (no hell, no judgement??? I’m not sure what he was getting at.) I agree with prolepticlife when they say, “After all is said and done the most glaring issue I have with the book is it never really answers the question posed on the cover: “Who really goes to hell?” It seems the author is proposing either a modified universalism, or a works salvation. In the book he says he rejects both, but at times that is the impression that one is left with.” I also for now won’t be recommending this book to my friends or colleagues.
May 14th, 2010
kristinemac
I’ve been doing book reviews for about a year and honestly this one is going to be the shortest I’ve ever done and obligation is truly the only thing compelling me to post it.
I personally did not enjoy this book. I thought the author’s style of writing was difficult to get into and honestly didn’t offer anything new to the “emergent or emerging” conversation. I didn’t find his arguments terribly insightful or engaging, and his view is a little lopsided.
I’m sure some people will think this book is useful to bolster or justify their ideology but it simply wasn’t for me.
May 14th, 2010
Kyle Kirkley
The Gospel You’ve Never Heard, by David I. Rudel, is a book that I appreciate and enjoy, but that I can not ultimately recommend. The book is valuable and interesting in that it raises questions and addresses issues in ways that are novel and engaging. Rudel makes claims about the Bible (particularly the Gospels) that are fascinating and (at times) articulated well. These claims include, primarily, that Jesus’ death and resurrection was meant as a call to repentance, rather than as a sacrifice to appease God’s wrath, and that “salvation” and “eternal life” are misunderstood in modern evangelical circles. He grounds these claims in the Bible (1,000+ Scriptural references by the author’s count) and he usually uses solid logic when analyzing the evidence.
On the other hand, Rudel’s work is flawed in a couple of key ways. First, he brushes aside possible problems with his interpretation of Scripture as if they were posed by the ignorant and uneducated. In reality, because he is challenging the very framework from which the Bible has been interpreted for centuries, he owes a far greater debt of explanation to these interpretive assumptions.
Second, Rudel damages his own credibility in the very print of his book. Grammatical or typographical errors are sprinkled throughout, the organization is at times dizzying, the actual text is occasionally difficult to read, and the abundance of asides and “I’ll explain that later’s” can be annoying.
The great thing about The Gospel You’ve Never Heard is that it really does force its reader to clarify his/her own beliefs in the face of a direct challenge. I’m glad I read it, even though I disagree with much of it.
Originally posted at: http://kylekirkley.wordpress.com/
May 16th, 2010
jc4jc
I recall as a kid singing the hymn, “They’re Passing to Their Doom” by A.B. Simpson :
A hundred thousand souls a day
Are passing one by one away
In Christless guilt and gloom;
Without one ray of hope or light,
With future dark as endless night,
They’re passing to their doom,
They’re passing to their doom.
They’re passing, passing fast away
In thousands day by day;
They’re passing to their doom,
They’re passing to their doom.
This hymn has a joyful, up-beat tune. Where is the joy in people going to their doom? Why was not that the most mournful tune in our hymnbook? And how sound is the theology? Where does the Bible say that those who have never heard about Jesus are passing to their doom?
Are those who have never heard of Jesus Christ damned to eternal hell-fire and suffering? Because of my sound evangelical up-bringing, my knee-jerk response has always been, yes, of course! But where did that idea come from? What is the Scriptural basis for our belief that those who have never heard are eternally doomed?
David I. Rudel in Who Really Goes to Hell? The Gospel You’ve Never Heard: What a Protestant Bible Written by Jews Says About God’s Work Through Christ, provides a new look at what the New Testament says, and how we have read into what the New Testament says. While he seems to make a good case, I still have some reservations and am not completely convinced. Yet I am not enough of a Bible scholar to want to take Rudel on. The lingering question Rudel placed in my mind is how did we come up with the idea that all who have never heard are condemned to eternal damnation? Even though that idea has been part of defining me as an evangelical, Rudel has raised some questions in my mind. But those questions are not going to change my attitude toward those without Christ. I believe that God is love. In His love for us God sent His Son to die for us. I also believe that God wants a personal relationship with people that is possible through His Son. People who have never heard of Jesus can experience God’s love through their contact with His children such as myself. That alone should be adequate motivation for reaching out to others—including those who have never heard.
Rudel has caused me to question whether those who have never heard of Jesus are passing to their doom. I can no longer sing “They’re passing to their doom” in a spirit of joy. My joy comes from knowing that more people have heard about Jesus Christ and had an opportunity to accept His welcome into His eternal Kingdom of joy.
May 18th, 2010
ricknier
Have you ever considered how you would respond to an entirely new religion? What if someone (and by someone I mean someone respectable and believable) came along and told us that God had spoke to him and given him the real truth behind life and love and other mysteries? Obviously we can rule out people looking for spaceships behind comets, men wielding guns instead of knowledge and the guy at school who uses ‘dude’ as an exclamation point.
Most of you will read that first paragraph and answer that you believe God has already revealed the answers in the form of Jesus. And I would agree. But what if the traditional interpretations for what Jesus said were incorrect? I don’t mean by a mile, although that should be considered as well.
If you care to continue with this logic, then you should probably pick up a copy of Who Really Goes to Hell? by David I Rudel. The subtitle, a lengthy one, says it all;
In essence, David tells us that we (those of living in the USA in 2010) have presupposed what 1st century Jews meant based on our culture. Sure, we understand that farming analogies given by Jesus weren’t based on farms with combines, but what about our understanding of their viewpoints, their language and their beliefs?
A change here and perhaps a tweak there and we are left with some problems concerning the good news we share with people. Allowing this post to be a mere review is difficult, given the topic. David has admitted to writing a difficult book. But he supports almost every thought with scripture, giving us historical facts of Bible times as well as etymology.
While reading this book has been a struggle, due to its nature and content, David writes well and I highly recommend it. In the epilogue, he writes candidly that while many may not agree with everything he has written, a serious consideration of what he writes will create a more mature Christian as they study scripture and discuss with others what they believe. For my part, I am planning on breaking down several of his thoughts for you, my faithful readers, and I hope to have some good discussion as we go along. I’ll even be bringing along a guest post from a friend with a copy of this book.
Who really goes to Hell? Don’t you want to know?
David’s blog: http://www.authentic-christianity.net/
The Gospel You’ve Never Heard booksite: http://www.whoreallygoestohell.com/
David’s website on chess strategy: http://www.zukertort.com/
To see the original review, visit http://www.ricknierwoo.blogspot.com
May 20th, 2010
ricknier
The following is a review by my good friend, Bryon who received a copy.
The following is my review of Who Really Goes to Hell? by David Rudel. I’ll say up front that I did enjoy the challenge of a different perspective on this subject. This book definitely made me open my Bible and ponder some serious questions. However, although the underlying question of “Who really goes to hell?” is a good one, and worthy of discussion, I believe Rudel’s reasoning is erroneous and I warn those who desire to read this book to read it with caution.
