Love Wins - Rob Bell

Having read Rob Bell's new book, I've spent the last couple months watching videos and reading online reactions to the book and to Bell himself. Thus, I can't help but add my comments, if only for my sanity.

1. Rob Bell is not a Universalist.

This has been the primary accusation, the mounted defense against the perceived attack on Evangelicalism as we know it. However, I find that this claim, this misunderstanding should offend both Universalists and non alike. It misunderstands the idea entirely. Universalism proposes that truth is far more relative than one philosophy or religion could hope to contain and thus espouses doctrines of acceptance and universality. In particular regards to the subject of this book, it advocates universal salvation, an "all roads lead to the same destination" kind of mentality.

This is not Bell's claim.

First, Bell believes (in my opinion, of course) that the ethos of Christianity, the gospel, is unequivocally and entirely true. He believes it is the Truth. He states this throughout numerous podcasts, videos, and books including this one. He believes in one God, one Spirit, and one atoning, necessary sacrifice of Jesus the Christ. This, he argues, is the truth, the love story that God woos hearts with, the redemptive narrative that many reject.

Secondly, he believes that this Truth can be and has been rejected by thousands. By vehicle of sin, the human heart stands against God's grace. There are those that refuse God entirely and those who accept Him, despite their sin. These truths are echoed throughout the Love Wins book and appear prominently in the chapters on Heaven and Hell.

Thus, Rob Bell is far from being a Universalist as he supports one, singular, necessary Truth and one Way towards accessing that Truth. He believes in one God, the author and finisher of this Truth.

2. Rob Bell is not anti-divine wrath and judgement in his promotion of God's love.

Just because human doctrines interpreted from Scripture have structured the exact parameters, some of which Bell questions, does not mean Rob Bell is ignorant and hateful of God's justice.

First, Bell believes in Hell. He states that quite clearly. Certainly, it's a different Hell than many have espoused over the ages, although there have been those who have said similar things. However, he believes in divine retribution, a wrath that requires the cross and a wrath that punishes sin.

Second, Bell believes in sin. Humans have dishonored and rejected God's law and, thus they sin. This sin is punished now and in the future. Hell exists on earth and in the after-life and those who refuse God's gospel here on earth will experience divine punishment in the forms described in Scripture. Bell goes into some great detail on this in the Hell chapter and a few of the following ones.

Bell certainly champions God's love and God's sovereignty in "getting what he wants," namely human reconciliation to himself. BUT, he also believes in and propounds God's wrath, God's anger, and God's punishment.

It really troubles me that these two points among others have been mistreated in dealing with Bell's book. His views are different and they deserve to be discussed. Many are perfectly justified in disagreeing with him. But, please, show a little intellectual honesty and careful, spirit-filled integrity in this discussion. It'd be one thing if these criticisms were just coming from YouTube vloggers or the obligatory angry pastor...but for them to be coming from places like Southern Seminary, Piper and others who have such a strong influence on secular and Christian culture, is unfortunate.

That being said, I'd love to discuss these ideas more with anyone willing to respond. I feel strongly, thus the strong language, but I want to learn more about all this and come to a more informed and, ultimately, Godly perspective on all these events.

Creative Potential

How beautiful it is to watch the sun as it soars across the sky in early hours or to catch sight of it setting into the ocean's tide! How my soul swoons to the dashing thunder and the falling rain! The sound of the sea, the smell of trees, the taste of fresh fruit or a lover's kiss.

It's part of being human. These existential experiences we have in beholding and interacting with nature are core, central to our being. They point to the mysterious, to the ineffable, to the unattainable and, yet, inescapable essence of existence.

They point, if you'll permit my musing, to an indescribable and untamed creator. As streams of sunlight shoot across the sky in millions of endless directions, I can't help but imagine a much greater, much further, unmeasurable designer. One that knows and holds the boundaries of these seemingly boundless entities within nature and within humaninity. One that not only knows the endpoints of the sun's rays, but the depths of the human heart, of sorrow and of love, courage and fear.

It would (and does) seem to many that these things could not be more perfect. That the breathless experience of dew on roses or snow gathering in the heights of cascading mountains, of passion between two people, of the radient dance of the human community; reveals the perfection or at least perfection potential of current reality.

Religion tells a different story, though. Many speak of a time before, an earth that was, a proto-nature. The Judeo-Christian tradition tells of an Eden. In this lush garden, a garden that spanned hundreds of thousands of miles, existed the world's primal community of human and nature. It was a harmonious existence of pure perfection. All was as it should be. No pain, no fear, no death. In this ecosystem, the creator God lived in direct relationship with all others. It wasn't like the current predicament of God "here" and nature "there" or God in "heaven" and human on "earth." Perfect.

