At the end of the year news magazines like Time and U.S. News & World Report catalog the top stories of the year by category. I’m a sucker for these articles. I find it fascinating to watch editors sift through the mundane and the trivial to find those stories that matter. I had a stray thought that has me a bit depressed. The top religion stories of 2011 are, by anybody’ standards, are:

1) The church had a loud and acrimonious debate over the nature of Heave and Hell , or heaven and hell, in Rob Bell’s Love Wins;

2) An engineer who no apparent aptitude for math predicted the world would end on May 21. (Can we all agree to thank God this engineer fiddles with End Time prophesies and instead of building bridges?)

There’s your top stories, church. Content?

Now, I know this isn’t fair. There are countless churches across the world that quietly save marriages, prevent suicides, break addictions, and instill morality in people.  A recently study conducted by the University of PA estimated that 12 churches in the Philadelphia had a $50 Million impact on the city. Moreover, how do you place a price tag on introducing an individual to their creator? The work of the church is quiet and unassuming.

Even with that caveat, are we content with these top stories, which, not coincidentally, expose our theological emphasis on salvation post-death at the expense of salvation-now? What if the church was tad more exuberant about Blood Water Mission reaching it’s milestone of creating 1,000 wells in Africa?  Or The Mentoring Project’s national launch?

Beyond celebrating the beauty of the church better, these two prominent stories should motivate all of us to be a more intentional about the stories we are creating. There’s nothing we can do to erase Harold Camping and the Love Wins controversy from the 2011 Top Ten Religion stories. But there’s still time to round that list out with a little beauty, love, and justice.

Before We Damn Rob Bell to Hell

Don’t Waste Your Heresy

Preface and Chapter One

Chapter Two

Chapter Three

Chapter Four

Chapter Five

Chapter Six, Part One

Chapter Six, Part Two

Chapter Seven, Part One

Chapter Seven, Part Two

Chapter Eight

The last chapter, Pastor Bell leveled his final assault on the traditional conception of Hell.  In this chapter Bell winds down and offers guidance to those he’s persuaded. He consoles these folk that it’s okay they had one believed the way they did. Their belief in a traditional torment was as stepping stone their more enlightened position. And he reminds them that their moral and spiritual decisions still matter. They do not need to be motivated by eternal fire in order to care about the kingdom.

And the book ends with this pastoral guidance.

…

In my opinion Love Wins is a valuable but a fatally flawed book. Pastor Rob Bell is a brilliant writer, thinker, and philosopher.

Bell correctly reminds us that heaven and hell are experienced on both sides of death. He’s imagined discipleship propelled by love and not fear. Perhaps the most valuable aspect of the book is his ability to look at our traditional positions on Hell and to voice concerns about what those positions say about God’s morality. These are questions that the church has not adequately wrestled with in some time, I think.

But ultimately, Pastor Bell failed to deliver a persuasive alternative to the traditional view of Hell. From where I’m sitting, Pastor Bell has a high view of scripture. In a book of this nature it would have been easily to explain away problematic passages through source or textual criticisms, but this was not the case. Not once did Bell challenge the validity of a problem passage. He made concerted effort to reconcile his views with scripture. The results, I’m afraid, are the inconsistent application of interpretive principles including the use of strict literalism when expedient and glaring omissions in his biblical surveys. Others have noted Bell’s selective and incomplete survey of church history when making his arguments.

The initial flap over the book was whether Bell was espousing universalism or not. Bell adamantly denies this charge and a careful reading of the book confirms that, yes, he believes that hell will be populated. Actually, to put it in Bell’s terms: People will still be free to resist God and to live in a self-injurious hellish state. Hell, according to Bell, is not active punishment but freedom to resist God for eternity. Bell’s believe that people will be allowed to repent after death is rooted in his belief that freedom is necessary inherent in love. Therefore, God cannot be love and deny people the right to repent while in their hellish state.

This is a problematic doctrine but it is only one of among many in the book. Pastor Bell recasts Jesus’ resurrection as being illustrative of the circle of life and death found in nature. Jesus’ resurrection is recast into a vague  form of romanticism. When Pastor Bell insisted that Jesus literally was the rock in Exodus 17 in the chapter “There are Rocks Everywhere” he opened the door for a form of Christian panentheism which historically has been held by some Christian universalists ( I am NOT branding Bell as being a panentheist. I am, however, troubled by the logical conclusions of his argument). Finally, Bell argues that a person does not need to be aware of Jesus or to give his or her allegiance to Jesus in order to be saved by Jesus. I confess, there is a strong part of me that wishes to believe this. However, Bell’s soteriology does not square with the Apostle Paul’s insistence in Romans 10:1-17 that a person must “call upon the name of the Lord” to be saved. Bell also seems to minimize the importance of substitutionary atonement. However, the debates between N.T. Wright and John Piper reveal that is possible to not hold to this doctrine and still have remain within orthodoxy.