At the core of Rudel’s message is a system of works. He interprets the emphasis of what Jesus did as having an effect in this life only, breaking the shackels of slavery to sin off of the believer by taking away the dominating power of sin. He presents the work of God in Christ as something that makes a believer stronger and more able to combat sin in this life, but not sufficient to rescue the believer from hell. Being rescued from hell, according to Rudel, is based upon obedience to Jesus’ commands. He states that a person who believes that Jesus is the Christ, who repents and who even receives the Holy Spirit, can lose their inheritance in God through disobedience.
I am not at all diminishing the importance of obedience, for I wholeheartedly believe that if a believer loves Jesus, then that believer will obey his commands (John 14:15). But I also believe 2 Corinthians 5:21, “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” The question to me is, did Jesus pay for our sins or not? If indeed Jesus was made sin for us, was crucified and died, and was raised by God as victorious over sin, then what charge is against the believer who places their faith in that work? The sin is gone, paid for, and separated from the believer as far as the east is from the west (Psalm 103:12). And if that sin is gone, than I am saved from eternal damnation as much or more as I am saved from sin’s power in this temporary life.
I in no way mean to be disrespectful to Rudel, but I believe false teaching should be called as such. In my opinion, Rudel did not back up his presentation with correct interpretation of scripture. I believe Rudel’s reasoning is erroneous because it diminishes Christ and what he accomplished. It strips God of the power to save his children from his own judgement and places that power in the will of human beings. That should make any honest person very uncomfortable. I agree with the Apostle Paul when he says “What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!” (Romans 7:24-25a) If Christ cannot save me from eternal damnation, then I am doomed. I am thankful to God that Rudel’s interpretation is wrong.
You can view his review at my site; http://www.ricknierwoo.blogspot.com
May 21st, 2010
TatPriest
The Gospel You’ve Never Heard by David I. Rudel
Honestly I was drawn to this book by its title and its publisher (Biblical Heresy Press) thinking it would be a discourse on Progressive Christian views on the gospel. Instead it turned out to be a somewhat rambling and disconnected discourse on Rudel’s struggles to make sense out of atonement theology.
I agree with Rudel’s basic premise, that Paul’s teaching of justification through faith alone is difficult if not impossible to reconcile with Jesus’ teaching of justification through works. It’s just that Rudel’s attempt to get us to this conclusion takes as many hermeneutical jumps as the evangelical preachers he is trying to counter. To be sure, Rudel has a vast knowledge of the New Testament and his biblical citations are exhaustive, however, he seems to lack a wider theological and historical-critical knowledge of the bible. Case in point, he uses John to refute atonement theology despite the point that John was written after atonement theology had been firmly established in the general church. It is a small point but it seems to me that he has John arguing against John.
Should you choose to read this book be ready for a long difficult read. Rudel’s style is wordy and overly dramatic and he uses amateurish tricks like bold print to make his points rather than allowing the text to speak for itself.
Rev. Scott Ziegler
Tattooedpriest.blogspot.com
http://www.abeachwedding.com
May 23rd, 2010
ngilmour
This is cross-posted from a May 26 post on The Christian Humanist Blog.
First of all, I must start by saying that rarely have I found a book so enamored of subtitles.
Beyond that, I do wish that theology writers for popular audiences would attempt a bit of humility. The material in this book is not a gospel I’ve never heard; in fact, much like “A New Kind of” this and that, this book sets forth interpretations on things whose influences were easy enough to spot. Very few thoughts in 2010 are entirely new, never-before-heard, or otherwise paradigm-shifting. By virtue of the instant digital connections that characterize the publishing and academic worlds in 2010, what new thoughts do happen (and I’m one of those historicists who thinks that nihil sub sole novum gets used far too often to justify intellectual laziness) tend not to happen in popular-press books. (As a thought experiment, imagine if someone wrote a book on physics claiming to articulate a theory that the world had never seen before. It would take some gumption to claim that, wouldn’t it?) I realize that some folks who have never been to seminary or sat in on a Sunday school class taught by a seminary graduate might never have heard this material, but I’d prefer to see theology books (even those with three subtitles) whose titles say what’s inside rather than trying to convince a reader that what’s inside has never been seen before.
Alright. I feel better now.
Rudel, a mathematician, approaches questions of salvation and judgment in a way that reminds me of that famous ancient lover of mathematics, Plato. Both writers have a keen eye for the contradictions and sloppy thinking that pervade popular religion. Both writers force a careful reader to think about and answer hard questions. And both writers offer answers that are themselves a mix of profound insight and strange misreadings that sometimes provide nice springboards for further thought and other times force that reader to articulate better answers than what are in the text.
All of that said, this is not by any stretch a gospel that I’ve never heard. N.T. Wright was setting forth a historically-informed reading of canonical text a couple decades before this book hit the presses, and Richard Hays was holding forth on the real ethical weight of the Sermon on the Mount and other New Testament texts when I was still an undergraduate. The real content of this book is a polemic against a Calvinist-flavored version of evangelicalism, a focused reading of the canonical gospels and some brief forays into Paul and the General Epistles that take the gospel narratives as logically prior to the epistolary discourse. This is one of the strange features of the book: at various moments Rudel almost seems to imply (though he never directly states it) that the gospels were also in some sense temporally prior to Paul’s letters, an assumption that lets him play Paul against Christ (rather than Paul against Mark or Paul against Luke) as a zero-sum game (36) but which seems to rely on a strange historical assumption.
Rudel’s main hermeneutical move is to draw a sharp distinction between regeneration, which happens here and now; and deliverance, which happens at the Final Judgment (42). Because I spend my professional time thinking about poetry rather than legal precedents, this strong separation strikes me as neglecting some of the real beauty of the scheme of salvation, and beyond that, it forces Rudel to make some strange moves when he writes about the book of Romans (58-59) and about the Eucharist (115). Rudel cites many texts that support his case (though his decision to use a boldface font for every Scripture citation is a bit hard on the eyes after a while), and his attention to the details of the text serve him well when he writes about the apparent upshot of Jesus’ parables in the context of his larger preaching ministry (119-122) and his account of what constitutes Christ’s obedience that saves sinners (149).
