Heaven Wins

I’m 60 years old and ever since I was in Bible college I have clung to the reason for the existence of evil being the necessity of mutually exclusive options in order for free will to exist. And of course, free will being a necessary element of love. I have always wondered how God will maintain freewill and keep eternity free from evil after the Judgment. I have also reasoned that since God continually refers to Himself as Creator that He must be “continuing to work” at creating. Heaven Wins has drawn all this together and increased my fervor for evangelism and DEEPENED my love for my Father's fathomless love. Thank you, Don, for writing this book!

A. Simpson’s diatribe against HEAVEN WINS is so impishly misleading as to hint of malice. I wrote Heaven Wins to OPPOSE Universalism—a view espoused, for example, by Rob Bell in his book LOVE WINS. No matter! Simpson brands ME a Universalist! Simpson says I coined the word 'Inclusivism' to label a supposed new brand of Universalism and even adds an alternate term—“Neo-universalism”—to caricature my theological position. In fact, ‘Inclusivism’ is a term that has been in vogue for quite some time. C. S. Lewis was an Inclusivist. So, too, are several modern conservative evangelical theologians whom I quote in Heaven Wins. None of them are Universalists because all affirm (as did Lewis) that Jesus Christ is the one and only Savior of mankind. In Simpson’s mind, ‘Inclusivism’ portends that people can be saved apart from Christ’s atonement. Not so! What Inclusivism does mean is this: Just as general revelation—creation’s spectacular witness to the true God—drew Melchizedeks and Jobs to saving faith ages ago apart from knowledge of the full content of the Gospel as we know it, so too general revelation has ever been drawing a similar few throughout the world to a faith-based relationship with God. The salvation of these “other sheep” (John 10:16) derives just as much from Jesus’ atonement as does our salvation today! Christ, after all, is “a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek” (Psalm 110:4)! In this New Testament era these already-living-by-the-truth John 3:21 responders serve advantageously as first endorsers for the Gospel if and when faithful messengers proclaim it among them. From that moment onward, the Gospel powerfully amplifies the prior wordless witness of the heavens and the earth by elucidating in clear human language what our Creator accomplished by incarnating himself among us. If Simpson believes that Job and Melchizedek are in God’s presence even now, to that degree Simpson is an Inclusivist! Simpson also mistakes a second theological term, ‘salvific,’ as if it means “saving.” I define ‘salvific’ on page 76 as “viably appointed to induce repentance and faith” leading to salvation. General revelation is thus salvific only as it persuades people like Job to supplicate God for mercy. It follows that the New Testament Gospel is “even more deeply informative and even more effectively and widely salvific” (p. 78) than wordless creation around us can ever be. In Simpson’s imagination, every sacred passage that affirms the New Testament Gospel as salvific somehow implies an invisible second clause denoting general revelation as no longer salvific (as if part of holy scripture is written with invisible ink!). In HW I summon 15 biblical texts as witnesses that general revelation is still salvific for modern ‘Jobs’ and ‘Melchizedeks’ wherever they are found. Simpson sidesteps all 15 weighty biblical testimonies, apparently without even a glance. Simpson thinks my premise that a large majority of mankind will be saved is also a tenet from Inclusivism. Wrong again! I base that premise on extensive biblical evidence (detailed in HW) that everyone who dies prior to a ‘moment of accountability’ is covered by the sacrifice of Christ and enters heaven. Medical science and historical data affirm that a huge majority of mankind has died due to miscarriage, abortion, stillbirth, or as infants or young children beset by plagues, natural disasters et al. Is that multi-billion majority of mankind saved or lost? In Heaven Wins, I trace God’s reassuringly positive answer to this, the gravest question one can possibly ask. When Jesus said, “Straight is the gate that leads to life and few find it,” he was referring to the fate of people mature enough to seek safety via a “gate.” Infants and young children in general do not fit in that category. Completely apart from the content of Heaven Wins, Simpson tries to confer ‘guilt by association’ by linking my name with organizations with which I have no affiliation. I have no association with “the Emergent Church,” “the New Apostolic Reformation” or the “World Christian Gathers [sic] of Indigenous Peoples (WCGIP).” Last, referencing an online article, “Deception in the Church,” A. Simpson alleges that “blasphemous translations of the Bible” foster “false names” for God (Allah, for example). Simpson seems unaware that every time he/she says “theology” (from the Greek word 'Theos') or “deity” (from the Latin word 'Deus'), he/she is endorsing an ‘a.k.a.’ for Elohim that the Apostles and/or the early Church accepted directly out of at-the-time pagan contexts. Even ‘God’ in English was lifted from a pagan context centuries ago. Likewise, Arabic-speaking Christians avow that their ancestors used 'Allah' as their valid equivalent for the name Elohim from Hebrew—a sibling Semitic language—long before Islam began. How daring of Simpson to officiate Arab terminology for Arabic speakers! Abandoning a time-honored name for God due to later misappropriation of that name by agents of evil cedes the victory to those evil agents, doesn’t it? Don Richardson

