It seems like the conversation in many corners of the Christian Church this week has been overtaken by discussion of Rob Bell’s latest book Love Wins.
Last Monday I was in New York for his launch and interview with Lisa Miller. I didn’t stick around to buy a book and get it signed, but I did download it to Kindle the next morning. I finished it today.
After all the pre-release hubbub, I was expecting Rob to say something really off-the-wall. I have to admit I was a little nervous. I was worried that in his interview with Lisa Miller he would announce something that would demonstrate his radical departure from the Faith as we know it.
…When that didn’t happen, I was then worried that he left something major out of his talk, and had left a “bomb” in the book. So, I read the book always waiting for the “bomb” to be lurking on the next page.
It never came.
Simultaneously, I was (at first) intrigued, and then later appalled by how some in the church and media were treating Rob. I read Al Mohler’s response that “we’ve seen this all before,” I saw the horrific interview that Rob did with Martin Bashir, and then heard the ridiculous interview that Martin Bashir did with Paul Edwards about the Rob-Bell-interview-debacle.
Martin Bashir brazenly claims that Rob’s book makes a radical departure from “historic Christianity.”
Really? Is he kidding?
Al Mohler called Rob, and those who theologically agree with him, “no friend of the Gospel.”
Again, really?
THE statement of faith that has unequivocally defined The Christian Faith for over 1,600 years is the Nicene Creed. At no point in the book does Rob dispute the existence of God, the historical life of Jesus, the Divinity of Christ, the virgin birth, the pre-existence of Christ, the bodily Resurrection or the life-giving work of the Holy Spirit. He doesn’t reconfigure the Trinity, deny the salvific power of the Cross, or throw out the Sovereignty of God.
Love Wins isn’t some liberal screed about how Jesus is just some “nice guy,” who probably never said half the things he’s recorded as saying, whose Resurrection was a group hallucination, and who just wants us all to join hands and sing kumbaya.
In fact, not only does he not say anything against the various doctrinal points of the Creed, but he gives full-throated and passionate defences of the Incarnation and Resurrection.
The book totally and absolutely supports and affirms Creedal Christianity.
Martin Bashir would be better off sticking to Michael Jackson and leaving theology to the theologians.
The Nicene Creed doesn’t specifically invoke one theory or doctrine on salvation or atonement for a reason: it’s hard to nail down in the Bible. Sorry, Al.
It’s why Penal Substitutionary Atonement and “conscious belief” doesn’t make the Creedal cut.
So, Bell doesn’t abandon historic Christianity.
He DOES make a striking departure from some of the basic tenants of Evangelical/Reformed theology though.
And there’s the crux. And I think it’s an important distinction to make.
What has Bell’s book at the top of the charts (and top of the to-be-burned/banned list) is that he is challenging Evangelical/Reformed theology from WITHIN the Evangelical/Reformed tradition. Had this book been written by a Presbyterian, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Methodist, etc., it wouldn’t be making a ripple. Nor selling as many copies.
When most Reformed/Evangelical preachers and teachers teach on salvation they stick to a few verses of the Gospel of John and the writings of St. Paul.They avoid Matthew, Mark, and Luke’s treatment of salvation like the plague, because when Jesus talks about salvation in those gospels he is preaching anything but reformed theology.
A rich man comes to Jesus and asks what he needs to do to inherit eternal life, and Jesus tells him to follow a short-list of the Ten Commandments. A lawyer comes to ask Jesus the same question, and Jesus tells him to love God and his neighbor. Jesus says that it easier for a camel to squeeze through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to make it into Heaven. The goats are cast into Hell because they didn’t help those in need, and the Rich Man is found hot and thirsty in Hades because he didn’t share what he had with Lazarus.
Each of those teachings are about salvation, are from Jesus, and in the Bible. And each of them have nothing to do with Reformed Theology.
Now, belief/faith, repentance of sins, the sinfulness of humanity, and the saving grace of God are ALSO taught in terms of salvation throughout other parts of the New Testament. But, the New Testament as a whole isn’t monolithic or specifically clear on how exactly one inherits Eternal Life with God.
The New Testament IS clear that Jesus brings the Salvation of God, and Eternal Life springs from Him. And, Rob is clear about that too.
What Rob Bell does do open the door up a little wider than some are used to, and try to keep one foot in the belief-and-repentance stream of soteriology (Reformed), while at the same time sticking another foot in the stream of right living (as Jesus also taught).
It appears that the “other” stream is the one full of hot water, because he’s in a lot of it with those in his home-town camp.
In Love Wins he paints a picture of what the Life God gives us to live looks like now, and what it might look like in the Age to Come. And in this book he paints this picture sometimes helpfully, oftentimes poetically, and yes, at times clumsily. But, when you boil it all down, he says that the business of Heaven, Hell, and Eternal Life just isn’t as simple as it all sounds. It’s not all about us. It’s not even the main-point of Christianity as Jesus taught it. And, in the end God, and God’s love, will reign and prevail.
But, don’t try and tell that to Martin Bashir.
Rick Morley is an Episcopal priest, and his forthcoming book “Going to Hell, Getting Saved, and What Jesus Actually Says” is available on Kindle now.
Which Afterlife?
In his new book “Love Wins” Rob Bell seems to say that loving and compassionate people, regardless of their faith, will not be condemned to eternal hell just because they do not accept Jesus Christ as their Savior.