Although his close readings of Scripture are good when they’re good, his take on the Church as it’s existed in the intervening centuries is decidedly more spotty. As I noted before, Rudel’s concern in his book is to approach the Scriptures with theological “precision” (115) and to counter what he frames as bad propositional/syllogistic frameworks with more adequate ones. (One moment that amused me, because I do read the Bible as poetic as well as true and probably more true because poetic, is when he initiates an ellipse-filled citation of Galatians with, “Removing some rhetoric…” (139). As someone who has recently taken on the role of rhetoric scholar, I had to wonder why in the world one would want to remove some rhetoric from Paul!) Therefore he’s not quite sure what to do with the generations of Christians from Paul’s generation (remember, the gospels are prior to Paul in his reading) roughly to the age of Protestant Orthodoxy. On one hand he criticizes them for allowing ambiguity to characterize their theology (138), but on the other, he praises them for being “less indoctrinated” (145) than their modern-era counterparts. He gets much more comfortable with Reformed and Evangelical writings from the last four hundred years, give or take, and some of the amusing moments in the book are when he attacks evangelicalism in general for using some very distinctively Reformed-Calvinist language, namely propitiation (160) and “alien righteousness” (140). One doesn’t have to guess too long which sorts of evangelicals Rudel spends his time with.
On balance I think (as I often do) that the strong questions about the canonical gospels, though I have heard them before, are worthwhile as a popular-press introduction to some interesting close-readings of the gospel texts. Because I’m a Sunday school teacher I imagine many books as potential Sunday school or small group texts, and I think that a strongly educated teacher could use this book on one of those settings profitably. Perhaps it’s a gospel that those of us who presume to teach have heard, but nonetheless it might be a good locus of conversation for those who have not.
May 25th, 2010
addowns
I’ve just started reading Who Really Goes to Hell–The Gospel You’ve Never Heard: What a Protestant Bible written by Jews says about God’s work through Christ by David I. Rudel. An intriguing title in itself but the caption underneath it made me all the more interested: “(A book for those in the church and those offended by it)”. Now that’s what I call a hot sell!
Over the next couple of weeks, I’ll cover what strikes me most about the book, and some the insights that are most compelling. Today, I just want to write a few words about what it is and what it is not.
This book is scholarly, but not written by a scholar. The author is a math teacher. He has a deep faith, liberal arts training, and brings a fresh perspective to Biblical Studies. He, however, doesn’t have a PhD in Old or New Testament studies. But this, in itself actually serves to his benefit, because he brings a real intensity to the text. When he has a point to make (and he has many), he drives to it with direct examples, drawing from all over the Bible. He also isn’t writing from an academic perspective, but an Evangelical Christian one. This makes his arguments less about how they fit alongside Crossan’s or Ehrman’s, but how they fit against the preacher down the street. And it is precisely this difference that allows Rudel to get to his primary point: the gospel proclaimed in most churches on Sunday morning (what he calls the “modern gospel”) is incompatible with the teachings of Jesus as depicted in the gospels.
If you want to read it for yourself, you can order it here, get a free ebook for your nook here, or go to the author’s page and download it for free.
More discussion can be found at: http://uncollusion.wordpress.com/
Jun 1st, 2010
Bill Nieporte
I am always grateful for authors who aim to challenge my own established beliefs. If I only read a diet of books that confirm what I already believe, how can I learn anything? I want to be challenged to think. Such a challenge may change my beliefs, or cause me to study harder to reaffirm my convictions. In either case, learning takes place.
For this reason, I was excited to read “The Gospel You’ve Never Heard: Who Really Goes To Hell.” The author’s convictions about heaven, hell, and who goes where, it certainly outside the mainstream of evangelical Christianity. He tries to do this from a scriptural viewpoint, revealing a high view of Bible and a desire to make it foundational in the development of his theological convictions. He wants to cut away the theology that has developed around the preaching of western evangelicals. These are laudable goals which I greatly appreciate.
Still, I have to say that the book was a major disappointment.
It lacked the depth necessary when addressing such a challenging topic.
It made bold assertions about the need to redefine certain biblical concepts (such as “justification” and “atonement”), but does so without meaningful explanation as to why.
It offered the typically trite “Jesus vs. Paul” conflict, which seems overstated, but has become fodder for many authors of late.
Beyond all of this, the book also was poorly edited. This made it extremely difficult to read on several occasions.
So, while I respect authors and books that challenge the status quo, this book failed to do so on many accounts.
This review can also be viewed at http://nieporte.name
Jun 2nd, 2010
addsalt
I will admit that I started this book expecting the worst. Having moved quite far from the viewpoint that Christianity is all about saving people from hell, I expecting a book explaining exactly which people needed to be saved from hell.
Turns out I couldn’t have been more wrong.
The book contrasts the traditional evangelical view of Christianity (that Jesus came to die to save us from our sins so we can go to heaven), with finally freeing God’s people to actually be God’s people.
The book is a little difficult to summarize because the chapters don’t entirely build on each other to a climatic point. With the main aim to raise questions about current Christian dogma, so much material needs to be covered in order to cover enough bases to make a point. Instead, topics are somewhat eclectic to cover what the author feels are the most important to help his point to be taken seriously. It is in no way the final word, but instead tries to open a window to let in a fresh breath on scripture.
The writing style was not entirely to my liking, but the tone of the book was very appropriately delicately confrontational. In addressing current modern beliefs, I believe that so much of the current understanding comes from haphazard quoting of the bible without its due context. It may be due to a desire of brevity, but much of the copious scripture quoting in the book is somewhat absent of the context in which it was originally written in. I also suspect that I am obviously not the target audience for the book who may be more interested in this type of point and shoot proof texting. I would be very interested in how this book would strike someone who is new to this mode of thought.
There is an effort to bring continuity of Jewish thought into the NT – showing the dissimilarity between current Christian believes and what would have made sense in first century Judaism. When we say we are saved, we must ask what they thought they would be saved from. When we say righteous, what would that have meant. In this mode of thinking, I was not at all surprised to find a few direct quotes and some heavy borrowing from N.T. Wright.
The book is published by Biblical Heresy Press, and I suspect there will be many who think it an apt name for this book. I think we fear heresy so much that we never truly engage the bible and God himself. If we vow to follow God wherever he would lead, does that also mean that we would allow Him to lead us to those murky grey waters, or are there boundaries that we would stop and say we will follow no further. Would we stand and defend “heresy” if that is where God would want us to be?
original post here
Jun 6th, 2010
Gotthammer
I’m taking a devotional approach to Rudel’s The Gospel You’ve Never Heard: come on over to gotthammer.com to take the trip with me.
Jun 8th, 2010
staucody
This book comes at a critical time in Western Christian history, as a lot of discussion has been tearing up the web and through print media about the issue of Atonement Theory. By and large, the most popular theory in the Evangelical realm is the Penal Substitutionary Atonement theory- basically, God’s wrath had to be fulfilled one way or another, and Jesus took our place to clear our accounts. It is so ingrained, in fact, that most Evangelical’s are even unaware that this is merely a theory or that it wasn’t even universally held to be true for much of Christian history, particularly in the early stages of church history. But right now some serious work is being done to reevaluate what the gospel really means, who is impacted by it, and what Jesus’ death and resurrection means for us all.