Amazing, requires much thought

Heaven Wins is an excellent case for the view within the Christian Faith that God really loves all human beings equally and will give all an opportunity to receive His love and spend eternity in Heaven with Him after they die through Jesus Christ. In addition, God will insure that all children including unborn children and mentally disabled people who are unable to make an active choice to receive God's love in the gospel, are automatically granted a place in Heaven. This view which is technically called Inclusivism is in contrast to the view of a significant number of Christians today, who believe the Bible is God's inspired word, that God only saves a select number of people whom He arbitrarily selects while the rest possibly including children are automatically sent to Hell with no real opportunity to avoid their plight. This type of belief technically called Exclusivism is still very popular within evangelical (Bible believing) Christian circles where it, along with Reformed theology which it is based on is often considered to be the only solid Biblical view. I still carry around with me a sort of ingrained prejudice at an emotional level, that was given to me in my early days as a new Christian believer that Calvinist and Reformed Theology is more solid than any other form of theology even though now on the basis of both Scripture and my own personal experience of my relationship with God, I believe this theology is really heretical and unbiblical and a serious misrepresentation of the True God and Father of Jesus Christ's Character. As a new believer, friends who introduced me to Reformed Theology also caused me to doubt my salvation and even my faith in Jesus Christ as being the true faith in the True God. There are two reasons for this: First, if God selects some to be saved arbitrarily, how can anyone know for sure they are truly among the elect? How could I or any other believer be really sure I was saved, perhaps I didn't say the sinner's prayer with enough faith or I didn't have a serious enough sense of my own sin. Secondly, the theology of double predestination which follows logically from any form of Exclusivist theology really calls into question whether God is really a God of love at all. If God sentences people to Hell, without giving them any opportunity to choose Heaven, including young children, etc., how can He be worthy of our trust, how is He different from totalitarian human leaders who kill often arbitrarily some people while blessing others? Don Richardson, in Heaven Wins, as a respected evangelical leader and thinker has had the courage to present this reasoned Biblical case for Inclusivism and God's inclusive love for all humankind when I'm sure some who are considered "Biblically solid" teachers will write him off as no better than a Liberal Christian. Don Richardson ,who has seen the power of the gospel work even with headhunting cannibals, has a clear reasoned case with numerous Scriptures to back up his arguments that God really does love every human being and will do His utmost to see that every human being is blessed in a relationship with Himself in this life and given a place in Heaven in the next. The only thing God cannot do in His love is override human free will and so those who reject His love permanently will have to face eternity in Hell. Heaven Wins, really gives every Christian who believes in the Bible the confidence to walk in God's love and share it with everyone else on the face of the Earth. The book also exposes the error of Exclusivism and Calvinistic Reformed Theology that it is based on, so that a Christian does not have to let this age old heresy which is often falsely accepted as Christian orthodoxy rob him or her of his assurance of salvation or of his or her passion to share God's love and the gospel of Jesus Christ with all humankind from his or her next door neighbour to the ends of the Earth.

Some interesting ideas. God Wins!

