God Unbound (Chad Bahl) -- A Review
GOD UNBOUND: An Evangelical Reconsiders Tradition in Search of Truth. Second Edition. By Chad Bahl. Nampa, ID: SacraSage Press, 2022.
Theology
is not just the province of the academically trained scholar. It is something
that we all engage in. Hopefully, all Christians are committed to the search
for truth, even if that means asking hard questions about the traditions we
inhabit. While some of us do this professionally, it’s also useful for
laypersons to engage in the process of asking questions and seeking the truth,
no matter where it leads. This can be difficult, especially if we are part of
more conservative traditions. But, it’s necessary. I know, from personal
experience!
In God Unbound, Chad Bahl offers us his take on a journey of discovery that has
forced him to reconsider his evangelical roots. Bahl has written this book as
an evangelical who has come to embrace an open and relational theology. He is a
layperson without advanced theological training. He does have a doctorate in
pharmacology, which means he has a background in the sciences. I would think
that a good scientist wants to ask hard questions, so this is a good starting
point for such an exercise as this one is. I should mention that Bahl also has
a blog—TheLayTheologian.com.
Bahl's
book, God Unbound, was originally self-published in 2016 using the Lulu
platform. More recently he has republished the book with SacraSage Press, which
was created by Tom Oord to share books on Open and Relational Theology. What I
don’t know is the degree to which it was revised. There is a reference to the Center
for Open and Relational Theology, and organization of which I am part, but I
believe that Tom Oord set this center up quite recently (before 2016). So,
there may be a few adjustments, but as far as I can tell this is essentially
the same book as Bahl put together in 2016. The difference is that SacraSage
gives him a broader audience.
So, my
take on Bahl’s book is as follows. This is a relatively brief book that offers
Bahl’s reasons for leaving behind the “classical theism,” which he believes
dominates evangelicalism. Once he found it compelling, but have encountered
open theism, he no longer embraces that version of Christian theology.
Evangelicalism claims to be biblical, but Bahl isn’t quite so sure. In fact, he
believes that Open and Relational Theology is more biblical than classical
theism. The problem, in Bahl’s mind with classical theism is that it is
indebted to (Plato/Neoplatonism), which he believes has led Christians and
evangelicals to stray from a truly biblical theology. Since this is the
starting point of the book, I want to push a bit on it. While much traditional
Christian theology was developed in conversation with Greek philosophical
traditions, including Platonism and Neoplatonism, I think it’s important to
distinguish this influence from the Hellenistic context in which Christianity
emerged. Paul was Jewish, but he preached in a Hellenistic context. He used the Greek language to communicate his vision of Jesus, and that required the use of
Greek philosophical ideas. In other words, he contextualized the message. The
same is true for his theological descendants, from Justin Martyr to Origen to
Augustine and on and on it goes. So, we need to be careful when we engage with
this early context in which Christianity took root.
So,
having made that qualification, we can address the issues Bahl surfaces,
especially the philosophical categories of immutability (unchanging) and
impassibility (no passions/emotions). The question is whether God can relate to
us if God is timeless, unchanging, and cannot be affected by God’s creation.
These are good questions, and those of us who have adopted an open and
relational perspective recognize that if God cannot be affected by the
creation, then it’s pretty difficult to imagine God relating to us in any real
way.
Having
raised this set of questions, Bahl like many within the movement challenges the
Calvinist/Reformed theology that dominates much of evangelicalism (chapter 2).
He finds the determinism of this version of Christian theology wanting. He
continues that conversation in chapter 3 with a word about the problem of pain.
This is the question of theodicy and whether God is at fault. I will note that
much of the conversation within open and relational circles focuses on
theodicy—the defense of God in the face of evil. Instead of a determining God,
Bahl believes the truth lies with the comforting/suffering God.
In
chapter 4, he takes up the important issue of our future destiny and whether unbelievers
face an eternity of suffering in hell. Bahl doesn’t embrace universalism, but
he doesn’t affirm eternal suffering either. Thus, he embraces annihilationism.
It is a perspective that is growing in popularity in evangelical circles among
those who cannot believe that a God of love would sentence humans to suffer
eternally. It’s a position that I too found attractive, and it does have strong
evangelical roots. But many of us have found that this ultimately doesn’t work.
