If scripture is not the final authority no wonder he denies hell

Doug Pagitt, an emerging church leader, makes a blod statement in his debate with Chris Rosebrough on hell: "Scripture is not the final authority".

And that, as James White of Alpha and Omega ministries pointed out, is the dividing line.

Because either your final point of reference is God's revealed Word, or it is not. What alternative replaces the Word as final authority will vary from person to person and from religion/cult/group to religion/cult/group. Despite all the postmodern guff, in the final analysis, Pagitt's authority is his own subjective feeling.

He would deny that - well he would, wouldn't he?

It was interesting in the debate that Pagitt got very defensive at one point. He was cornered. It wasn't so much that he denied hell, but his foundations were being exposed. And for an anti-foundationalist, that's a tough spot to be in.

I wish Chris had spent a little more time proving hell from Jesus' words, the wider teaching of the NT and then backed this up with more quotations from the Church Fathers and beyond. But Chris did a good job nonetheless.

The debate begins here:

Hell Debate Part 1 of 7 from Doug Pagitt on Vimeo.

No doctrine, or denial of it, exists in a vacuum. Pagitt denies hell because he has a different worldview from Rosebrough. Pagitt denies Scripture as finally authoritative. Rosebrough, however, is a historic Christian. Pagitt, despite his warnings to Rosebrough about imposing a tradition on the text and being a 'player' in the reading of the text is guilty of finding the speck in his brothers eye...