Much of the controversy surrounding "Love Wins" by Rob Bell has been created by individuals who issued judgment on a book they had never read. The publisher Harper One and Bell, very skillfully crafted a marketing plan that would generate premature responses from the established church. After reading "Love Wins" it appears that Rob Bell has done what he always does; he walks up to the line between heresy and orthodoxy and, like a toddler, touches the line and looks back at the "adults" to see what kind of response he can generate.
In my opinion, he hasn't crossed the line, but he has asked several probing and uncomfortable questions that many Christians are afraid to ask and few are able to answer.
This is Rob Bell's standard operating procedure - he asks open-ended questions and just lets them hang there for us to wrestle with. I believe that wrestling with these questions can make us better Christians, but some will be left unanswered in this life.
Here are a few passages of "Love Wins" that I question or challenge.
On pages 50-51 Bell suggests that "heaven has the potential to be a kind of starting over." As proof he observes that spiritual transformation doesn't happen overnight. "Our heart, our character, our desires, our longings - those things take time." These suggestions mirror re-incarnation where, if you don't get it right the first time, you get a second chance in a new life. But he never says that heaven IS "a kind of starting over", it just has the potential; Bell suggests that it's possible.
On page 56 he says that people who die are "in heaven, but without a body". As proof he states that "those currently 'in heaven' are not, obviously, here. And so they're with God, but without a body." But his proof assumes that God and eternity are constrained by time. What happens if, when we leave our earthly body, we also leave time as we know it? We could receive our resurrected body "instantly" being outside of time, while time on earth continues for years or centuries to come until the resurrection.
On several occasions, including page 58, Bell asserts that there is a "future coming together of heaven and earth in what [Jesus] and his contemporaries called life in the age to come." As I read scripture there will be a new heaven and a new earth, but I don't read where they come together and become one.
Bell's "social justice" leanings come out on page 75, where he asserts that the rich man in Hades wants the beggar Lazarus to serve him. The suggestion is that social injustice is one reason the rich man is confined to Hades. I don't find this class-warfare in the original story. The story Jesus told does include individuals from two classes, but nowhere does it suggest that the differences in class determined their destination. Is it possible this interpretation has crept up because of a false guilt that many Americans feel, because we've been so blessed?
On page 81 he asserts that Jesus' warnings on the "coming wrath" were for his contemporaries only and not for us. He believes that these warnings dealt with the political uprising that the Romans crushed in 66 CE. I'm not sure you can defend that position adequately. And haven't we seen that biblical prophecy can speak to several, even all, generations?
In my opinion, the most glaring scriptural omission to the book would have clearly challenged a section on page 108. In this paragraph Bell says that "many have refused to accept the scenario in which somebody is pounding on the door, apologizing, repenting, and asking God to be let in, only to hear God say through the keyhole: 'Door's locked. Sorry.'" However, this is the exact picture that Jesus himself paints in Matthew 24:36-39, and Luke 17:26-27, and again this image is used in 2 Peter 2:4-10.
On page 115 he assumes that because the gates of heaven are never shut, "people are free to come and go" from heaven. This assumption takes us where scripture does not go. Just because the gates are never shut, does not mean that people can come and go. It might mean that gates are defensive and after the judgment heaven's enemies will be defeated, so there will be no need for defensive measures. Or it could mean something entirely different; or it could mean nothing at all expect that the gates are not shut.
Pages 128-129 deal with the politically incorrect topic of talking about the "blood of Christ" in today's cultural setting. Bell states that, "what the first Christians did was look around them and put the Jesus story in language their listeners would understand" - namely blood sacrifice. However the first Christians did not have that option; God ordained the time and place for Christ's sacrifice. God established the sacrificial system, and the tabernacle/temple design. God used all of Hebrew history to foreshadow the crucifixion of Christ. It was God's story. If He wanted another analogy used, He would have picked another time and another method.
On page 145 I have a minor quibble with Bell. He states that the "energy that gives life to everything is called the Word of God." While it is a minor point, in the second chapter of Genesis and other places in scripture, the Word of God created all things, the Breath of God made man a living being.
Page 173 contains the assertion that if we die outside of a belief in, or relationship with, God, that God essentially becomes "a fundamentally different being." Is it possible that God does not change, and that we simply did not understand the full nature and character of God?
Finally, this statement from page 182 troubles me: " . . . we shape our God, and then our God shapes us." Maybe it is simply semantics but if we shape our God then He is no god at all. We may not ever fully understand God (how can a finite mind understand the infinite creator of the universe?), but the more we discover the true nature and character of God, the more we can be conformed to His likeness. If we shape our God, we will have little to change in our own lives.
Bottom line: Rob Bell does what he always does. He stretches the envelope; he asks tough questions that make us uncomfortable. Most of his questions he leaves unanswered. However, this kind of questioning can be beneficial to the Christian. If there is anything in my faith-life that can be shaken, it should be firmed up or removed altogether. With brothers like Rob Bell we will more frequently find those shakable areas. Once identified, we have the choice to become more like Christ or to walk away from Christ altogether. Do we want to be safe but shakable, or more firm in our faith because we have struggled with tough questions? The choice is ours . . . choose well.
You can find me on FACEBOOK at my Facebook Page (http://www.new.facebook.com/profile.php?id=504321719). Here's a link to my Flickr.com Page (http://www.flickr.com/photos/curtisferrell/) Thanks for reading!
Posts
