The Evangelical Universalist Forum

"The Prodigal Gospel of Rob Bell" (aka JRP's long review)

Featured Writers Jason Pratt
#27

BUT WHY BOTHER TRYING TO ANSWER ANY SUCH QUESTIONS AT ALL?? CAN’T YOU JUST GLORY IN THE VAGUE TACIT AMBIGUITY OF THE BEAUTY OF THE QUESTIONS ETC.?!

Uh, no.

But this brings me to a point I’ll be talking more about as I go along (especially in Rob’s opening chapters), but which has a bearing here on why this review and commentary is so lengthy.

Rob asks a lot of questions. A little more accurately, he throws out a lot of questions. He does try to provide answers to some of them, but on the internet this kind of behavior is also called topic spamming: the human mind naturally just gets overwhelmed into not even trying to consider the answers to all those questions, and people often use that result to try to make arguments by implied innuendo.

Setting aside (but not for long) the question (and answer!) of whether Rob is using his topic spamming for that purpose–if we take seriously any respect for the questions as more than a convenient rhetorical fog to hide behind, then we try to deal with the various answers to those questions pro or con. But it takes much, much longer to do that than to ask the questions in the first place.

I am not going to be going much into the technical issues, thus I am not in fact going to try to discuss and answer all those questions.

But in choosing to proceed this way, Rob himself is either inviting vastly much more discussion on what he’s writing about, or he’s only using a rhetorical trick to cheat his readers.

And regardless of which one (or both?) of those answers is true, the cold fact of the matter is that Rob’s defenders have often appealed to just that principle: all he’s doing is asking questions!–why are his opponents getting so angry?–he isn’t doing anything wrong!–this shows just how oppressive they are, that they’re scared of a bunch of questions! Etc.!

#28

All right, fine. Can we question Rob in return then? Or not?

If not, then when did Rob become Pope?–and why should any Protestant or Eastern Orthodox Christian (much less any Roman Catholic Christian!) accept him as such?

If so: then the answers to those questions might or might not turn out to be problematic for Rob.

That’s how fair inquiry works. And fair inquiry takes time and effort.

If the problem is that a fair inquiry might turn up problems…? Well, too bad.

BUT DON’T YOU REALIZE ROB BELL HAS HELPED A BUNCH OF PEOPLE COME TO ACCEPT CHRIST AND COME CLOSER TO CHRIST??

Yes I do, and I’m glad for that! You know who else has helped a bunch of people come to accept Christ and come closer to Christ? A bunch of non-universalists. Many of whom are concerned that Rob isn’t helping people accept Christ and come closer to Christ. Whereas Rob is concerned that those non-universalists are failing in much the same way.

Just as it isn’t fair to simply ignore Rob’s concerns in order to pay attention to other people’s concerns about Rob, it isn’t fair to simply ignore other people’s concerns about Rob in order to pay attention to Rob’s concerns about other people.

#29

Let me put it another way. I called this a “fraternally anticipated question” list. That wasn’t only because I intended to use the “ALL CAPS” portions to (hopefully somewhat humorously) anticipate concerns and responses from a potentially hostile audience of my Christian figurative-brothers (aside from whether they would bother to acknowledge me as a brother or not–and even aside from whether they’re non-universalist or not!)

I also called it that because I am (somewhat humorously) anticipating concerns and questions from my literal brother: an intelligent, mission-minded servant of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is not only a non-universalist (as I once was), but is deeply concerned about universalists being Christian at all (as I once was) and maybe even leading people astray to damnation. My brother is concerned about me being hurt by people like Rob Bell, because he loves me. And he’s concerned about other people being hurt by people like Rob Bell (and like myself for that matter!), because he loves them. And all this because he loves God, Father and Son and Holy Spirit.

Now if my literal brother is being unfair to Rob Bell in various ways, especially while accusing him of crimes against God and against other people, am I supposed to give him a pass because he’s my brother and I love him and he’s helping people come to Christ himself?

If not my literal brother, or my Christian non-universalist brothers, then what if my Christian universalist brother is being unfair to non-universalists in various ways, especially while accusing them of crimes against God and against other people?

#30

When non-universalists are being unfair to universalists, they’re being unfair to my friends and Christian brothers and sisters. But when universalists are being unfair to non-universalists, they aren’t only being unfair to my friends and Christian brothers and sisters, they’re being unfair to my literal family!

