Some thoughts on the Rob Bell thing…

I am a young evangelical pastor. I really liked Rob Bell. I am jealous because I cannot pull off glasses that cool. Back in the day, I enjoyed the Nooma videos when they first came out and I really liked to listen to his podcasts. Rob is a gifted speaker and I believe God used Bell to reveal Himself to me in a few ways. Like a lot of people my age, I enjoyed most of Velvet Elvis, but somewhere in the middle of the book, I remember being concerned that he was questioning the importance of the Virgin Birth…so I wrote a question mark in the margin but I continued to give him the benefit of the doubt. The rest of the book was pretty darn good. Then I bought Sex God. Another good book with some very intriguing thoughts about the Bible’s “salvation as marriage” metaphor. It opened my eyes on several issues. In Velvet Elvis it seemed to me that Bell was de-emphasizing the importance of the historicity of Adam and Eve (he was saying that the fact that this story ”happens” in our lives, is much more significant than whether or not it “happened” in history) Really? Is that okay to downplay that story like that? I mean, there’s a lot at stake if you get rid of a historical “Adam” and the story of the fall of mankind. Not to mention its implications on Romans 5 or 1 Corinthians 15 where the first Adam plays a pretty important role in New Testament theology. I guess my point is that I have noticed Bell pushing the envelope further and further as the years passed. 

After watching his book release interview for Love Wins in New York City last night, I shook my head. (Here is a transcript).  When asked point blank questions about fundamental Christian doctrines, he left them hanging in the air instead of giving clear answers. He told lots of stories (really good stories, mind you, he is a great speaker), but he was evasive and ambiguous at best and deceptive at worst. Bell is a great communicator. Intriguing. Thought-provoking. But he left ambiguity when clarity was called for. When people were asking for propositions, he told stories that didn’t answer their questions. He could have easily laid to rest the accusations made about him, but he chose not to. At the end, I shook my head as he was avoiding the very weighty issues at stake and that is just irresponsible. I think he knows it too, which is why he tries to relieve his responsibility by claiming  at the end of the interview that “he’s not very smart, not a theologian and not a scholar.” Not so fast, Bell, if that is the case, then why are you shepherding people as a pastor and writing theological books? You’re on the hook for the impact of your teaching, Bell, sorry, as James says, for this reason, not many of you should be teachers. A terrible responsibility comes with the territory. If you can’t take that heat, get out of the kitchen.  (Here is a critical review of the book.)

In the promo video for the book (here), Bell claimed that he was getting at the issue behind the issue, the question behind the question about hell.

For Bell, the “question behind the question” is…the very character of God. How can you believe in a God who would send people to hell? How can God be good if He does that? How is God just? Surely God could not have meant what he said about “forever and ever,” and Bell just can’t believe in that kind of God.  For Bell, it is just downright un-American that everybody doesn’t have the right to go to heaven. Therefore, for God to be “good,” in his definition of the word “good,” he thinks that God must give everyone heaven, or at least a chance at heaven, and maybe even a second chance after they have already rejected God and died. And all of this he gives scriptural support for. Really? 

But here is the issue behind the issue that is behind that issue. Pride. In a spirit of independence from God’s revelation about hell in the Bible, Bell is refusing to submit to God’s word. In other words, Rob Bell, the clay, is talking back to the potter. He sets himself up as the authority and boastfully believes his idea of fairness and his heterodox understanding of hell is more accurate than the plain biblical text. Listen to this verse, “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matt 10:28). As Sinclair Ferguson once noted, these words were not spoken by Augustine, or Luther or some firey baptist preacher, they were spoken by Jesus Christ. Submit to Him and tremble in your seat at His terrible words of justice. When He returns, who can stand the wrath of the lamb?

And here is the issue that is behind that issue which was behind the other issue: Bell has a misunderstanding about grace. The real problem here is that his mindset shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what grace is. God is not obligated to give anyone grace. God is under no obligation to save everyone or anyone for that matter. Man has rejected God and God is at odds with man. By definition, grace cannot be demanded or else it is not grace. The only thing anyone is entitled to is justice, which is what we all deserve for committing high treason against the Righteous Judge of all the Earth. R.C. Sproul says it this way, “We are no longer amazed by grace, and we are shocked – in consternation – by justice.” Grace is an absolutely amazing gift of God which teaches us both to fear God again and simultaneously to be relieved of our fear from God’s wrath. As the hymn goes…”‘Twas grace that taught my heart to fear and Grace my fears relieved.” At the cross, grace came and taught me to fear God. When I look at the cross, grace shows me that there is an infinitely terrible punishment for my sin that I deserved. “But grace my fears relieved,” the cross also reassures me that my punishment has already been paid by the infinitely valuable sacrifice of the God-man in my place. That kind of grace is simply amazing, amazing that He saved a wretch like me. But no one can ever claim that God is not fair for not giving it to someone, no one is ”entitled” to grace because they are all guilty as charged of their sin and their punishment is just.

Our post-modern, entitlement laden culture is not tender toward the exclusive message about Jesus Christ, nor are they tolerant of the terrible doctrine of hell. But this is nothing new…This is not the first time Christians have been in a hostile environment. We must be careful here, there is a temptation to think that the only way to get people to accept Christianity is to change it. But that is not an option. Our faith is to proclaim, not to edit or reinterpret. Our faith was “passed down” (Jude 1:1-5) to us by the apostles and prophets and we are under divine obligation to keep it in tact.

Advertisement