It’s these flaws in Love Wins that provide the means for  different wings of the church to talk past each other. The Reformed wing of the church, so far, has been pointing out the difficulties I listed above while ignoring Bell’s questions about Hell and the morality of God. Those sympathetic to Bell and a wider grace theology celebrate Bell’s ability to point out the anomalies in the traditional view and rightfully see “older brother” behavior in parts of the Neo-Calvinist’s camp, especially on the blogophere. In doing so, these good folk have the means to turn a blind eye to the bad hermeneutics and doctrine found in the book.

If I could point readers any for a fair look at questions of Heaven and Hell, I’d recommend Scot McKnight’s “Jesus Creed” blog. McKnight, I think, is a fair, thoughtful, and gentle guide for exploring these issues.

If we could figure out how to stop talking past each other, Love just might win.

In spite of the qualms that I have with Pastor Bell with his treatment of the Prodigal Son in the first half of the chapter, I have to admit that the second half of the chapter is particularly strong. Bell is in his wheelhouse in the remainder of the chapter and lays out the theological and sociological difficulties that come with the traditional view of Heaven and Hell:

• Bell writes that the tradition view of Hell is a challenge to God’s morality:

Millions have been taught to accept that if they don’t believe, if they don’t accept in the right way, that is, the way the person telling them the gospel does, and they were hit by a car and died later that same day, God would have no choice but to punish them forever in conscious torment in hell. God, would, in essence, become a fundamentally different being to them in that moment of death. A loving heavenly father who will go to extraordinary lengths to have a relationship with them would, in the blink of an eye, become a cruel, mean, vicious tormentor who would ensure that they had no escape from an endless future of agony.”

p. 85

From my seat, this is Pastor Bell’s finest argument against the traditional conception of Hell. In my opinion, Bell has failed, up to this point of the book, to lay out an alternate construct of Hell that is consistent with scripture. However, this objection is a strong one and deserves better and more thorough discussion than it is currently receiving. Bloggers and pastors and theologians have dissected the suspect to poor hermeneutics in Love Wins with relative ease. I’m not seeing compelling responses to this question, though. If nothing else Love Wins is valuable for its potential to force traditionalists to grapple with the implications of guarded doctrines.

• A theology that flattens out theology to “getting in” usually does so at the expense of being a disciple now and experiencing heaven now. (Although one might ask why isn’t it possible to affirm both?)
• A theology of “fear and scarcity” can drive clergy and their families into viewing God as a slave driver. These folks labor for the kingdom and quietly resent those who don’t. This theology can breed “older brothers.” (It can. This isn’t an propositional argument for or against Hell, though. Just a powerful observation.)
• We can generate a theology of Jesus saving us from an angry God. Bell writes,

“We shape our God, and our God shapes us,

clung to with white knuckles and fierce determination,

can leave a person outside the party,

mad about a goat that was never gotten,

without the thriving life Jesus insists is right here,

all around us,

all the time.”

p. 90

In another post, I addressed the weak Trinitarian theology that allows for this line of thinking. That said, that doesn’t mean that people don’t think this way. I’ve seen it. More than I care to. Even if someone concludes that Bell is wrong in his theology, he or she would make a mistake to ignore the caricatures of proper theology that crop up and harm people.

One final chapter to go.

This is a continuation from yesterday’s post.

Pastor Bell moves from his argument that Jesus was literally the rock in Exodus 17 and returns to a survey of the New Testament. Bell show cases scripture that captures the cosmic vastness of our salvation. We see in Ephesians that Jesus is working to restore the unity of “all things.” Paul crashes through any provincialism in Colossians 1 by declaring that God was revealing the mystery of salvation to the Gentiles. This, of course, was a wrecking-ball on the nationalistic bent that was misguiding Judaism and some Jewish Christians. Bell writes:

“This use of the word “Gentile” is significant, because for many of Paul’s Jewish tribe, whatever God was going in the world God was doing through, and for, them:

Their tribe,

their people,

their faith.