David Rudel steps into the discussion with Who Really Goes to Hell?: The Gospel You’ve Never Heard- What a Protestant Bible Written by Jews says about God’s work through Christ (A book for those in the church and those offended by it).
In the course of the book, Rudel compares modern day Evangelical teaching about what the gospel is and it’s strong focus on escaping hell with what he (of course) calls the biblical gospel or teachings of Jesus. Rudel does a terrific job asking the questions that we mostly have to ignore if we want to accept the modern Evangelical spin on the gospel- questions like, “If that’s all it is about, then why does Jesus teach things like, ‘Forgive and you will be forgiven,’ or ‘In the manner you judge so you will be judged,’ or even ‘If the gospel is all about getting people out of hell, then why did the Disciples take so long to get around to telling others outside of Judaism about it- or could the gospel have more to do with other things than merely hell or heaven for eternity?’”
Rudel certainly takes the Bible seriously, and his scripture work has been extremely thorough. Rudel was a theoretic mathematician, and it is interesting to watch him lay out his evidence and then make logical connections to bring out a more robust and holistic understanding of Christ’s entire life, rather than just his death on the cross. The connections he makes (and fresh insight he brings) to the work of the High Priest in the temple and Jesus’ work on the cross made me smack my head and say out loud “Of course!” I don’t want to give too much away, but the way he brings the teaching of Jesus and Paul together, as well as troublesome passages from the book of Hebrews (troublesome to a modern Evangelical understanding of the gospel) is, to put it simply, beautiful.
This, of course, flies in the face of at least one review I’ve read of his book, which claimed he relied on the now trite argument of “Jesus vs. Paul.” I didn’t see that at all- in fact, quite the opposite. Rudel acknowledges that seeming dichotomy, but then summarily dismantles it by showing how they really are compatible, IF we understand a Jewish perspective on things like judgment, delivery, etc.
This book was independently published, and is offered completely free as a download. So you can expect that yes, there are some editing issues or concerns with layout. Some reviewers seemingly focused on this alone- but don’t let it stop you from completing the book. It really is well thought out and well reasoned, and offers a great perspective on issues of atonement, salvation, judgment, and the gospel.
I have sent a request to the author for a potential interview, so stay tuned for that. In the meantime, check out the author’s blog: Fire in The Bones [Biblical, Heterodox Christianity].
You can also check out the website for the book, where you can download the book for free and get some awesome PDF’s (like “What Jesus Never Preached,” “Misunderstood Parables,” “The Modern Gospels Biblical Problems,” and “A Comparison of Biblical and Evangelical Christianity”)
Jun 11th, 2010
ahub101
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
READ THIS BOOK: Who Really Goes to Hell – The Gospel You’ve Never Heard.
Read this Book: Who Really Goes to Hell – The Gospel You’ve Never Heard.
I recently read Who Really Goes to Hell – The Gospel You’ve Never Heard, by David I. Rudel. I was initially skeptical about this book for a few reasons: 1) The Publisher is Biblical Heresy Press; 2) I am generally skeptical of supposedly new ways of understanding the Bible, as most have a very Postmodern ring to them (as the next book I will be reviewing, called “The Naked Gospel”.
Don’t let these fool you. As I read on, with fewer and fewer objections along the way, I was brought to a deeper understanding of the gospel than I have ever known. The title of the book seems to be pointed at grabbing the attention of those who might not be interested in a scholarly work on many of the essential doctrines of Christianity; but the book is just that. Now, I do not know my Bible well enough the properly critique the book, but what I read really made sense to me.
The book purports to destroy many of the common Evangelical Protestant doctrines in favour of a much more biblically founded teaching. I would say that the book is successful in this. This book has helped me to understand, or at least know another quality viewpoint on, many major important biblical teachings, including: What is the role of the Holy Spirit?, How are we to be judged after death?, What is justification?, Why does repentance feature so prominently in Jesus’ teachings?, Why do we need to continue to ask for forgiveness?, What is the relationship with faith and good works?, How does Jesus save us?, What is the importance of Jesus’ entire life?, What does the Bible mean by “God’s wrath”?, etc., etc., etc.
This book I so helpful that I recommend it to all who read this review. This is my advice: get this book. Granted, I know that this book will give some people trouble and will dismantle their current faith, but I believe that it will build up something more solid in the reader. Also, at the very least, the book provides an alternative paradigm to Protestant teachings; this is helpful as truth is often best discerned when two or more options are in competition and one shows itself to be more dominant.
I do not wish to give away any of the answers described in this book, but I will warn that it seems to be something much closer to a Catholic teaching, although the author doesn’t seem to like Catholics or Protestants very much for their doctrines.
Give this book a read. I have to read it again to glean more from it and to understand it so that I can put it in competition with other paradigms that I know, but I am already excited to have read this book once. Read this book. I have not said that about any other book that I have reviewed to date. After you’ve read this book, let me know what you think.
http://important-topics-ahub.blogspot.com/2010/06/read-this-book-who-really-goes-to-hell.html
Jun 12th, 2010
chrisostrander
First I’ll get the criticisms out of the way.
What Rudel is attempting to do is commendable. With his book and several websites, he seems to be trying to start a massive theological movement. I wouldn’t even be surprised if deep down inside Mr. Rudel fancies himself to be modern day Martin Luther, and get the sense that the author believes he has stumbled upon a new reformation. Now I won’t disagree that we certainly need a new sort of reformation, and indeed I believe we are in the midst of one currently. But Mr. Rudel’s less than subtle attempts to spark a new one himself with his book and blog comes off as a little naive.
Secondly, if Mr. Rudel wants to be taken seriously he should nix the “biblical heresy press” thing. The logo is amateurish and cheesey. But more importantly, while I get what the author means by the name, many people won’t. I have decided not to lend out my copy of Who Really Goes to Hell to some conservatives in my life because I think the phrase “Biblical heresy” will be too off-putting and color their view of the author’s arguments from the get go.
Thirdly, as other reviewers have noted, there are typos and grammatical errors galore. I also could have done without all the font changes, bold type face and previews of what’s to come in further chapters.
Now that those quibbles, most dealing with style and presentation, are out of the way I would like to say that I really enjoyed the substance of the author’s arguments. I thoroughly resonate with the notion that the modern gospel has been piled upon by centuries of theological lenses that are far removed from the world view and cultural-historical context of the first century Palestinian Jew. Mr. Rudel’s argument that one would come away with a thoroughly different gospel than today’s evangelical one, if he or she were only given the synoptic gospels, is spot on. Furthermore, I found many of my own questions and arguments being brought up in the pages of Rudel’s book.
