Rob Bell is at it again with his new book

[Ivan]

here is a blogger that has read the book; Being The Body: Love Wins

I am no Rob Bell "fanboy", hey I can't even think of anything nicer to say about him then "I'm not a fan". but it seems like the stoning should wait until we have the book in hand, n'est pas?

As I stated earlier, since all this fuss has taken place I will now read the book.

 

[Joseph Scibbe]

With all due respect, I know this is a Reformed board and Rob Bell certainly does not fall under that but I think it is very close to a ninth commandment violation to be speaking ill of a book that we have not read. We are going off the assumptions and thoughts put forth in a blog whose author has not read the book either. If he does say that he is universalist in his book then we can discuss the implications from their. If you have not read the book you have no right to be making definitive statements about what he says in it.

 

[ChristianTrader]

I think the weird thing is that many seem to think that these questions have not been dealt with before? I think this is the best take on the issue yet, Rob Bell and the Judgmentless

 

[Micah Everett]

With all due respect, I know this is a Reformed board and Rob Bell certainly does not fall under that but I think it is very close to a ninth commandment violation to be speaking ill of a book that we have not read. We are going off the assumptions and thoughts put forth in a blog whose author has not read the book either. If he does say that he is universalist in his book then we can discuss the implications from their. If you have not read the book you have no right to be making definitive statements about what he says in it.

Does Bell's own promotional video for the book not establish, at the very least, universalistic tendencies? I see no ninth commandment violation here, given that most comments here seem to be about the video, which we have seen, not the book, which we have not read.

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

It is not like we need this book by Bell to know he has universalistic teaching.

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

Kevin DeYoung nails it.

Two Thoughts on the Rob Bell Brouhaha – Kevin DeYoung

 

[SolaSaint]

I don't know Bell and McLaren's hearts, but I must wonder of their sencerity. Do men like these truly believe in the drivel they produce that diminishes the attributes of God and twists scripture to fit their theology? Or are they aware of the many weak minded professing christians today, and thus come up with this heresy to make lots of money. I guess we'll never know this side of eternity.

 

[TheElk]

Kevin DeYoung nails it.

Two Thoughts on the Rob Bell Brouhaha – Kevin DeYoung

Fantastic read!

 

[kvanlaan]

Yep, I think Kevin DeYoung nails it too. Unless the book is called: "Love Wins - why I am recanting a large portion of everything I've ever taught", then I don't think that the criticisms can be termed 'pot shots' or the like.

 

[kvanlaan]

We are on septic here in the countryside, and I have the unenviable job of taking care of it (it's about 50 years old, it has issues sometimes, especially when the kids throw toys down the commode). I know what comes out of the discharge pipe into the tank, I've seen it many times. It would take a miracle for chocolate milkshake to come out of the discharge pipe, no matter how much it may look like milkshake, I know the nature of the pipe, I know its function, I know its source. I have seen too much of the emergent ilk to expect good things of this book.

 

[Micah Everett]

Al Mohler nails it, as well.

 

[discipulo]

I saw this, and posted it to my FB. I may blog about it next week, because I believe it is very significant. I am actually grateful that this bad theology - no, damning theology - is being made public. In that way, it can be combated by the light of day.

Totally agree with Pastor Greco.

Like Justyn Taylor also says:

But it is better for those teaching false doctrine to put their cards on the table (a la Brian

McLaren) rather than remaining studiously ambiguous in terminology.

So on that level, I’m glad that Rob Bell has the integrity to be lay his cards on the table about universalism.

Remember how much ink was spilled over Barth's hide and seek game?

One verse from Scripture is particularly clear on this:

For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. 1Corinthians 11:19

Hairesies is of course also the greek word in 2 Peter 2:1 and Galatians 5:20

 

[R Harris]

Mr. Bell is one of the most "illustrious" graduates of my alma mater. Inhaling the heady air of Pasadena, he heard these things the same place I did, from our profs. Graduating several years before Bell, annihilation was taught/promoted in my Sys Theo III class way back in the '70s when Bell was in 1st grade!