Something interesting happened next though, it it's not what you may expect. God, the gentle and kind leader of this society, commanded the two human beings to "Be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it." (Gen. 1.28) This may not seem too odd at first glance. Especially to us as moderns who are not only acquainted with this verse and its meaning, but also with the whole reproduction system. We get that we have sexual organs and are inclined to use them and produce offspring. If we've spent any time in church, we also get that we're supposed to be "stewards," caring for and "subduing" the nature around us.

But, I want to challenge that interpretation. I think there's been a terrible mistake in translation and transmission. Through textual ancestory and cultural change, through countless Bible commentaries, studies, and formations...we've lost the true nature of this verse. Sure, it's just one verse in a few-thousand page text, but it's so much more than that. It's the first command given to humankind! The first of only two given in Eden.

My issue is with the word "fill." It is placed in the text in such a way that it logically follows the sentence before that speaks of our responsibility to reporduce (whether that's to be taken literally and/or figuratively, I can't say). In actuality though, "fill" is not the right word. The word is milaoo. It is the imperative form of the verb used to describe fullness. Not "to fill." The verb form in the text roots from the form used to say "The pitcher is full of water." There is a competely different Hebrew verb form for saying " I fill the pitcher with water." The second verb, "to fill," is active. The verb used in the Biblical text is the passive, the intransitive form that is adjectival in nature.

All that to say, the word is not "fill," but "be full." So God's not saying, simply, "fill the earth." God's saying to humanity, " make it so that the earth is full."

Wait a second! So, the perfect creator God made the world...in perfection...and yet told humanity "it's not full yet, make it full." God made an incomplete masterpiece...purposefully.

God made human beings "in our image." God made us to be creators. We were destined from the start of it all to co-create with God and, in so doing, to complete, to make full the world. We are hard-wired with creative potential.

It's not like the popular Christian narrative that speaks of our job as "restorers." Not exactly anyway. We aren't, in response to the Fall, in response to sin, aiming to restore the world back to a time before sin and pain. Creation was our job all along. It didn't start at the Fall.

The Fall messed things up bad. The entrance of human sin into the world severed us from God. God designed the "co-creating system" to work perfectly as we join him and learn how to create beautifully. So, we badly need to see and revel in the work of Jesus on the cross, the work that realigned us with God, the work that allows us to, once again, co-create and do so well. However, the Fall was not the start of human creative agency.

Creation is our identity. Whether it be through physical elements, ideas, relationships, family, etc... we are co-creators, co-dreamers, co-fillers of a beatiful masterpiece that God began long ago and left open for fulfillment, growth and change.

How captivating is the dance of humanity's God-ordained creativity! How soothing, how riveting the harmonies of instruments and lyrics of masterful musicians! How deep the strokes of brush touch the souls of those who view a finished canvas! How enchanting are the nimble motions of a skilled dancer or the speed and dexterity of a talented sportsman! How the poet's pen pierces deeper and higher than any warrior's instrument could hope to reach!

How marvelous is God, author and creator of all creation! Creation wrought through human hands, creation wrought by God's intent, creation made to fill the earth and make it full, to display and reflect the essence, the glory, of it's creator.

Namaste

"That which is of God in me honors that which is of God in you"

That's one common way of translating this Indian greeting that normally circulates in Sikh and Hindu religious cultures, as well as commonly throughout the east. What a cool way to say "hello."

I have a general sense that Christianity has much to learn from the practices and structures of other global religions and that sense is confirmed on a weekly basis as I participate in a pluralistic society. This greeting is just another example. Although I've heard it many times, it really struck me today. Reading through the book of James in the Bible, I came across his famous section on the tongue. He spends near half the book talking about the severity of common speech, its rarely-credited power. How, in a word, a man can damn another or completely exalt him. How words are indeed the greatest and most pronounced action in human society. Then he says this, " With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men who have been made in God's likeness." (3.9)

It's a good reminder. It's certainly not a hidden message in the Bible. The Book is filled with moralisms on treating others with dignity and respect. Throughout, prophets and teachers remind the reader that "evil" originates in higher and darker places than the human soul; in principalities and structures. Thus, when we stand "against the world and worldliness," it is not a stance against individual people or even groups of people, but rather these mores and structures that have fostered evil on a global level for generations.

No, we should not interact with each other as fallen and evil. Then how should we understand and relate to each other? Namaste. "That which is of God in me honors that which is of God in you"..." That which God has graced unto me so that I can act and see rightly, that of God's love and God's image in me...acknowledges, upholds, and cherishes that which is of God's image and grace in you" Because, we are created God's image; we do behold and embody the glory of Jesus Christ. Because God has given us lenses through which to view the glory of his creation. This is the starting point of a conversation, of any interaction, of community in general. Namaste.