Because I’m not a bible scholar and I cannot adequately critique all of Rudel’s claims about ancient Jewish beliefs and culture, I’ll give the author the benefit of the doubt that his interpretations of Hebrew and Greek words and his depictions of ancient Jewish thought are accurate. However I would have appreciated Rudel citing his scholarly sources. Here and there he mentions N.T. Wright and David Flusser, but a notes section would have been much appreciated.
Overall, I agreed with much of Rudel’s criticisms of “the modern gospel.” Like Rudel, I grew up in the world of conservative evangelicalism, and found him asking the same questions I have. His observation that the modern gospel comes by way of reading the Jewish gospels through a western protestant lens, and that we must revisit the writings of the apostles through a Jewish lens has been made before. Yet I think that Rudel’s contribution to this view is very helpful and I found his differentiation of deliverance and regeneration intriguing. I’ll definitely be re-reading this book.
And by the way, I agree with his answer to the title’s question.
When I do, I blog here:
http://wconfession.blogspot.com/
and here:
http://chrisostrander.blogspot.com/
Jun 17th, 2010
kmcdade
Original review at http://whatsthemission.wordpress.com/2010/06/20/book-review-the-gospel-youve-never-heard-by-david-i-rudel/
Gospel. Good News. What was the actual good news that Jesus and his disciples preached? Was it really about who gets into heaven, or is there more to it?
Many Christians have considered these questions in recent years. This material will be familiar to anyone who reads Brian McLaren, Frank Viola, or Leonard Sweet. David Rudin comes at these issues from an analytical and biblically literal point of view, but still comes to similar conclusions — that Jesus was telling us how to live NOW, not that we needed to believe in him in order to be saved from our sins and get into heaven.
It’s an excellent analysis that will make the reader think, even if he/she doesn’t agree with the conclusions.
Jun 20th, 2010
Debby Albrecht
debbyalbrecht
Original reivew at http://debbyalbrecht.blogspot.com/2010/06/gospel-youve-never-heard-by-david-i.html
In previous posts I’ve mentioned that I do some reading and blogging for Viral Ooze. They give me books that I wouldn’t normally read in exchange for blogging about them
This time I chose two books, The Naked Gospel by David Rudel and The Gospel You’ve Never Heard by Andrew Farley. These books start with the authors sharing their discontent with what they believe the modern church teaches about salvation, grace, works and the law. At this point they diverge significantly; one author, Farley, claiming that the Law has no place in the life of a Christian, the other (Rudel) claiming that Jesus calls us to follow the Law and that believing in Him does not guarantee a place in heaven.
As an evangelical I struggle with both views. Faith in Jesus Christ does not exempt us from being responsible for our neighbor or from living righteously as Farley would lead one to believe. But I cannot agree with the position that seems to be taken by Rudel, that faith in Jesus Christ is insufficient to guarantee my position as a child of God apart from the Law.
As mentioned by several bloggers before me; font changes, grammar and errors made The Gospel You’ve Never Heard a very frustrating read. The author would have benefited greatly from an editor with the eye of a reader. The name of the publisher, Biblical Heresy Press, was also offputting.
While I did not agree with all that Andrew Farley’s arguments, it was a much easier read due to it’s structure and the care with which it was written and edited. There is a significant benefit to being published by a publishing house with the expertise of Zondervan.
Jun 21st, 2010
emilswift
Who REALLY Goes to Hell?
So begins a book by David Rudel entitled, **Who REALLY Goes to Hell? The Gospel You Never Heard Preached.** Since I’m already convinced that much of what people think the Bible teaches is not biblical, I was predisposed towards learning whatever new insights his book might reveal.
Yet when Rudel begins his argument by claiming he’ll show that what Paul preached contradicted what Jesus preached, I sat up and took notice. It raised my expectations – not that I believed at the outset that he had to be wrong. I love it when someone can show me I’m wrong — I have no vested interest in maintaining false teaching only because it’s tradition.
But in my years studying both Jesus’ and Paul’s teachings, I have seen no “contradictions” — only people’s disappointingly inaccurate misreading of the Word. Wrongly interpreting either Jesus or Paul can lead to some outstandingly foolish errors.
But excited by this author’s new challenge, I hoped he would show me something new, something more than I’d ever seen previously.
Of which I was yet again disappointed.
Near the start of his book, Rudel makes an odd request. He explains that he’s used so many Bible verses that he wants the reader to “skim rapidly through his book at least once without pausing to closely examine any of the verses”, saving that “closer” examination for a second perusal. Why? Rudel says, “I use over 2,700 verses and you’ll never get through the book if you stop and examine each passage.” To begin with, there’s a touch of arrogance in assuming his readers are going to read his book twice, as most readers will not. But there’s also a hint of theological sleight-of-hand in his saying, in essence, “Don’t look at any of the verses too closely – just go with whatever interpretive spin I put on them as I build my persuasive argument.” If an author is presenting truth that is rooting out older misinterpretation and misunderstandings of Scripture, it seems the reader ought instead to be encouraged to look closely at the Scriptures used in order to see that this author’s re-interpretation (or re-envisioning) of them is in fact accurate.
In a few places I rebelled and looked up his interpretation of Scriptures. Several times I discovered he’d either taken a verse out of context (giving it a meaning it didn’t really have) or gave an explanation (especially “of the Greek”) that I couldn’t find supported in any other scholastic commentaries.
One brief example: He relates a sermon given by Norm Koop (son of the famous Surgeon General) explaining the word “eternal” in John 17.3 which reads, “This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” Koop said that “in the Greek” (which phrase always needs to be taken with a grain of salt), “eternal” doesn’t refer to a chronological span of time but to its quality. Rudel apparently felt free, with that little expository tidbit, to henceforward dismiss any normal interpretation of “eternal life” and exchange it for what he defends as a truly “Jewish idea” known as the “World to Come”. But as many sources as I checked, none of them gave even the least hint of this interpretation of “eternal life”. Rudel, I suppose, might claim I looked at sources which are biased toward traditional interpretations. Which would make his argument irrefutable.
Yet what drew me to Rudel’s book was the hope that at the very least, he would ask some questions and pose some problems that would prove challenging to the religious status quo in Christendom. Along the way I came across a number of lovely observations he’d made about Scripture passages that I hurriedly adopted as my own. (Thanks, David!)
One precious little insight referred to Jesus’ story of the Good Samaritan. He observed that though most translations say that the Samaritan was a good neighbor, the Greek verb tense is better translated became meaning that prior to stopping to help the Jew, they were not neighbors. But after seeing the Jew’s need and stopping to render aid, he then became neighbor to the Jew. Absolutely lovely. And upon checking it out in Greek dictionaries and other sources, they confirmed his observation.