The ones who believed and lived like them.

Us, not them.

We, not you.”

p. 75

 

Pastor Bell’s survey is a needed correction for our small, individualized “Jesus-n-me” salvation that so prevalent in our churches. Yes, Jesus died more my sins– along with those of every citizen of the planet. He correctly points out that Jesus isn’t the property of Christianity and that Jesus himself declared the planet-wide efficacy of his sacrifice:

John 12, “And I , when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

John 6, “This read is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

“He takes this very personally.

He is willing to die for this,

“for the life of the world.”

Jesus is supracultural.

He is present within all cultures.

and yet outside of all cultures.

He is for all people,

and yet he refuses to be co-opted or owned by any one culture.”

p. 76

Pastor Bell is placing the story of today’s church on a parallel path as the Jerusalem church. He’s setting up the argument that Jesus is present in all cultures and free to save people within those cultures whether or not they are aware of Jesus or whether or not they actively surrender to Jesus’ lordship or accept his forgiveness or not.

Pastor Bell notes Jesus words, “I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father expect through me.”

Bell elaborates:

“This is as wide and expansive a claim as a person  can make.

What he doesn’t say is how, or when, or in what manner the mechanism functions that gets people to God through him. He doesn’t even state that those coming to the Father will even know that they are coming exclusively through him. He simply claims that whatever God is going in the world to know  and redeem and love and restore the world is happening through him.”

(p.77)

“And then he leaves the door open, way open. Creating all sorts of possibilities. He is as narrow as himself and as wide as the universe.

“He is as exclusive as himself and as inclusive as containing every particle of creation.”

(p.78)

At this point it would be good more me to pause and affirm where I agree with Pastor Bell. Christ (although he is not the rock in Exodus 17), is working in every culture. We see it in Acts. God waits to give the Holy Spirit until Pentecost, when there’s a large international presence in Jerusalem. God empowers the 120 to share the account of Jesus’ death and resurrection with a multicultural audience. God gives Cornelius– a gentile– visions that lead him to Peter. God leads Philip to share faith with the Ethiopian. Even the most staunch traditionalist can be reminded that Christ is committed to all people and not merely those who look, think, and believe like us.

Bell reminds us that it is possible to encounter Jesus without knowing his name. He reminds us that we have not cornered the market on Jesus. He challenges not to make “negative, decisive, and lasting judgments about poeple’s eternal destinies.” (p. 80).

Check.

Check.

And check.

And the chapter ends.

Despite what I can agree with in this chapter, I’m left with some irreconcilable differences in terms of theology.  It is one thing to affirm that Jesus is drawing all of humanity to himself– all of it.  It’s quite another thing to suggest that you can be saved without being aware of Jesus, consciously accepting the forgiveness of sins, a submitting to his rule.

(Note: I’ve realized that all my page references are for the Nook and don’t correspond with the print versions of the book.)

Pastor Bell continues his exploration of soteriology (how we are saved) in chapter six. Bell is working to make the case that people come to Christ through means more diverse than saving the “Sinner’s Prayer.”

He opens with two stories of men who came to Jesus in unconventional ways. The first was a man who experienced God’s presence on a drug high and was led to follow Jesus. The second story involved a man who was near death in a workplace accident. He saw a white light and began to sense that his life was not right. He prayed “please forgive me” repeatedly. He lived to tell this story. For him this was the moment of conversion.

Certainly these are examples of God “drawing all people to himself.” (John 12:32)

However, Pastor Bell chooses Exodus 17 as the text to explain those stories. The resulting theology lies outside of the Christian tradition. The chapter describes the Israelites’ journey after they flee Egypt. The people are hungry and thirsty and belligerent toward God and Moses both. God instructs Moses to strike the rock and water comes out. The Apostle Paul references the incident, “They all ate the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.” 1 Corinthians 10:4-5.

Bell makes the choice to interpret the Apostle Paul with a wooden literalism:

“According to Paul,

Jesus was there.

Without anybody using his name.

Without anybody saying that it was him.

Without anybody acknowledging just what– or more precisely, who– it was.

Paul’s interpretation that Christ was present in the Exodus raises the question:

Where else has Christ been present?

When else?

With who else?

How else?

