Skip to content
blue map

5 Minutes with Todd Miles

Interview by Oren Martin –

 

In light of the debate over hell, universalism, and pluralism, should priority be given to certain attributes of God (e.g., holiness, love)?

It is the elevation of some attributes over others that has created  much, if not all, of the confusion over the reality of hell and the fate of the unevangelized. What is needed is a recovery of the doctrine of divine simplicity which states that God is always and totally who he is all the time, that he is simultaneously ALL that ALL of his attributes reveal. When we give priority to one attribute over another, we ignore the biblical presentation of God and end up distorting the character of God to the point of creating a God based on our own preferences, sensibilities, and desires. The biblical word for such creation is idolatry. Ironically, when we emphasize one attribute over another, like love over holiness, we not only distort who God is, but ironically we do not even get the attribute we are emphasizing correct. A telling example of this is Rob Bell’s book, in which he criticizes the doctrine of hell, appropriately titled, “Love Wins.” Bell presents an ultimate being, void of holiness, justice, and righteousness, based largely upon his own sentimentalities. The result is a god who more closely resembles a neighbor we think we would like to have than a transcendent being worthy of devotion, fear, and praise.

The key to holding love and holiness together is to allow God to define not only who he is, but to allow him to define the nature and scope of each of his attributes. The biblical presentation of the love and holiness of God is coherent and it is manifest beautifully at the cross of Christ. Fortunately, the God who spoke the universe into existence and sovereignly governs it is not limited by my capacity to understand exhaustively who he is and what he does.

How can the discipline of biblical theology help in rightly seeing the Holy Spirit’s work in the world and/or other religions?

The discipline of biblical theology encourages us to look to the Bible for the categories and vocabulary of theological inquiry. When we develop a biblical theology of the Holy Spirit, we find that the divine presentation of the work of the Spirit focuses on the glorification of the Son (John 16:4). This is not only the case now, but has been since creation and will be through to the consummation of all things. Many pluralists and inclusivists are currently turning to Pneumatology to justify their proposals. They hope that the Spirit might work in and through other religions (apart from the Son) to save those who have not placed their trust in the Son. The problem with this is that the Bible’s own presentation of the Holy Spirit will not allow for that kind of separation. Biblical Theology forces us to recognize that the Bible is not pre-theoretical, but provides the forms and content of its own interpretation. Our theological inquiry and systematic constructions must be submitted to the authority of Scripture. Faithful Christians are not free to conjure up scenarios or experiment with new ideas, no matter how “compassionate” or “hopeful” the motivation, that run contrary to God’s own self-revelation.

How do the religions of the world fit into God’s plan of redemption? Is there truth in non-Christian religions?

These are really two different questions. With regard to the first, I would say that insofar as other religions do not tell the story of Jesus then they do not play a necessary role in God’s plan of redemption. In that way, they “fit” into God’s plan of redemption the way that sin and idolatry do. I appreciate Daniel Strange’s definition of non-Christian religions: “Non-Christian religions are sovereignly directed, variegated and dynamic human idolatrous distortions of divine revelation behind which evidence demonic deception. Being antithetically against yet parasitically dependent upon the truth of the Christian worldview, non-Christian religions are ‘subversively fulfilled’ in the gospel of Jesus Christ.” [D. Strange, “For their Rock is not as our Rock,” ETS National Meeting, 2011] With that definition in mind and in answer to the second question, we should expect there to be some truth in other religions. It would be folly and ignorance to deny it. We are all created imago Dei and we are all witnesses to God’s powerful self-revelation through creation and conscience. For example, other religions contain insights that mirror biblical wisdom on such topics as ethics, virtue, family maintenance, social justice, financial planning, etc. But Christianity, at its core, is not any of these things. Unless the story of Jesus is told, as presented by Jesus through his apostles, and unless there is encouragement and divine enablement to follow Jesus, then it is to that degree that other religions are fatally misleading, regardless of how “helpful” they may appear to be.

How should a Christian respond to the so-called universal atonement texts (e.g., John 12:32; Heb. 2:9; 1 John 2:2)?

By reading those texts in context. Unless one gets incredibly lucky, cherry-picking individual verses to justify a theological position while ignoring the immediate, book, and canonical contexts is always a recipe for disaster. A quick check of the context of these verses may not settle all the disputes about the extent of the atonement, but it is sufficient to reject universalist positions that demand that these verses teach that all will certainly be saved.

For example, John is crystal clear in both his Gospel and in his letters that only those who believe in Jesus will be saved and there is a horrific judgment that awaits those who are not reconciled to God (John 1:11-12; 3:16; 5:24, 39; 8:24; 10:25-26; 11:26; 20:31; 1 John 1:1-3, 7; 5:10-13). The writer of Hebrews is also emphatic on the same points (Heb 2:2-3; 6:4-6; 10:26-31). So the affirmations that Jesus draws all people to himself (John 12:32), that Jesus is the propitiation for the sins of the world (1 John 2:2), or that Jesus tasted death for everyone (Heb

2:9) cannot entail a universal reconciliation without exception. To cut directly to the chase on these examples, the contexts teach that Jesus draws all without distinction, both Jew and Gentile to himself (John 12:32), that the cross has universal and cosmic implications (1 John 2:2), and that Christ died and a bona fide offer of the gospel is available to all people (Heb 2:9), but not all will believe (note the limiting “many sons” who are brought to glory in 2:10).

What should be our response to the question, “What about those who have never heard the gospel?”

Exactly what the Bible says – Go tell them! Honestly, it is frustrating to me that some Christians treat the awesome mandate to share the gospel as if it were an embarrassing problem to overcome by philosophizing and theologizing over the state of the unevangelized (which tragically helps no one, least of all the unevangelized). The gospel solves the problem of human sin; it does not create problems! A few inclusivists and most pluralists are on record stating that religious others would be better off not hearing the gospel – it is far better to let them work out their “piety” within the framework of their own religious traditions. But the cross of Christ is a stumbling block, not because it distracts others from reaching God on the alternative path that they are on, but because humans are so sinful that the only means of salvation available is offensive to their fallen and pride-filled sensibilities. And yet, by the grace of God, when those who are called hear the gospel, they repent, believe and are saved. The biblical response to the question, “What about those who have never heard?” is an emphatic and unqualified “Go tell them!”

Todd Miles (B.S., M.S. in Nuclear Engineering at Oregon State University; M.Div., Western Seminary; PhD in Systematic Theology, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is Associate Professor of Theology at Western Seminary in Portland, Oregon. Before his doctoral studies Miles was a Research Engineer at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for ten years. Now Miles teaches Systematic Theology, Hermeneutics, and Ethics at Western Seminary. Miles is married to Camille and they have six children, Natalie, Ethan, Levi, Julius, Vicente, and Marcos. Miles serves as an elder at Hinson Memorial Baptist Church in Portland. Miles is the author of A God of Many Understandings? The Gospel and Theology of Religions (Nashville: B&H, 2010).

This interview is from the January issue of Credo Magazine, “In Christ Alone.” Read others like it today!

The January issue argues for the exclusivity of the gospel, especially in light of the movement known as inclusivism. This issue will seek to answer questions like: Can those who have never heard the gospel of Christ be saved? Will everyone be saved in the end or will some spend an eternity in hell? Must someone have explicit faith in Christ to be saved? Contributors include David Wells, Robert Peterson, Michael Horton, Gerald Bray, Todd Miles, Todd Borger, Ardel Caneday, Nathan Finn, Trevin Wax, Michael Reeves, and many others.

To view the magazine as a PDF Click Here

Advertisment
Back to Top