I read Rob Bell's controversial Love Wins yesterday - as in I started at 8:30 and was done by 3:30. Granted, I'm preaching on heaven and hell this week, so I figured I should at least read the most debated book on the topic in recent memory.
If you missed the controversy, let me just say it was messy and ugly, and I was only viewing the remnants and echos from the other side of the world. For a not-so-brief summary of the controversy, check out this article. For a beautiful interview with Rob Bell about how he has handled all this controversy, click here. For a look at what this conversation means for the current state of North American Christianity - especially evangelicalism, read this excellent article by theologian Scott McKnight.
Essentially, the controversy is all about two long debated points within Christian theology.
1. What does it take to be saved (to go to heaven and to avoid hell)? (Specifically, can people who have never heard about Jesus be saved?)
2. Is hell a place of eternal, conscious punishment from which there is no escape - ever?
Both of these questions have been asked by theologians almost since the time of Christ, and for almost that long, our best Christian thinkers have come up with a variety of answers. There is no Christian consensus on these two points. Neither of these two points are critical questions of Christian orthodoxy. Therefore, throughout history, most Christians have afforded each other the freedom to disagree. Rob Bell's answers to both questions fall well within the scope of the varied Christian opinion throughout history.
So what does Bell actually say? Although he says it very well, in his wonderful way of putting very complex ideas in simple and beautiful words, he actually only makes a few specific points.
Regarding heaven, Bell clarifies the use of the word heaven in the Bible. In the New Testament, the word "heaven" is used in three different ways: (a) as a reference to God (e.g. "Kingdom of Heaven"), (b) the place/time of total restoration in the future, (c) the invasion of that future reality into our present reality ("Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven" - type of thinking). Basically, heaven is something we can experience in part now. (Remember all your pastors talking about starting the "eternal life" now. This is what Bell is talking about.) But one day, this foretaste will become the real deal, explosively joyful, unfiltered presence of God among the loving community of God's people. So far, Bell is right in line with all good theologians.
Regarding hell, Bell unpacks almost every Biblical reference to hell. And then he slowly works to prove that it is at least possible that a person's experience of hell might not be forever. The fires of hell might be for the sake of purification rather than eternal punishment. There might be a second (or third) opportunity to repent and to return to God's grace even after death. It is possible that God might eventually empty hell and reclaim every lost child. This may sound strange to people who have grown up with the concept of hell as a place of eternal, conscious, permanent punishment. However, as Bell points out, good Christian theologians ranging from Justin Martyr to Origen to Luther have said exactly this.
Regarding salvation, Bell makes three basic points. (1) God is everywhere. (2) God is always trying to woo people to him and his ways of love. (3) We will be judged on how we respond to God's wooing - however or wherever we find it. Although he puts the argument in more beautiful and more controversial tones, this is the essential point, and this is nothing new to Christianity. Everywhere there have been Christian missionaries and thinkers, people have wondered about this, and many of them have said exactly the same thing.
So here's my conclusion. Rob Bell didn't say anything new or unorthodox or unChristian, but he said it really, really well. Honestly, I'm not sure he's right, but I think it's possible. And I think it's important that we talk about hell and who may or may not go there with a little more humility and uncertainty. (The Bible seems to be intentionally unclear on that point.) And I am sure that Bell (or anyone else) can believe everything in this book and be authentically Christian.
The Josh rating: JJJJ.
(Coming soon, my sermon on Heaven and Hell.)
3 comments:
Josh,
Please clear something up for me. You say that Bell's book deals with the issues of how to be saved and what hel. is like. Then you say "neither of these two points are critical questions of Christian orthodoxy." It seems to me that these are two of the most important questions in Christianity. That's why Bell's book has been opposed and defended so strongly. I'm glad that no one is letting him be martyred or letting him get away with saying whatever he wants to. We have to think critically about these issues because they are important. Salvation in this life and the next are the defining issues in Scripture.
Thanks for the good question Amy.
As for what hell is like, the Bible has precious few details about that. Basically, the Bible's point is that Hell is really, really bad - a place/experience to be avoided at all costs. Other than that, we don't really KNOW much about it from the Bible. Almost everything else we can say about hell is just speculation. And throughout history, good orthodox Christians have disagreed in this process of speculation.
As for "what it takes to be saved," Christians have also disagreed about this throughout the ages - particularly on whether any people from other religions will be saved. The vast majority of Christians have said, "Yes, some people from other religions will be saved through Christ's work on the cross without putting conscious faith in Christ." This would include for example Jews from the Old Testament (Moses, David, Isaiah, etc.) and non-Jews from the Old Testament (Able, Noah, Job, etc.). This would also include babies who die and people who don't have the mentally handicapped without capacity for conscious faith. The vast majority of Christians have agreed on this.
This opens the door though, that it is at least possible that someone from another religion today who has never heard the gospel but has been faithful "to the amount of light that he has" (see Romans 1), could also be saved. A smaller majority - but still a majority - today and throughout history have agreed on this.
The minority Christian view is that the only people who can be or will be saved are those who have put conscious faith in Christ as Lord and Savior. That means Hell would be stocked with people like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Jeremiah, maybe even Joseph - Jesus' father, who probably died before Jesus began his ministry. Hell would also include any babies or children who died before reaching an age before they could put conscious faith in Christ. Also, anyone throughout history at any place in the world who never even heard the gospel would automatically be destined for hell. Again, this is the minority view throughout history and currently.
When I say that these are not issues central to Christian orthodoxy, I don't mean they aren't important issues. What I mean is that the Bible is not completely clear on them and that Christians are free to disagree on these points.
Good question. Thanks for giving me the chance to speak a little more clearly.
Also, I meant that these issues do not determine whether or not one is a Christian. There are no required beliefs about hell to be a Christian. Similarly, there are no required beliefs about the fates of others to be a Christian. Neither of these issues are included in either the Apostle's Creed or the Nicene Creed. Neither of these issues are represented in the Bible as mandatory points of belief to put saving faith in Christ. Wisdom demands rigorous honesty, and these are not honestly not nearly as important as we make them out to be. (I'll say more when I post my sermon for this Sunday, so stay tuned.)
Post a Comment