Fuller was teaching annihilation back in the 1970s?

Wow, just wow. From just what I had heard at the time, I thought in the late 1980s that Fuller had started heading south and making shipwreck of the faith, but I had no idea it was going on much earlier. Absolutely incredible.

 

[toddpedlar]

here is a blogger that has read the book; Being The Body: Love Wins

I am no Rob Bell "fanboy", hey I can't even think of anything nicer to say about him then "I'm not a fan". but it seems like the stoning should wait until we have the book in hand, n'est pas?

Stoning could easily be warranted based on the video alone. No need to wait for the book.

 

[kvanlaan]

Micah, thanks for that. Mohler always approaches things in a calm but incisive manner, very helpful (I appreciate the lack of foaming at the mouth).

 

[Notthemama1984]

How popular is Rob Bell? Is he worth the reaction that he seems to be getting?

 

[Grillsy]

How popular is Rob Bell? Is he worth the reaction that he seems to be getting?

He is extremely popular. Especially with the younger folks and hipsters.

 

[Notthemama1984]

How popular is Rob Bell? Is he worth the reaction that he seems to be getting?

He is extremely popular. Especially with the younger folks and hipsters.

Maybe we should encourage Driscoll to be the macho man

(Mars Hill vs. Mars Hill on PPV, it might work.)

 

[Grillsy]

(Mars Hill vs. Mars Hill on PPV, it might work.)

 

[discipulo]

Micah, thanks for that. Mohler always approaches things in a calm but incisive manner, very helpful (I appreciate the lack of foaming at the mouth).

Indeed. I had only read Justin Taylor, and yes, it is good to keep it

Fortiter in re suaviter in modo, as Gresham Machen said.

I wonder, watching how evangelicalism fell into the semi pelagin captivity snare, if Universalism,

won't be the next trend, leading to a transversal Ecumenisml, a Sincretic United Nations of Religion.

Peace for our Time, said Chamberlain after meeting Adolf Hitler, the Wolf about to undress his Sheep clothes

 

[torstar]

I agree to fully cooperate if the true church agrees to a 7-year moratorium on mentioning this book and giving it free publicity.

 

[Notthemama1984]

Refuting heresy = free publicity?

 

[kvanlaan]

Unfortunately, sometimes it does.

 

[torstar]

Refuting heresy and free publicity are not mutually exclusive.

He couldn't care less what his critics say, he probably LOVES IT that he has again raised such a stir.

And helped sell way more copies.

 

[interalia]

Remember how much ink was spilled over Barth's hide and seek game?

One verse from Scripture is particularly clear on this:

For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. 1Corinthians 11:19

Hairesies is of course also the greek word in 2 Peter 2:1 and Galatians 5:20

A few distictions between Barth and Bell must be said. Please note for the record that I by no means endorse Barth's universalist-leaning soteriology, but this is apples and oranges vis a vis Bell. Bell is worse.

-Barth gets his universalist badge mainly from his essay "The Humanity of God." I just re-read it to be sure, but he never overtly states an adherence to pure universalism...just says as a conclusion, "This much is certain, that we have no theological right to set any sort of limits to the loving-kindness of God which has appeared in Jesus Christ." Now, I disagree, but that is not the same as suggesting definitively that "hell is empty," and thereby completely misappropriating a correct theological sense of God's justice, wrath, and therefore, the significance of substitutionary atontement. If one "understands" Barth in his high regard for Christology and Sovereignty, then one could see how this is a logical outflow (though incorrect) of his thought.

-I will defend Barth as far as suggesting that Bell could only wish to have the mental horsepower of Barth, or any other significant theologian, for that matter. Bell will forever be relegated to the mediocre mass media...though his wild fame is horrifying as American evangelicals largely struggle with using their minds to critically analyze their faith and other worldviews.

All this to say because I, like many of you, value clarity. We are dealing with a huge threat of mediocre thought and writing, with heretical theology, from Bell.