Like Richardson’s earlier books, Heaven Wins offers a mind-stretching elucidation of topics rarely or minimally covered by other authors. He offers biblical support for his opinions in ways this avid reader has not seen elsewhere in print. So it is disturbing to see a 1-star review (Simpson) that blatantly misrepresents the author as unbiblical, given the myriad scriptures Richardson provides for his findings. If one reads only part of this book, he might draw ‘conclusions’ he would soon realize are unfounded had he read all of it. Simpson’s 'review' makes claims that are proven faulty by the book’s actual content. In HW an idea may be first explained in its historical or biblical context and then is expanded on later. Or, for example, back cover text coupled with the chapter titles might cause one to wonder if the author is abandoning his belief in Jesus as man’s only Savior. Is he now a universalist as Simpson claims? No, the book clearly shows he is not. His opening critique of Rob Bell’s book Love Wins states universalism is unbiblical; there is a literal hell where people suffer eternally. He says: "I discount [Rob] Bell's conclusion that hell is temporary rather than eternal." Richardson shows how universalism differs from Exclusivism and Inclusivism (which is not, as Simpson claims, a new ‘category’ akin to universalism). Chapters 4 & 5 examine the concept of an age of accountability and data vis-à-vis heaven’s population. Chapter 4 quotes from the Old Testament, the Gospels and the Epistles. Chapter 5 cites data showing that throughout history, 80% or more of mankind has died by or before age 5 -– via miscarriage, stillbirth, abortion, infant mortality or child mortality. The author presents biblical teaching that they incur no judgment and will be saved forever. He thus asserts that heaven’s total population will exceed that of hell – but NOT because all will be saved. (Other scriptures, such as Matt. 7:13-14, suggest otherwise; the author’s comments on such texts are helpful.) Rather, the unborn or very young will not have lived long enough to understand moral culpability so are covered by Christ's sacrifice. God alone knows when a person passes his or her age of accountability. Such people will comprise a minority of mankind and appear before God in judgment to account for how they responded to Truth. Though a majority of people who live past their age of accountability are probably lost (in light of the `few' who `find' the straight gate), this majority of a small minority will still be a minority of the total. Richardson confidently proclaims that Heaven not only won the moral victory at the Cross but will also win the quantitative victory of souls created in God's image that will live eternally with Him. Richardson shows the error of equating universalism (the belief that all will be saved) with Inclusivism; for true Inclusivists believe, as do Exclusivists, that Jesus Christ is the only way of salvation. The key difference between these two latter groups is that Inclusivists believe the redeemed include the ‘Jobs’ and ‘Melchizedeks’ of the world — i.e., those who come to God in faith based on truth learned about Him via the witness of creation, without knowing details of special revelation, a la Psalm 50:1-5, Hebrews 11:6, Romans 2:4 and 10:17-18, John 3:21, Acts 17:27 and many other verses. Christ’s atonement covered such mercy-supplicating souls in the Old Testament (even though such believers didn't know the details available to us in the Church age), and it still does today. Richardson tackles thorny issues with precision, always affirming scripture’s authority but daring to say we have not adequately lined up the full testimony of scripture on certain topics. The author repeatedly states his belief in Christ’s atonement as sin’s only remedy. Some examples: "Christ's work at Calvary is still the one and only atonement for sin" (p. 100). "Every sermon I have ever preached...has acknowledged Jesus Christ by name as the one and only Son of God and Savior of mankind" (p. 130). "Thank you, Exclusivist pastors and theologians, for teaching us about the plenary inspiration of Scripture, the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, the Atonement, the physical resurrection of our Lord, the Second Coming, the new birth, justification by faith, sanctification, and more. We [Inclusivists] hold all of these truths dear, as do you" (p. 143). Universal salvation and/or universal reprobation are "unacceptable, of course" (p. 163). "God's only remedy for sin provided via the atonement of Jesus Christ" (p. 173). The last part of Heaven Wins presents a sobering exposé of dire choices that caused the Church to wander from its early path of obedience to the ‘Great Commission,’ with tragic results. Richardson weighs direct quotes from several noted Christian historical figures against their tragic impact. These quotes and concomitant actions may shock some readers, but they are part of history and have left their mark. The author, a noted missionary leader, issues a concluding urgent appeal to all Christians to obey the example and final command of their Lord. Every book has its cheerleaders, critics, and dispassionate readers. The fair thing to do is to read the entire book and form opinions on the basis of its actual content and not on the basis of what someone else claims is found therein.

The majority of people who read books usually read with their own theology as a guide to help them understand whether what they are reading is truth or not. Before they even pick up a book, it has been judged. Those who have clung to the idea that "broad and wide leads to destruction" is to be interpreted that the majority of people are going to hell, have a hard time understanding/seeing Don's excellent understanding of the scriptures. It is so foreign to them. But with an open mind, it is easy to see what Don is saying. Don DOES say there are people going to hell. He leaves us no doubt where he stands on this. He is NOT a Universalist. But his excellent insight into the scriptures helps us to see that God does win in the end. There are going to be more people in heaven than in hell, even though "Broad and wide leads to destruction" is still accurate for those above the age of accountability. This book is so refreshing and so insightful, I am making it a required reading for my homeschooling community. Don's books shows the absolute sovereignty of God over the sinfulness of man. What joy there is to the soul when we see this in the "big picture of things." I find nothing in Don's book unbiblical or unacceptable. Though he does challenge "standard doctrine" in certain circles, he does it biblically and lovingly. Either Simpson read it with such preconceived ideas that he totally missed what Don was saying--or he never read Don's book at all. Don't take Simpson's review as solid. Read the others and the book itself. You'll be delighted!