Paul finds Jesus there,

in that rock,

Because Paul finds Jesus everywhere.”

p. 73

This interpretation of scripture ignores the typology that fills Moses’ writings. In the Book of Hebrews we learn that the temple was type of Christ. The architecture was designed in a way to explain God’s holiness. The thick curtain separated the Holy of Holies from the rest of the of the temple. Access was limited to that Holiest of places to teach Israel that God is morally different from them and that sin created a division between God and humanity. When Jesus died, God tore the curtain to teach Israel that through Jesus’s sacrifice the division between God and man had been overcome.

But Jesus was not the curtain. The curtain was a “type” of Christ.

Just like the rock was not literally Jesus. The rock was a type of Jesus. Not unless Pastor Bell is advocating a form of Christian Panentheism. Paul did say that Jesus in “in all, through all, and holds all things together.” Jesus does hold the universe together but he is not a part all matter. The creation accounts in Genesis are clear that God is something separate from his creation. I’m not suggesting from this one passage in his book that Bell is a panentheist. That would be something of a rush to judgment. Is is interesting to note, though, that historically some theologians who embrace a “wider grace doctrine” have also embraced Christian panentheism.  It is fair to say that this notion that Jesus literally was the rock is not indigenousness to a Christian world view. Note: I cannot stress enough that am I not branding Bell a panentheist. I’m struggling with a handful of pages from among multiple books by Bell. It’s simply not a large enough sample of thought to land on that conclusion. I am,though,  adding this passage to my wishlist of topics I want Pastor Bell to unpack more.

A few years back Pastor Bell wrote a brilliant book, Sex God, in which he famously said “this is about that.” Pastor Bell understands that God uses physical objects and acts to represent spiritual realities. He reaffirmed this in his chapter about atonement. However, he does not allow that possibility in his reading of Exodus 17 and 1 Corinthians 10.

For Bell, this is that.

This, to me, is curious.

For time’s sake I’m going to have to break my thoughts on chapter 6 into two posts.

In chapter two  Pastor Bell unpacks his theology of Heaven.

Bell holds the theological position that Heaven is not a far off place where God dwells but the final condition of our planet. Heaven is what happens when Jesus Christ returns, judges everything, and purges the planet of the effects of sin. In N.T. Wright’s words, Heaven is what happens when God’s dimension is reunited with this world’s physical dimension.

Heaven is not just a place but a quality of existence. It’s what happens when Jesus’ followers live in a way that anticipates the coming order. Bell notes this is why we pray “Thy Kingdom Come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”

Bell points to the prophets and reminds us that this Heaven includes “all the nations.” He writes:

“That’s everybody. That’s all those different skin colors, languages, and accents; all those kinds of food and music; all those customs, habits, patterns, clothing, traditions, and ways of celebrating–

multiethnic,

multisensory,

multieverything.”

p. 21

Bell then goes on to defend God’s wrath and judgment. He describe Heaven as something that Christ-followers will unable to achieve on there own that God will personally have to intervene to rid the world of everything that threatens “Shalom”:

“Central to their  vision of human flourishing in God’s renewed world, then, was the prophets’ announcement that a number of things that can survive in this world will not be able to survive in the world to come.

Like war.

Rape.

Greed.

Injustice.

Violence.

Pride.

Division.

Exploitation.

Disgrace.

Their description of life in the age to come is both thrilling and unnerving at the same time. For the earth to be free of anything destructive or damaging, certain things need to be banished. Decisions have to be made. Judgments have to be rendered. And so they spoke of a cleansing, purging, decisive day when God would make those judgments. They called this day the “day of the Lord.”

p.22

Bell also defends that idea that God is capable of anger:

“Same with the word “anger.” When we hear people who can’t believe in a God who gets angry– yes, they can. How should God react to a child being forced into prostitution? How should God feel about a country starving while warlords hoard the food supply? What kind of God wouldn’t get angry at a financial scheme that robs thousands of people of their life’s savings?”

p. 23

Pastor Bell then makes a case for Christian living. We are to prepare for God’s future order now. The coming judgment should unnerve us because “we each know what lurks in our own heart– our role in corrupting the world, the litany of ways that our own sins have contributed to the heartbreak we’re surrounded by, all those times we hardened our hearts and kept right on walking, ignoring the cry of someone in need.” (p. 23)

It’s at this point that my discomfort with the chapter increased. Pastor Bell takes us to 1 Corinthians 3 and Paul’s description of “The Day” that the prophets foretold. The Apostle Paul write about how “everything will be brought to light” and how things will be “revealed with fire.” Pastor Bell describes this as “Flames in Heaven.”  The imperfect is consumed. Paul writes, “the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved, even though as one escaping through the flames.”