Many chapters and sections of chapters are wonderful. In one, for example, he lists seven things Jesus never preached, including any sermons about trusting in His atoning work on the Cross.
Here’s an example of how Rudel’s reasonings can challenge conservative Christian thought: Since Jesus never preached to the Jews about His atoning work on the Cross, yet He went everywhere preaching the Gospel — then the Gospel doesn’t include people understanding (and trusting) His work on the Cross. Give that a moment and reflect: did Jesus preach the Gospel or not? His Gospel had neither Cross nor Blood, so is He a heretic? Or is the common understanding of what makes up the Gospel inadequate? Whether Rudel is “right” or “wrong”, the question itself should rattle the cages of those who have an overly simplistic idea of what is “the Gospel”.
However correct Rudel is in his reflections on “the Jewish perspective”, he has gained many excellent insights by merely asking, “Since the Jews in Jesus’ day were not modern, 21st century Euro-Americans, what did they think Jesus meant in His teachings?” Rudel points the reader back to the Old Testament repeatedly, insisting that many, modern Christians have either neglected it completely or have picked out of it only those verses that make them feel good. He insists that all of the Old Testament must be read as Jesus intended: everything in it pointed prophetically to the coming of the Messiah Who was Jesus. He even points out Jesus’ exasperation in Luke 24.25 with His own disciples’ blindness that the Old Testament was “a type of grand prophecy, a huge picture that… gave clues about the coming Christ [Messiah] so that the Jews of Jesus’ day could recognize Him.” [Which they didn’t.]
Part of the challenge of this book are the questions Rudel asks — questions that most Christians either avoid or ignore. For example: how exactly is it possible for people, before Christ’s death, to be “saved”. What about people who have never even heard about Jesus but who obey within themselves the Law of God (as Paul refers to in Romans 2.) Why is it that Jesus can say to people who have not repented (such as the paralyzed man let down through the roof) that his sins were forgiven him? Or the thief dying next to Him on the Cross that that very day they would be together in Paradise? The thief didn’t repent, showed no indication that he trusted in Jesus for salvation, and he certainly wasn’t baptized. How’d HE get into Heaven? (Or DID he?) How can Jesus say that the people who “inherit the Kingdom” are those who have “given Him” food and drink? Jesus says nothing about repentance or trusting Him or believing in His atoning work on the Cross. Giving someone a glass of water is the basis of being taken into God’s Kingdom?
The question posed in the title, “Who Really Goes to Hell?”, isn’t directly answered anywhere in the book. He briefly refers to it on p. 84 and I won’t give away his solution. Needless to say, it’s in the same section in which he demonstrates that God’s intention never was for any of us to “go to Heaven” — at least, not in any permanent sense. Enter, stage left, the city of New Jerusalem.
Two problems I feel are most difficult for me to resolve. (1) He goes to very great length trying to establish that there are actually two “salvations” referred to in the New Testament — deliverance and regeneration. He asserts that there can be no regeneration aside from becoming one with Jesus Christ (baptized), but deliverance can come in a much more general fashion. My problem is that there are numerous Scriptures that show us that not only regeneration comes through the Cross, but deliverance from sin, death and even sickness (“by His stripes we are healed”.)
The second problem (2) is the hardest for me to resolve. Rudel displays throughout his book an affection for the Law. He reinterprets the Law so that there is the Law which still holds sway over us and the rabbinical “Law” which nullified God’s intentions. In fact, he insists that a person can be made righteous by properly obeying the Law. But however you cut it, it seems to me to encroach on the freedom from the Law that the apostle Paul insists is ours — all the Law.
The one text I observed Rudel does not focus on seriously (at least that I could find) was Paul’s logical explanation in Galatians 2.21 and 3.21 that if it were possible for any person ever to be made righteous by obeying the Law, then “Christ has died in vain.” If a person could become righteous by his or her own efforts, then instead of dying, Jesus could have simply stood back and said, “Get your act together, O Man, or go to hell.” But since there is no righteousness that comes from obeying the Law, Jesus chose to give up His life for on our behalf.
Rudel says he hopes that his book will “turn upside down the worlds of a few” who once had been unthinking followers of traditional dogma. In my opinion, there are ample pages of questions, challenges and radically different perspectives on the traditional approach to Christian teachings on salvation, hell, Heaven and the lot that a reader who ventures into Rudel’s world will come out the other end with some degree of spiritual transformation. As Hopkins writes in the Forward, “if you love God’s Word and treasure God’s Church, this book will be an essential, albeit annoying, challenge.”
Jun 24th, 2010
kevinstewart
I am an avid reader of the Bible. One thing that I have noticed through my studies is that the more that I study, the more things don’t seem to add up. The Old Testament with the New Testament, the gospels with the epistles, Paul and Jesus all seem to disagree at times when it comes to specific teachings that many consider indispensable doctrines of the Church. It also should be noted that those within the Church quite frequently disagree on what doctrines are indeed absolutely necessary for one to believe. Who’s right? The more I try to answer this question the more questions I have…
You can view this review in its entirety at: http://kevinstewart.wordpress.com/2010/07/03/the-gospel-youve-never-heard/
Jul 2nd, 2010
SGill4613
It is difficult to come to a conclusion as to how I feel about Who Really Goes to Hell? The Gospel You’ve Never Heard by David I. Rudel.
Having just recently read another book with the word Gospel in the title, I have become a bit leery of people who will do so in the future. So I began reading with trepidation as to how Rudel would use the word.
Personally I define the good news as anything which sets you free to love. It is clear that in reading this book, Rudel felt it necessary to be freed from certain church doctrines of which he was previously bound. It is wonderful that the author has found more freedom to love as a result of his understanding of the Bible. Yet, one of my main concerns is that he rails against the term “evangelical” without giving it a personal definition.
As a pastor, within a denomination which considers itself Evangelical, which is nothing more than a group of people who seek to share the good news with others, allowing them to become more free to love (as Jesus’ main commandment is to love God and love your neighbour) it pains me to read his negative references to the word. The truth is that Rudel himself is being evangelical by trying to spread what he believes to be the good news.
Overall, the book is decent, though poor editing makes it difficult to read. I consider myself a pretty good reader, and this is a book I have to put down every few pages just to try and understand the many points made.
I would rate this book a 5/10.
Jul 5th, 2010
Jason Bybee
Disclosure: This book was provided to me free of charge by The Ooze Viral Bloggers.
David Rudel’s “The Gospel You’ve Never Heard” is a challenging assault on evangelical Christianity’s modern presentation of the Gospel. The book is subtitled “What a Protestant Bible written by Jews says about God’s work through Christ” — which is a fair way of describing Rudel’s primary thesis: our understanding of the Gospel revealed through Christ in Scripture is contextual and interpretive. The front cover contains yet another subtitle: “A book for those in the church and those offended by it.” Finally, the jacket cover illustration shows a young lady with her arms folded in front of her and the phrase “Who really goes to hell?” scrawled in Sharpie across her hand. Before you even crack the cover, you have a pretty good idea of where Rudel is going.