(Much the same way: when non-Christians are being unfair to Christians, they’re not only being unfair to my friends, they’re being unfair to my family. Whereas, when Christians are being unfair to non-Christians, there’s a good chance they’re being unfair to my most beloved under God!–and to the ones, and the one, whom she loves most!!)

If Rob Bell was only some internet commentator (like for example myself :wink: ), this wouldn’t be so much of a problem. But he was already influentially famous worldwide, and now is substantially moreso after publishing Love Wins. He had a chance to help make peace between us.

And my complaints, at bottom, are going to be–not that he failed to be technically proficient (except where this adds to the confusions and problems)–but that in various ways he has kept the cycle of hatred going, when he could have very easily acted to help stop that cycle, while still critting problems.

#31

I’m going to say a lot of good things about what Rob does in the book. I’m going to defend him from oppositional criticism several times along the way. But I was terribly, terribly disappointed in how he proceeded on some issues–not related to his technical theology (or not primarily so), but related to his treatment of his opposition. I cannot in good faith, in good faithfulness to the righteous fair-togetherness of our Lord, let that pass. I think it’s something his supporters just aren’t willing to hear from his opponents (who are naturally sensitive to such things). Someone who supports what he’s doing (more or less) needs to say something.

People are listening to Rob Bell. And non-universalists are not listening to him on some things–maybe because it’s too inconvenient, but also partly because he makes things harder sometimes, not easier, by being evasive. And, I think it must be said, also because he cheats–and they’re rightfully upset about that.

Universalists are also not listening to him sometimes. We have to listen to the problems as well as to the things we agree with. We aren’t being faithful first to God if we don’t. We’re being faithful first to Rob Bell.

The road of justice requires us to be fair and loving to our enemies, even if we have to oppose them. That is one of the toughest lessons in the world to learn (or beyond the world either). It’s a fundamental truth, grounded in God. We deny it at our own peril: our own salvation from sin absolutely depends on that truth being applied in our favor; and our own salvation from sin absolutely depends on that truth being applied in our enemy’s favor, too.

#32

Is Rob Bell being fair to his enemies in Love Wins?

No. By and large, and I grieve to say so, no he is not.

That is a huge problem. Not least because the hope of universal salvation is directly connected to the principle of fairness and love being fulfilled even to the enemies of God–to ‘them’ not only to ‘us’.

Fortunately, I can report that Rob is certainly somewhat aware of this–and makes good use of it, too!

Unfortunately, Rob is not yet aware of this enough. And that is causing problems and hostility in our culture as people take up arms around him, for him or against him.

And that’s why I’m writing a long review and commentary.

Which will start next in part 4.

#33

Was Jesus being “fair” to the Pharisees in Matthew 23?
I love theology, attended seminary (in the mid 1980’s), and write very technically about some subjects

And I read Bell and think “WOW, he’s putting into words what I already know because God has been showing me the same thing”.

I have barely cracked “Love Wins” due to my responsibilities juggling full time college (RN program), part time elected office, and taking care of the needs of the youngest four children who still live at home (8,11,13,16). But I read “Sex God” in its entirety, and some of “Velvet Elvis”

and **Rob Bell hears what the Spirit is saying to the church. **

I have been part of a small ladies Bible Study for about 7 years and four of us have been through a lot together. They knew that I had been tilting universalist due to marriage issues and they were wary of it. None of them is theologically geeky like me, though they have appreciated some of my studies. One of Chris’ friends lent her a copy of “Love Wins” and she read it. Chris is 70 and the founder of the study. Wanda had a dream (long story). Anyway, a few weeks ago at Bible Study, every single one of them came out as universalistic. The whole Bible Study converted. We all KNOW.

“Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the church.”

#34

Yes He was. Among other things, He even acknowledged credit for what they were doing right. :wink:

Merely critiquing someone strongly is not being unfair to that person. Misrepresenting them in order to critique them, is. Contradicting one’s own principles in order to critique them, also is. And Jesus had some excessively strong things to say to the Pharisees about that, too.

Excellent! I’m not only very happy about that, I hope it was due to the good things Rob does in his book!

And not due to the less than good things.

But the less than good things have to be talked about, too. There aren’t as many of them as the good things, but they’re there.

#35

Like I said, Jason, I haven’t read but the first two chapters of** this **Bell book.

I’ve seen several interviews and have come away very concerned for him about all the attention he’s getting and the distraction that it will be from his being able to sit at the feet of Jesus and hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches. I pray for him along those lines. Many a celebrity preacher has fallen.