Concepts of an afterlife vary between religions and among divisions of each faith. Here are three quotes from “the greatest achievement in life,” my ebook on comparative mysticism:
(46) Few people have been so good that they have earned eternal paradise; fewer want to go to a place where they must receive punishments for their sins. Those who do believe in resurrection of their body hope that it will be not be in its final form. Few people really want to continue to be born again and live more human lives; fewer want to be reborn in a non-human form. If you are not quite certain you want to seek divine union, consider the alternatives.
(59) Mysticism is the great quest for the ultimate ground of existence, the absolute nature of being itself. True mystics transcend apparent manifestations of the theatrical production called “this life.” Theirs is not simply a search for meaning, but discovery of what is, i.e. the Real underlying the seeming realities. Their objective is not heaven, gardens, paradise, or other celestial places. It is not being where the divine lives, but to be what the divine essence is here and now.
(80) [referring to many non-mystics] Depending on their religious convictions, or personal beliefs, they may be born again to seek elusive perfection, go to a purgatory to work out their sins or, perhaps, pass on into oblivion. Lives are different; why not afterlives? Beliefs might become true.
Rob Bell asks us to reexamine the Christian Gospel. People of all faiths should look beyond the letter of their sacred scriptures to their spiritual message. As one of my mentors wrote “In God we all meet.”
Dear Rick
I have listened to that interview with Mr Bell and Mr Bashir’s subsequent interview with Mr Edwards.
Mr Bashir’s style of interview says more about himself than about Bell’s theology.Bashir is exactly the reason I stay away from certain churches.What a hypocrite.He has made a career out of editorial slander.He should learn to practice what he preaches.
Have you heard Mr Bashir’s Asian Babes joke. There are plenty of other occasions when the man has over stepped the line.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Asian-Babes-British-ABC-Anchor-Martin-Bashir-Apologises-For-Lewd-Comments/Article/200808115071819
Mr Bashir needs to stay away from reporting anything to do with Michael Jackson. Many people throughout the globe acknowledge Mr.Bashir as a key player in the destruction and premature death of Michael Jackson. It is awful when you consider Mr. Bashir assured Mr. Jackson he would have full editorial control of the programme he made “Living with Michael Jackson “ However, Mr. Bashir’s own extensive editing of the film, laden with innuendos, made for a landmark piece of scandalous trash. After viewing the unedited rebuttal tape-recorded footage from Mr. Jackson’s own cameras, it is no wonder so many people view Mr. Bashir with such disdain. In an attempt to repair his image following the Bashir interview, Jackson released a second interview, called Take Two: The Footage You Were Never Meant to See (also referred to as “the rebuttal video”). This was presented by Maury Povich and contains material which Bashir omitted. It also features new interviews with people close to Jackson, such as his former wife Debbie Rowe. In this interview, she claimed it was on her request that the children wore masks in public. She also pointed out that the concept of “sharing a bed” can be misunderstood: for example, she herself likes watching TV in bed; when she has a visitor, often both watch TV together in bed. It also contains interviews with Bashir giving much different opinions than he gave in past interviews as well as in the voice-overs. He is shown praising Jackson as a father as well as saying that he thinks it’s wonderful that he allows children to come to Neverland, directly contradicting the journalist’s previous statements that Neverland Ranch was a “dangerous place” for children.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6Ilq7oYgto
However, Mr.Bashir’s unethical behavior is not just exclusively directed toward Mr. Jackson. You only have to look at his checkered past in the UK and the views of his peer group to understand the extent of Mr. Bashir’s deception. In the words of Max Clifford, “You don’t want him getting close to your star because you know you would be putting them in jeopardy.”
Mr. Bashir’s speciality is manipulating the words of his interview subjects and setting up situations to portray his subjects in whatever light he wants.Mr. Bashir’s interview with Princess Diana will go down in history as a public relations disaster for Diana.
One of the most recent victims of Mr. Bashir’s mode of questioning is Sean Diddy Combs. Mr. Combs stated that Mr. Bashir was racist and judgmental in the questions he asked about the mothers of his children, as well as, Mr. Combs decision to purchase his 16-year-old son a Maybach. Mr Bashir once again displayed in his interview with Mr. Bell he has no journalistic integrity and he sounded more like a person with an axe to grind.Ultimately, those who are at the receiving end of journalistic work trust and hope that the truth is being made known to them. We rely on media operators to employ people with the highest integrity.Those involved in the media sector need to be responsible in their recruitment of journalists who foster, within themselves, the natural desire to know the truth, so that same truth can be faithfully transmitted to us, the members of society. The truly professional journalist needs to practice and love the truth, something Mr. Bashir has failed to do in his treatment of various people.
Rob Bell is basically calling Jesus a liar when he claims that there is no hell to worry about. In all translations of Mark ch. 9 Jesus speaks of hell. Jesus also speaks in the book of Matthew of false prophets and refers to the path of salvation as a “narrow gate”…again, in all translations of the Bible these words are clear. So, Mr. Bell, are you saying that we cant trust Jesus’ words in full?
I trust that Jesus gave us the translation and the parts of the Bible that he wanted the people to have today to guide them. He did not come to confuse or deceive! To say parts are left out based on human truth is lacking faith in the God who breathed every word of the Bible into existence purposefully.
Do youself a favor, put your faith in the word of God…NOT Rob Bell the false prophet. When a bit of truth is tangled with deception it equals a whole lie.