Rudel’s primary objection to mainstream evangelical Christianity’s presentation of the Gospel is that it simply isn’t biblical. Rudel forces his readers to go rushing back to their New Testaments in an effort to validate what they’ve always believed (or been told to believe) about the Gospel. He claims that we’re guilty of reading Jesus too often through Paul, which results in an emphasis on total depravity as the hallmark of the human condition. “All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God,” Paul says and we adopt this as our primary identity. Rudel makes a good point here; I believe we should hear Jesus on his own terms as he announces God’s Kingdom reign.
But many of Rudel’s conclusions will challenge and even upset most readers who consider themselves to be Christians. He claims that early belief in Jesus as Messiah had nothing to do with either His death or His resurrection (p17). He also repeatedly claims that we should differentiate between Jesus’ public teachings in the Gospels and his private interactions with the disciples. Such a reading neglects the literary nature of the Gospels as communally formative documents about Christ. Are we to accept that the earliest Christians somehow discounted the narrative portions of the Synoptics that make us privy to Christ’s “extra curricular” sessions with the disciples? Are these texts not meant for our “overhearing” that we might grow as disciples, too?
Rudel seems to base a great many of his conclusions on a close reading of the Synoptic Gospels, specifically the Gospel of Mark. Rudel acknowledges this hermenuetic approach, but it is one of the shortcomings of his text. Rudel prefers to focus on the Gospel accounts in his search for the “real” Gospel — which is fine, except that he fails to give many other New Testament texts (John’s Gospel, Paul’s letters, etc.) a fair reading. In fact, very little is made of John’s Gospel, which is somewhat surprising given Rudel’s preference for Gospel over epistle. When he does turn his attention to John, his treatment of the text is poor, even lazy in places. (See his rushed discussion of John 3.16, pp.26-27.) It seems Rudel may be guilty of the same kind of interpretive construct he accuses evangelicals of propagating.
On the positive side, Rudel’s attention to detail is commendable. He also approaches this work with great respect for the authority of Scripture, something that will appeal to his audience even if they disagree with his ultimate conclusion.
Jul 19th, 2010
TheLogo
First of all, I think this book gets the award for longest title… seriously. Sadly, in terms of style, the title is a precursor of things to come; I guess that’s what you get when a mathematician does theology. In terms of content, however, there is much more positive to say. But first, a summary.
In this book Rudel takes on the “modern gospel message” in all its minimalistic glory, claiming that this is not the message of Jesus, nor his apostles, nor Paul, nor anyone else in Scripture. If your curious, the modern gospel message is basically this: Believe in Jesus and you will get in to heaven. In the face of this slogan, Rudel begins by spending 4 chapters asking difficult questions (like, if this is the answer, then what was Jesus doing to that poor man in Luke 10? And how in the world does the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7 fit in? And so on). He then spends 3 chapters, in his second section, exploring what the bible says about judgment, heaven, and hell. Finally, in his last 4 chapters, he redefines salvation.
So, what do I think? First of all, Rudel asks some VERY good questions, questions which evangelicals desperately need to be able to answer. Secondly, Rudel does his best to stay true to scripture and, at most points, he does this well. I think he is right on when it comes to clarifying the call for Christ-followers today, how the gospel is so much more than a message about how to avoid hell, how Paul and Jesus ought to be read so that they do not directly contradict each other, and how our modern gospel message has completely missed the point.
Sadly, I think Rudel is a perfect demonstration of the pendelum swing. Thus, he trades in the modern minimalist gospel message, with its total uselessness in terms of life today, for a full on Jewish gospel, with a new total uselessness in terms of life after resurrection and judgment. Considering how thorough his research was into the items such as Jesus fulfilling Jewish prophecies, Paul’s distinctions between terms such as salvation/judgement/justification, I was sadly surprised to find that Rudel lacks any and all sophistication or proper research when it comes to such literature as Revelation (which he takes to speak of literal physical wrath approaching in the future, and this in spite of having read Surprised by Hope by N.T. Wright?).
Overall: 3.5 of 5 stars. Conditionally Recommended. This book demands careful reading, both because of the positive points which we NEED to consider, and because of the negative considerations which ought to make the reader pause.
http://thelogo.blogspot.com/2010/07/david-i-rudel-who-really-goes-to-hell.html
Jul 28th, 2010
'Seph
I’m going to approach this particular book review, as I was invited to, by a comparison with Andrew Farley’s ”The Naked Gospel”
Where I was suspicious of Andrew Farley’s ”The Naked Gospel’s” intent (fearing that the author may have been a Conservative Evangelical Christian with a subterfuge agenda of repackaging and remarketing the same old religion) this suspicion and accusation absolutely cannot be made of David Rudel’s ”The Gospel You’ve Never Heard”. He leaves little to the imagination when he expresses the hope ”…to break the hegemony [of the] evangelicals”, pg. 170. He also goes on the clarify that by “evangelicals” he means “Conservative Evangelicals”, recognizing and apologizing for any overgeneralizations (pg. 7), then goes full-steam ahead.
Where in Andrew Farley’s ”The Naked Gospel” I had asked ”who exactly is this book aimed at?”, David Rudel’s answers point-blank. ”I’ve tried to make the book meaningful to evangelicals, liberal Christians, and non-believers.” (pg. 2).
~
Although ”The Gospel You’ve Never Heard” by David Rudel is a man after my own heart – namely biblically and theologically ‘gunning’ down the Conservative Evangelical – I have to wonder whether this is a good or healthy position to begin with. I mean, wouldn’t it seem like little more than a debate or rebuke against a preexisting position; a contradicting shadow against another’s position? But once this book is gotten into I’ve found very little evidence to support this concern. If anything, this apparent anti-Conservative-Evangelical angle is little more than a segue to enter David Rudel’s topic at hand.
Having said this, maybe comparing this book to Andrew Farley’s ”The Naked Gospel” isn’t such a good idea. I’m going to inevitably paint a picture otherwise! But Andrew Farley makes some pretty flawed statements (presented as facts) and leaves himself wide open. He states, ”If we accept God’s blood-only economy… blood sacrifice is the only action that results in forgiveness and cleansing. This was true in the Old Testament and there’s no exception today.” Andrew Farley, The Naked Gospel, pg. 135.
Well… if you, my gentle reader, will allow me to use this expression, David Rudel tears him a new one on page 160 in ”The Gospel You’ve Never Heard”.
He begins by addressing the defining differences between expiation and propitiation.