#36

Oh and BTW, my husband is reading Bell and was critical of how he handled the rich man and Lazarus account. Hermeneutically speaking, I agreed with my husband’s criticisms. One cannot take a leap like Bell did. (unfortunately he took the book with him on a business trip so I don’t have the specifics)

Anyway, though I’m sure I will disagree with some details like that, I still think Bell is very spiritually sensitive and that the whole controversy and “Times Best Seller” phenom is right from God.

#37

there’s a good chance they’re being unfair to my most beloved under God!–and to the ones, and the one, whom she loves most!!)

Sorry for the aside and sorry if I am being dense, but, who is “she”? Just curious…

#38

She is she who must not be named. :slight_smile:

(I only talk about her rarely for special emphasis; don’t feel bad if you haven’t seen her mentioned before.)

#39

Well Jason, it’s easier to read this given the insight, and humility it took to say this! :smiley:
I will say that it’s fun reading; though I doubt as much fun as you seem to be having writing it!
I do feel your energy and engagement however…

Do you think Bell is actually trying to be obscure? Really?
Hmmm — me too. :blush: :sunglasses:
But it’s brilliant and has obviously had the intended effect. He ain’t writin’ for us Jason.
Ask yourself this (as I surely have). Did Jesus teach via parables with the intent to obscure??
Hardly.
Yet I have little doubt that this is the effect He actually had!

As I see this, Bell is trying hard to empower people to ask and try to answer their own questions! He is trying to teach people to do the very things that those who come to a site like this one do second nature.
We forget how hard it is for many (most?) to break from tradition; from the safety of the “group”; to feel like they’re not disrespecting God for asking the hard questions that they’re tired of suppressing.

Bell’s pastoral instinct here in his book is nothing short of superb – to my way of thinking. He in effect hands the reigns to each and every mind hearing/reading and emboldens them to figure it out for themselves. To confront Almighty God alone, and begin to make personal sense of it all!
My God that is a Holy calling!
Bell’s saying, in effect, don’t come to ME for your theology and doctrine, go to the Bible, go to God for yourselves! He asks his calibrated questions with the intent to evoke a response.
He actually trusts that God can and WILL be able to carry and nurture these folks to deeper knowledge of Him.

For this I say bless him; Bless Him; BLESS HIM!

Oh, I know what you mean for sure; but I think he knows EXACTLY what he means and where he intends to lead his reader! This is the measure of his brilliance as a Pastor. He is trying, BEGGING his reader to TAKE the mantle of Christ’s priesthood and thus be empowered to go out and testify in utter confidence.

Does Bell seem coy and elusive?? Oh yes!
Perhaps he knew Carlton Pearson and is too savvy to duplicate that debacle.

Bell is not trying to be a reference book on the subject.

But fact is, I’ve had conversations by the many, about Universalism, that I never would have had otherwise were it not for this book.
Now I know you well enough I think to know that you DO bless him.
So that’s how I am reading you JRP!!

Carry on…

TotalVictory
Bobx3

#40

Jason, thankyou! :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: Now I can die a happy man!

Seriously though, I’ve actually enjoyed reading the interchange between you and the others who have responded in this thread.

I haven’t read the book yet. My wife has. A student of mine took it home last night. He is quite wary of universalism, and I suspect is only giving it a thought because I mentioned yesterday that I 100% believed it. Anyway, he brought it back this morning and said he’d started skimming it, and a number of parts “set alarm bells off in my head”, and proceeded to talk about false teachers and heresy and stuff. I smiled and said that was completely fine. He did say he still wanted to talk to me about it, but just not read the book. Would that fit with your impression of it?

#41

Actually yeah, one afternoon He did! He even said as much to His disciples afterward when they asked Him why He started teaching in parables all of a sudden.

(From a harmonization perspective this happened in His second round of preaching on the lake near the Bethsaida fishing suburb of Capernaum after lunch, having previously been charged with Satanic collaboration by Pharisees in the audience when a demented man He had already healed the night before showed up the worse off than ever. The day made a huge impression on His disciples because I found an equally huge block of material from it plopped piecemeal into the Synoptics. :slight_smile: The sequence starts about halfway through Chapter 17 of The King of Stories and continues through the first part of Chapter 21. I was amazed to discover how much of that material fit together when I started checking time/place cues and thematic/narrative cues.)

