The evangelical world is in an uproar about a controversial new book called Love Wins by Rob Bell, founder of Mars Hill Bible Church in Grandville, Michigan, and featured speaker in the popular NOOMA video series. So what's the big deal? While most evangelicals believe fervently in Heaven and Hell as real places where souls are punished or rewarded for eternity, Bell challenges readers with a new set of questions about our ultimate fate.
Bell states that the story of Jesus is “first and foremost about the love of God for every single one of us.” He then criticizes the Church for making questions about Jesus, Heaven, Hell and salvation off limits. There is no question too big for Jesus to handle, Bell argues. And too many people have walked away from the Church because no one listened to their doubts.
Particularly vexing for Bell are questions about Hell. He writes, “It's been clearly communicated to many that this belief [in Hell as conscious, eternal torment] is a central truth of the Christian faith and to reject it is, in essence, to reject Jesus. This is misguided and toxic and ultimately subverts the contagious spread of Jesus' message of love, peace, forgiveness and joy that our world desperately needs to hear.”
Bell then outlines a number of alternative theories of Hell, including universalism, the belief that Hell is not permanent and that God will eventually reconcile all of humanity to himself. “Of all the billions of people who have ever lived,” he asks, “will only a select number 'make it to a better place' and every single other person suffer in torment and punishment forever? Can God do this, or even allow this, and still claim to be a loving God?”
Using the parable of the Prodigal Son, Bell suggests that Heaven and Hell may be one and the same place, depending on our perspective. The younger son joins the celebration even as the elder son sulks in a self-imposed “Hell” of his own creation. While God, in his universal love, extends the invitation to all to participate in the abundant life, our choice to accept or reject him determines our experience, argues Bell.
“If we want isolation, despair and the right to be our own god, God graciously grants you that option,” Bell writes. “If, however, we crave light, we're drawn to truth, we're desperate for grace … God gives us what we want … the peace that transcends all understanding.”
For Bell, death doesn't cut off the ability to repent. In the Bible, Bell sees no “infinite, eternal torment for things [people] did in their few finite years of life.”
Despite his enthusiasm for the subject matter, Bell's book leaves a number of questions unanswered. What do we do with Jesus' teaching about the final judgment? Why are the Apostle Paul's words about Christ as the model or exemplar of our faith taken seriously, but the verses on substitutionary atonement dismissed as an outdated metaphor? Is Bell tailoring his message to the current culture at the expense of biblical revelation? And if we all end up in the same place anyway, what is the point of the gospel?
In the face of intense criticism, Bell denies he is a universalist. Rather than embracing any particular view, he wants to leave room for uncertainty. Love Wins presents his “case for living with mystery rather than demanding certitude.” Some evangelicals see this “uncertainty” as incompatible with biblical teaching, while others say that the book is simply promoting overdue conversation about traditional interpretations of Scripture.
No matter where you stand, these are questions worth exploring.
Great thoughts expressed. I do not know Geoff, although I have had interactions with Dion as I do work with a partner agency to his within the Salvation Army, and I trust both from our prior talks and from the tone of the review here that he would not consider such debate sabotage - so long as it was both edifying to God and to one another. I have been wrong before, though. I should offer the disclaimer before I begin, however, that although I am employed by Salvation Army, I am not an officer, nor do I attend an SA church (though I am most certainly a Christian), so my views may not necessarily reflect those of SA.
As to the content of the debate, I see good points on both sides. That said, there are a couple of issues that I feel compelled to address here. First, I do agree with Dwayne when he stated that an assertive challenge is needed of Mr. Bell's conclusions so as not to convolute the issue in the minds of our virtual bystanders for the sake of the gospel, for although these issues can and should certainly be talked about rather than pushed aside, biblical conclusions should be offered to some degree with respect to issues of salvation and hell. Otherwise, they will leave people with less spiritual truth than they came with, and that should never be the goal of those professing to further the gospel.
To that end, Mark, I do certainly acknowledge that there are aspects of hell and the nature of it that we just cannot assert. Devils running around with pointy tails and pitchforks/tridents are archaic notions of the past, and ones that the Bible most definitely does not mention. However, there are a few things that I can claim with certainty, assuming of course that the Bible is held by all involved in this discussion to be the ultimate authority on such matters. One is that it is eternal, two is that it is a punishment, and three is that it involves a separation from God. These ideas are all scriptural, and supported numerous times.
A final item of note (as this is getting lengthier than I would like) is that contrary to your most recent statement above, Mark, Jesus most certainly did use the word hell. Abundantly, in fact. Some prominent passages to support this claim are Matthew 18:9, Matthew 23:33, Luke 16:19-31 (particularly verse 23), and of course, Matthew 10:28. I do find it ironic, though I do wish to submit this humbly rather than be contentious about it, that you did mention this verse in another context above, and then right after stated that Jesus never would have used the word. He may have used the word "Hades" in your translation rather than "hell", as the original NT language was Greek, and that is the interchangeable Greek word for the exact same thing. As a Bible college graduate, I can promise you that He did use that word, and also that other NT writers did, and this is a very vital truism to note. If your version of the scriptures does not acknowledge this, I would encourage you to drop your dynamic equivalency translation for a more fundamental one. Or simply take it back to the original text, as there are even websites now that allow anyone to do this free of charge. As for Rob Bell's assertions, I would urge anyone still looking for additional information on the matter to either read Francis Chan's new book "Erasing Hell", which I would highly recommend, or click on this link: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2702207/posts
God's richest blessings to Mark, Dwayne, Geoff, Dion, and everyone else commenting and viewing in this online forum. May your faithful seeking be rewarded with God's truth.