Regarding Vicarious Punishment, he says, ”Strictly speaking, this is not even propitiation, which refers to wrath being cooled due to a change of disposition… The Vicarious Punishment… does not provide actual propitiation. It simply claims the wrath was vented on someone else.”, pg. 162.
He then (I believe somewhat comically) cites and example of ”When God relented of the wrath in store for Nineveh (Jonah 3:10), the Almighty didn’t have to blow up one of Jupiter’s moons to exhaust the pent-up anger”. pg. 163.
Once again, David Rudel cannot be accused of speaking in Christianese (as Andrew Farley has). He is using certain terms and terminology, but clearly defines them.
Andrew Farley’s ”The Naked Gospel” previous quoter’s point being that sacrifices have always been and must always be of blood and that ”Jesus’ blood sacrifice on the cross was the once and for all blood sacrifice” provides the appeasement of God’s wrath now becomes, at the very least, questionable.
Now add to that the numerous biblical examples Rudel provides of non-blood sacrifices.
Exodus 30:15 made through silver. Numbers 16:46 made through incense. Numbers 31:50 through jewelry. Lev. 5:13, Exo. 32:30, Numbers 8:21, 2 Chronicles 30:18. (He even offers the possibility of sacrifices being for a purpose other than expiation or propitiation, ”…passages like Leviticus 19:20-22 suggest the guilt offerings were actually the punishment itself. Rather than a bribe or payoff of God, the sacrifice is more like a fine designed to deter sin”., pg. 162)
Let me just finish off my comparisons between these two books. Andrew Farley’s ”The Naked Gospel” at approximately 70,000 words put me past my ‘allowed’ time frame of 30 days to read and write a review on, while David Rudel’s ”The Gospel You’ve Never Heard”, at over 85,000 words (estimate) took about 12 days.
What’s interesting is that I – personally – like Andrew Farley’s “gospel” (not book) better. It’s a truth I would prefer. David Rudel’s “gospel” (again, not book) isn’t as attractive to me, but more convincing.
This book addresses difficult issues that I know I have (and continue to ) struggle with. The author identifies apparent conflicts between Old Testament and New Testaments. He identifies apparent conflicts between the teachings of Jesus and Paul. He attempts to broach these difficult issues by redefining our understanding of salvation and judgment and presenting the possibility that these two issues may not be intrinsically linked, but separate issues.
He presents the idea that “salvation” be something less juvenile and more mature than simply making it to Heaven, or avoiding Hell; both somewhat spiritually hedonistic endeavors!
One of the most memorable (and continuing to echo in my conscious) questions he asks is, ”What gospel can Christ and His apostles preach if Jesus forbids them to tell anyone He was the Christ, and His disciples do not realize He is going to die after He tells them in private?” pg. 98. It would seem to very strongly suggest the gospel has nothing to do with Judgment or post-Judgment “bliss” (heaven).
In Dead Off-Center I voiced a view and a concern about an option outside of either the Law-only or Grace-only dichotomy. Andrew Farley’s ”The Naked Gospel” does little to explore these concerns, but really – more or less – confirms this dichotomy. David Rudel’s ”The Gospel You’ve Never Heard”, however, seems to identify with my similar concerns. He gives a great analogy – a parable perhaps – of three artists in Budapest running orphanages for artistically talented children (pg. 77-79) demonstrating there are other options than legalism or licentiousness.
This book also brought to light a challenge for me. Although I had said I agreed with Andrew Farley’s ”The Naked Gospel’s” point regarding the Law of Sabbath Observance and Tithing (calling it the church’s modern day Membership and Revenue Stream) as relating to the (now defunct) priesthood of the Old Testament times. However, this does not and cannot “write-off” all observation of Mosaic-law. This does not give us carte-blanc to become antinomian.
When Jesus is asked which is the greatest (Mosaic) Law, he answers to love God and to love your neighbour as yourself (Lev. 19:18). Although we are not bound to tithe we are to help the poor (Deu. 15:7), the orphans, and the widowed (Deu. 24:20).
This is not the abandonment of Mosaic-law…
…but simply not the abuse of it:
If forces me to at least question my own motives. Do I use the defunct Tithing “law” to possibly justify not helping the poor, or orphan, or widows? I can only hope not!
We underestimate the Torah.
”The Gospel You’ve Never Heard’s” good news is a people-orientated one. It has precious little to do with the hedonistic and gnostic Heaven of eternal bliss of the Afterlife.
This gospel is much more practical and one of live and caring for your fellow man.
‘Seph
Aug 2nd, 2010
cfalvo
This book has been sitting on my desk for a while now, and I feel bad that I haven’t gotten around to reviewing it until now.
The Good: One feature I really liked was at the end of each chapter, there was a section entitled “Summary and Final Notes.”
The Bad: Whoever thought it would be a good idea to bold Scripture quotes in the text, let me tell you…it was a bad idea. In my opinion, it made the book more difficult to read and was a huge distraction.
Something else that irks me about this book was a little disclaimer on the copyright page:
Version 1.3
Due to the author’s zeal overrunning his good judgment, an uncorrected version of this work made it into retail channels previously.
One would think that they now have corrected the typos in this version…but alas, that is not so.
In Mark 9:43-49Jesus… (22)
That was just one of many typos that should have also been fixed between the first version and this version.
Finally, Rudel seems to ignore 2000 years of interpretation history. I don’t recall one quote from the Church Fathers.
The Ugly: None
Overall, I thought the book was interesting. Much like the author of the Forward, there were parts that I agreed with and there were parts that I didn’t agree with. But the book did challenge me. It made me think.
I give this book a solid three stars.
Aug 9th, 2010
pomotheo
…..Moving on to the second book, which I’m still hashing through: The Gospel You’ve Never Heard from David Rudel. Firstly, he could have spent more time editing this edition because it seemed to be rushed. Secondly, he could also benefit from an extensive bibliography. Why a bibliography? Because the postulations he makes are at some points stupendously heretical…. or at least to the average churchgoer looking to pick a fight.
This is a tough book to get through not because of its writing, but because of its content. Chapter after chapter run of the mill evangelicals are challenged to abandon status quo theology and instead explore what scripture might actually say. Bibliography would’ve helped me research in depth some of the statements he was making. Since I don’t have his resources I’m left with more questions than answers, and more skepticism than acceptance.
That’s not to say this is a book to avoid. In fact, I’m a HUGE fan of books that challenge the mundane status quo that is evangelicals (usually loosely based on some spawn of reformed theology) that’s left the church utterly powerless today. I recommend picking this title up and taking the ideas seriously, but exploring your own answers to the questions Rudel raises.
Aug 12th, 2010
for “The Gospel You’ve Never Heard: Who Really Goes to Hell? by David Rudel”
You must be logged in as a VIRAL BLOGGER to post a review.