 

[captivewill]

He is very popular and thus very dangerous.....and smells like smoke.

 

[SRoper]

I think the weird thing is that many seem to think that these questions have not been dealt with before? I think this is the best take on the issue yet, Rob Bell and the Judgmentless

Judgementless gospel. Perfect. I didn't have a term for this before. My charitable view of the Rob Bell video is that he will come out in a sort of CS Lewis view that hell is merely the absence of God, and we are not sent there, but we choose to go there when we choose to be without God for all eternity. Everyone gets what they want in the end. It's not biblical, but it's not universalism either.

 

[discipulo]

Remember how much ink was spilled over Barth's hide and seek game?

One verse from Scripture is particularly clear on this:

For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. 1Corinthians 11:19

Hairesies is of course also the greek word in 2 Peter 2:1 and Galatians 5:20

A few distictions between Barth and Bell must be said. Please note for the record that I by no means endorse Barth's universalist-leaning soteriology, but this is apples and oranges vis a vis Bell. Bell is worse.

-Barth gets his universalist badge mainly from his essay "The Humanity of God." I just re-read it to be sure, but he never overtly states an adherence to pure universalism...just says as a conclusion, "This much is certain, that we have no theological right to set any sort of limits to the loving-kindness of God which has appeared in Jesus Christ." Now, I disagree, but that is not the same as suggesting definitively that "hell is empty," and thereby completely misappropriating a correct theological sense of God's justice, wrath, and therefore, the significance of substitutionary atontement. If one "understands" Barth in his high regard for Christology and Sovereignty, then one could see how this is a logical outflow (though incorrect) of his thought.

-I will defend Barth as far as suggesting that Bell could only wish to have the mental horsepower of Barth, or any other significant theologian, for that matter. Bell will forever be relegated to the mediocre mass media...though his wild fame is horrifying as American evangelicals largely struggle with using their minds to critically analyze their faith and other worldviews.

All this to say because I, like many of you, value clarity. We are dealing with a huge threat of mediocre thought and writing, with heretical theology, from Bell.

Michael, my point was to make the contrast between Bell and someone who never claimed to be Universalist but never fully denied it either, Barth (all his twisted view of a Christomonistic Election and Universal Atonement leads to implicit Universalism), but there you are, we are changing these posts because Barth was never about his position, was he ever clear about anything really?

Of course few can claim the intelectuall caliber or theological knowldege of Barth, surely Bell is not in that league. Never the less he may be worse and more acessible, alas more dangerous, but at least he may be clear or honest about what he truly believes, that is what I meant.

But thank you for sharing on this. Like you said Clarity is the name of the game.

 

[jawyman]

I don't know Bell and McLaren's hearts, but I must wonder of their sencerity. Do men like these truly believe in the drivel they produce that diminishes the attributes of God and twists scripture to fit their theology? Or are they aware of the many weak minded professing christians today, and thus come up with this heresy to make lots of money. I guess we'll never know this side of eternity.

You are right Rick. None of us knows Bell and McLaren's hearts, but I personally believe their sincerity. They must believe "in the drivel they produce that diminishes the attributes of God and twists scripture to fit their theology," just as much as Peter Abelard in the twelfth century or Apollinaris, bishop of Laodicea or Arius or Donatus or Marcion or any of the others of the same ilk.

What Bell and McLaren are teaching is not new. It is heresy in a 21st Century context. We must cleave to the truths of God's Word and remember the words of Solomon(??) from Ecclesiastes 1:9, "What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun."

 

[LawrenceU]

I've been out of town for the past three weeks and pretty much of off the internet, still I was very much aware of the latest Rob Bell fiasco. I was not surprised at all when I heard about what he has said and seems to be saying; it is consistent. I also will not be surprised when more people, some fairly visible, fall in line with his position. He and McLaren are merely verbal about a position that I run into all the time. The Biblical God is not popular. A great majority of the Western Church worships a god made after their own likeness. It is much more comfortable that way. . . for a season.