It’s too limiting. It appears that Bahl is struggling here with biblical
literalism. He doesn’t want to be a literalist in one sense but he wants to be
true to Scripture. In his take on the situation, conditional immortality makes
the most sense. As for the idea of torment in hell, he traces that to
Augustine’s embrace of Plato, such that Augustine’s Platonic belief in the
immortal soul leads him to embrace hell as a possible destiny. Of course,
Christians embraced the idea of an immortal soul long before Augustine—see
Origen nearly two centuries earlier, if not before that.
In
chapter five, he brings science into the conversation. Again I see myself in
his journey, though I’m not a scientist. He wants to reconcile the science he
has learned with the faith that he embraces. He seems to still be struggling
with all of this. He leans toward
theistic evolution, but he’s not sure yet. Then in chapter six, he addresses
the challenge of bibliolatry. I think perhaps the idea of biblicism might be a
better term, but in any case, he takes up, in brief, the question of how we
should read scripture. Finally, in chapter seven he writes about escaping
evangelical elitism, though I would better characterize this as exclusivist
Christianity. It is clear that he wants to embrace an inclusivist Christianity
but not religious pluralism. He wants to envision a broader welcome but one
that requires them to be included in Christ.
As I
read the book I saw a lot of my former self in his reflections. I went through
many of the same stages of faith, asking questions and letting go of old beliefs.
I’m still on that path. I expect that the same will be true for Bahl. This book
represents a stop on the journey in search of the truth. He raises good
questions, though many answers are still to come. The importance here is to
remain open to new possibilities.
Because
Bahl seems to still be on the journey, I’d like to push him on a few things,
starting with his take on Hellenism. We need not embrace everything that goes
with what develops over time, but it’s important to acknowledge the importance
of the context in which Christianity emerged. The Hellenistic context enabled
the message of Jesus to go forth from Jerusalem. Theologians like Irenaeus,
Origen, and Augustine, sought to communicate what they believed was the
Christian message in a form that spoke to their contexts. That doesn’t mean
they got it right, but I think we need to give them credit for attempting this.
Lest we make Platonism the bogeyman, let’s also acknowledge that Open and
Relational theologians make use of modern philosophical systems to communicate
(Whitehead is not a pure biblical Christian). The historian in me is concerned
about how Bahl (and many Open and Relational folks) interpret early
Christianity. More specifically, it's important to remember that theology will
get contextualized, and so the theology that we have inherited will have
elements of that context. As far as the immortal soul, it is useful to remember
that Origen contemplated the likely possibility that all things ultimately will
be restored, and thus eternal torment isn’t in our future. Thus, Origen could
conceive of universal salvation. Just a note, Eastern Orthodox theologians tend
to be “classical theists” but many have embraced universal salvation in some
form. I would also like to push Bahl a bit on religious pluralism. He seems
open to some form of inclusion in Christ, but I think this needs further work.
In fact, this might help clarify some conflicting points of view I found
present in the book.
On the
science end, while I’m not a trained scientist, I want to push him further
along in his journey from the creationism he originally embraced. I would
suggest reading scientists and theologians such as John Polkinghorne and Jürgen
Moltmann. Philip Clayton and Tom Oord also write on the subject. He might even
enjoy reading my book Worshiping with Charles Darwin. He says he leans
toward theistic evolution, so I would like to push him further along the path.
There
is one other area I want to address, though it might appear that I’m being a
bit picky. However, I think it's important. Bahl tends to use masculine
language not only for God, which is common among evangelicals and even among
many non-evangelical Protestants, but he also uses language for human beings.
That is, he uses man and mankind generically for humans. While inclusive
language may seem politically correct, it is an important advance. Many women see
such language usage, especially in this day and age, as excluding them from the
conversation. I don’t believe Bahl means to do this but watching his language
will help communicate the message he believes is important, and that is the
love of Jesus for the world.
I am
honored to have had the opportunity to receive a copy of God Unbound from Chad and engage
with it. This is my hope, that Chad will continue his journey into an open
future!
Comments