Wow, what a unique and refreshing perspective. I started the book on a Sunday afternoon and finished it that same night - couldn't put it down! Why have scholars rarely taken the age of accountability seriously, when the doctrine has life and death implications for such a huge portion of humanity - to mention just one salient point? Lock-step Calvinists will likely find themselves uncomfortable reading this material. Because Richardson is neither Reformed nor Arminian in the classical sense of the terms, his mind is free to explore a wider panorama of Biblical solutions to vexing questions, in ways that others, steeped in their respective theological paradigms, may not. Is God great and glorious enough to handle genuine free will exercised by the citizens of his domain? Does he value their voluntary expression of love?And what is love if not voluntary? Does the redemptive story playing out here on earth have cosmos-wide implications? I savor the thought. The disciples could not have imagined the world we live in today, much less (can any of us imagine) the future that God has prepared for all of us in the age to come. Thanks once more to Don Richardson for stimulating our hearts and minds with courage and clarity.

Heaven Wins is an excellent case for the view within the Christian Faith that God really loves all human beings equally and will give all an opportunity to receive His love and spend eternity in Heaven with Him after they die through Jesus Christ. In addition, God will insure that all children including unborn children and mentally disabled people who are unable to make an active choice to receive God's love in the gospel, are automatically granted a place in Heaven. This view which is technically called Inclusivism is in contrast to the view of a significant number of Christians today, who believe the Bible is God's inspired word, that God only saves a select number of people whom He arbitrarily selects, while the rest possibly including children are automatically sent to Hell with no real opportunity to avoid their plight. This type of belief technically called Exclusivism is still very popular within evangelical (Bible believing) Christian circles where it, along with Reformed theology which it is based on is often considered to be the only solid Biblical view. I still carry around with me a sort of ingrained prejudice at an emotional level, that was given to me in my early days as a new Christian believer that Calvinist and Reformed Theology is more solid than any other form of theology even though now on the basis of both Scripture and my own personal experience of my relationship with God, I believe this theology is really heretical and unbiblical and a serious misrepresentation of the True God and Father of Jesus Christ's Character. As a new believer, friends who introduced me to Reformed Theology also caused me to doubt my salvation and even my faith in Jesus Christ as being the true faith in the True God. There are two reasons for this: First, if God selects some to be saved arbitrarily, how can anyone know for sure they are truly among the elect? How could I or any other believer be really sure I was saved, perhaps I didn't say the sinner's prayer with enough faith or I didn't have a serious enough sense of my own sin. Secondly, the theology of double predestination which follows logically from any form of Exclusivist theology really calls into question whether God is really a God of love at all. If God sentences people to Hell, without giving them any opportunity to choose Heaven, including young children, etc., how can He be worthy of our trust, how is He different from totalitarian human leaders who kill often arbitrarily some people while blessing others? Don Richardson, in Heaven Wins, as a respected evangelical leader and thinker has had the courage to present this reasoned Biblical case for Inclusivism and God's inclusive love for all humankind when I'm sure some who are considered "Biblically solid" teachers will write him off as no better than a Liberal Christian. Don Richardson ,who has seen the power of the gospel work even with headhunting cannibals, has a clear reasoned case with numerous Scriptures to back up his arguments that God really does love every human being and will do His utmost to see that every human being is blessed in a relationship with Himself in this life and given a place in Heaven in the next. The only thing God cannot do in His love is override human free will and so those who reject His love permanently will have to face eternity in Hell. Heaven Wins, really gives every Christian who believes in the Bible the confidence to walk in God's love and share it with everyone else on the face of the Earth. The book also exposes the error of Exclusivism and Calvinistic Reformed theology that it is based on, so that a Christian does not have to let this age old heresy which is often falsely accepted as Christian orthodoxy rob him or her of his assurance of salvation or of his or her passion to share God's love and the gospel of Jesus Christ with all humankind from his or her next door neighbour to the ends of the Earth.