Anyway, I should clarify that I don’t think in the book Rob is (intentionally) trying to be obscure, although I do find in his early interview material he seems to be trying to be intentionally obscure or evasive on some points for whatever reasons–possibly from lack of experience (at the time) talking about it, maybe somewhat for marketing reasons, maybe also because he doesn’t want to lose his audience talking about technical issues. (My complaint about that, ever since I watched the first interview, has consistently been: Rob owes the audience or at least his peers strong reasons, not merely emotional suggestions, as to why he has spoken so strongly against non-universalist teachers and preachers.)

I agree, and will be saying more-or-less the same thing myself (more than once if I recall) in my next part. :slight_smile:

(Plus as I go along I have fewer complaints; mainly because he’s talking more about his positive case and so by proportion less about his opposition in various ways–which means he also has fewer opportunities to be fair or unfair to his opposition by proportion. :wink: )

#42

Depends on why warning bells (hells bells? :smiley: ) were going off in his head.

Was it because Rob has a very positive idea of justice as being much more than punishment for evildoing? Rob doesn’t deny the latter, but he positions it within context of the former–and I think he’s Biblically right to do so. Also metaphysically right, though he doesn’t get into that much. But when people have been taught that ‘orthodoxy’ only-or-primarily involves the latter so long, then the former can look like heresy.

Was it because Rob relies on emotionalism a lot in the first chapters? I can sympathize with that, even though I also understand (up to a point) that the emotionalism is a hook for engaging popular interest. But it can be a hook for heresy as effectively as for orthodoxy, too.

Was it because Rob promotes the scope as well as the persistence of God’s salvation?–or the persistence as well as the scope? Calvs per se will (in a way logically) consider the former heretical; Arms (in a way logically) the latter. And will be naturally reluctant about affirming each other’s point on this.

Was it because he found Rob cheating pretty badly several times in the first few chapters? I wouldn’t blame him for flinging the book away on any of those points. :wink: (But I’ll be discussing those later.)

Was it because he thought Rob said a couple of obviously silly things about ‘eonian’? I think Rob does mostly a good job there, and that critics who worry about him undermining a lack of our security of salvation by lack of proper parity of term usage are missing some points. But he does (probably by accident) throw up a couple of headbangers, too. (More on those later. Fixing them wouldn’t hurt his overall argument, broadly or in details, though.)

Was it because he thought Rob was denying hell (and/or heaven!) after death? If so, that’s only a problem with skimming the material, though I can see how someone only skimming could easily worry about the first (or even the second!)

There are plenty of things that could set off alarm bells; a few rightly so, most at least understandably (if wrongly) so.

#43

I’ve been meaning to add: I’ve decided I should start watching the other available Rob interviews (beyond the ones I first watched), and reading any such, too, if they’re available, so that I can keep any improvements in mind as I go along.

I have some archived on my desktop where I can easily get to them; but if any enterprising soul(s) would like to search through the forum (or elsewhere) and create a post linking to as many as possible, not only will I be grateful, but I’ll add a link to the first post in this thread leading to your post for purposes of directing readers to the interview list.

(Also, if multiple people add links, I’ll consolidate them into one post with thanks to the ones providing the links, though to neaten the thread I may also delete your post once I’ve consolidated the links.)

Note: I’m not asking for links to articles and interviews about Rob Bell (pro or con), though interviews featuring Rob and someone else are fine.

#44

Sad to say it wasn’t the right setting to ask him why. I suspect if it’s any of those you mentioned, it’d be either

or

I doubt he’d even be in the ballpark of

But as I said initially, his keywords were “false teachers”, “heresy”, “be on your guard”, that sort of thing.

#45

WHY HAVE YOU STOPPED POSTING JASON, I WANT MORE! :stuck_out_tongue: :wink:

I’ve enjoyed reading this thread, thanks Jason for putting in the time. You have cleared up a few question I had.

Awesome to hear the positive stories from David and Gem about Love Wins. It has convinced me to order a few copies, so that I can lend/give some to friends who would find TEU/TILoG too hard.

I didn’t think of that, but I think you’re right. That’s great :slight_smile:

rline, it’s awesome that you’ve moved from hopeful to convinced, I just hope you & dad don’t get fired for being “heretics”! :neutral_face:

#46

Mondays and Thursdays. :mrgreen:

I totally agree, and I wouldn’t mind in the least if people keep adding such anecdotes to kind-of counterbalance other things I’m talking about. :slight_smile: