Alternative Missiology

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected

| PentecostalTheology.com

440

Book Reviews / Pneuma 32 (2010) 431-473

Waldron Byron Scott, The Renewal of All Things: An Alternative Missiology (Eugene, Ore.: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2009). viii + 221 pp., $24.99 hardback; $14.99 paper.

For Waldron Scott, “contextualization is the defining feature of all missiology” (p. x). Accordingly, his objective is to present a contextualized theology of universal salvation for the “planetary postmodern movement” (p. ix). It is clear that Scott means to contextualize “his gospel” completely, not merely to indigenize it, and it is highly unlikely that tradi- tional Pentecostal /Evangelical scholars will find his efforts pleasing. Though he states straightforwardly that he “value[s] the biblical metanarrative highly and base[s] this book upon it” (p. x), he does not frame his view of the Bible in terms such as revelation, inspi- ration, or authority. He never attempts to engage in what most Evangelicals would see as exegesis, showing little concern for questions such as the contextual meaning of the text, but rather focusing on novel interpretations mediated by scientific or anthropological the- ory. For example, toward the end of the book he states that “theistic evolution explains . . . [evil, especially natural evil] . . . more helpfully than traditional readings of the Scriptures do” (p. 189).

Scott’s argument begins with an explanation of his cosmology, embracing theistic but nevertheless random evolution — seeing random freewill as deeply “built-into-nature” (p. 17) — and rejecting intelligent design. While there may or may not be anything par- ticularly scandalous in this cosmology, what is surprising is the degree to which he allows evolution to determine or contradict what the Scriptures say. For example, he avers that “we do well to think of the serpent [in Genesis 3:1ﬀ] as a metaphor for the genetic heri- tage of H[omo] Sapiens,” over and against the Biblical writers who clearly identify the snake as a ﬁgure of Satan. As the argument progresses, Scott will somewhat breezily explain how the development of the human genetic heritage over the course of nearly a million years supports his doctrine of universal salvation. Along the way, he will reinter- pret the Old Testament in the light of Girardian mimesis, thus rejecting the whole sacriﬁ- cial concept and its meaning for the atonement. He includes a chapter on the Axial Age to explore whether “YHWH [was] present to peoples outside Israel” (p. 53) and whether he “directly inspired” the great religions and philosophies of the world. He straightforwardly declares that we should not “cling to the notion that [the demonically-interlaced Chris- tian] religion is superior to others (p. 167).

After oﬀering a revisionist reading of the New Testament and a universalistic theory of the atonement, he goes on to make the central argument of his book, i.e., that “God determined from eternity past not only to redeem the universe [from the corruptions inherent in the evolutionary process] but also to save and renew the human race in toto — everyone who has ever lived or ever will live” (p. 119). He recognizes that there are Biblical texts that suggest that “some persons will be eternally separated in hell from the presence of God and tormented there without end,” (such as Matthew 25:41 and John 5:28-29), as well as texts that suggest universal salvation (such as I Corinthians 5:22 and I Timothy 4:10). Although he endorses creative tension for some paradoxical concepts (p. 173), he rejects that approach with respect to universal salvation. “If I am to obey the Lord’s command to make disciples of all nations,” he reasons, “I want to be able to com- municate the good news with clarity and conviction” (p. 127). Accordingly, he dissolves

1

Book Reviews / Pneuma 32 (2010) 431-473

441

the tension by choosing to trump eternal damnation with universal salvation. Since many of the deepest doctrines of Christianity are paradoxical, such as simul justus et peccator, free will and predestination, the dual nature of Christ, and the Trinity — seemingly requiring believers to hold polar options in faithful tension — it is unfortunate that he felt com- pelled to dissolve the tension inherent in the mystery of salvation.

Te argument Scott makes in favor of universal salvation is marred by his hermeneutic as well as his rhetorical strategy. In considering the traditional position that people face eternal perdition without Christ, he engages a second-hand reference to the webpage of an unnamed pastor who presents God as a merciless tormentor of the damned. A more con- vincing argument might have been made by seeking to refute the careful arguments of a prominent contemporary theologian. Given the academic sophistication of some parts of his argument, it is curious that Scott interacts with straw-man positions (pp. 147-150) at the crucial point of his argument. He goes on to oﬀer a specious nineteenth century word study to prove that aioniōs does not mean eternal. A more sophisticated approach to Bibli- cal semantics would require some exegetical attention to particular texts to discern what individual biblical authors meant by aioniōs or any other word. While the contextual meaning of scriptural passages and words does not seem to be authoritative for Scott, his argument falls ﬂat for anyone who does recognize the verbal inspiration and theological authority of the Scriptures.

Scott’s missiological proposal oﬀers nothing particularly original and depends com- pletely on the success of his argument for universalism. In my view, he fails to make that case biblically or in any other way. He expects that “some will call his [proposal] heretical” (p. 119), and it is unlikely that he will be left disappointed. Perhaps most importantly, he states that “Today . . . the Spirit is empowering us to overcome our natural pre- judices toward others. Te Spirit is enabling us to conquer the Darwinian spirit of exclu- siveness — the selﬁsh gene — that for so long has gone hand in hand with the belief that only ‘we’ are God’s chosen people” (p. 175). Such a claim inevitably calls not only for a critical reading, but also for the discerning of spirits.

Reviewed by Joseph L. Castleberry President

Northwest University, Kirkland, Washington

2