And this next quote is where my discomfort level and disagreement grows:

“Jesus makes no promise that in the blink of an eye we will suddenly become totally different people who have vastly different tastes, attitudes, and perspectives. Paul makes it very clear that we will have our true selves revealed and that once the sins and habits and bigotry and pride and petty jealousy are removed, for some there simply won’t be much left. “As some escaping through the flames” is how he put it. ”

p. 29

Jesus might not have promised this instant change but Paul seems to have:

“… in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.

1 Corinthians 15:52

Now in fairness to Rob Bell, the Apostle Paul does not explicitly say that our resurrected selves will be sinless. But to borrow and modify a question from Pastor Bell,  ”Is resurrecting  humans as sinful beings the best that God can do?”

Pastor Bell then makes a connection between this passage and the stories of Jesus regarding the surprising people we’ll meet in Heaven:

“The fames of heaven, it turns out, lead us to the surprise of heaven. Jesus tells a story in Matthew 25 about people invited into “the kingdom prepared for [them] since the creation of the world,” and their first reaction is… surprise.”

p. 29

Pastor Bell goes on to note various passages in the Gospels where the morally marginalize are welcomed into the kingdom and while the spiritually self-assured are not.

Here’s where I break with Pastor Bell’s logic. First, I don’t see any connection between the 1 Corinthians 3 passage and those kingdom parables. Paul makes no literary allusions to any of Jesus’ teachings as I can see. Secondly, those kingdom parables are best seen as stories that illustrate Jesus’ ministry. He aligned himself with the sinners and socially marginalized because “it is not the healthy who need a physician but the sick.” The “surprise of heaven” is that the very people the morally self-righteous labels as too wicked to enter Heaven are the ones who embraced the Messiah.

Bell however sees the kingdom being filled through a different set of criteria:

Think about the single mom, trying to raise kids, work multiple jobs, and wrangle child support out of the kids’ father, who used to beat her. She’s faithful, true, and utterly devoted to her children. In spite of the circumstances, she never loses hope that they can be raised in love an go on to break the cycle of dysfunction an abuse. She never goes out, never takes a vacation, never has enough money to buy anything for herself. She gets a few hours of sleep and then repeats the cycle of cooking, work, laundry, bills, more work, laundry, bills, more work, until she falls into bed late at night, exhausted.

With what she has been given she has been faithful. She is a woman of character and substance. She is kind and loving even when she’s exhausted.

She can be trusted.

Is she the last who Jesus says will be first?

Does God say to her, “You’re the kind of person I can run the world with?”

p. 30

Pastor Bell seems to offer competency to co-reign in the kingdom come as better standard for entrance into heaven-on-earth. However, in chapter one, Bell rails against any kind of works contributing to salvation:

“Accepting, confessing, believing—those are things we do.

Does that mean, then, that going to heaven is dependent on something I do?

How is any of that grace?

How is that a gift?

How is that good news?

Perhaps I’m misreading Bell. Maybe he sees her struggles not as “works” but as evidence of Kingdom-worthy character. If so, I would suggest that belief in the resurrection and a confession of Jesus’ Lordship (Romans 10:9-10) could also be offered as similar evidence of such character. I struggle with seeing surrender to Christ and following his Lordship out of gratitude a form of “works.”

Again, another chapter in which I read many commendable truths but then found myself ending the chapter in sharp disagreement. The Chapter on Hell is next. I’m anticipating that “the flames of heaven” and “hell” will be identical and that he’ll view hell as a type of purgatory. But I could be wrong.

…

As an aside, I was curious as to how a Eugene Peterson came to be comfortable with endorsing a book that fell outside of his personal theology. I love his answer.

…

Again, if you are under the opinion that I’ve read Pastor Bell poorly and that I’m misrepresenting him, please make a comment. I’m not making any claims at infallibility.

…

Theology aside, Pastor Bell is a heckuva writer. I could learn from him.

I started reading Love Wins this morning. I thought I’d post my initial impressions as I work through the book. I’m not offering these thoughts as final word on Rob Bell or his theology. I tend to agree with Scot McKnight; universalism is a widely held belief in Christian circles that is quietly held on a popular level. Pastor Bell’s book (and I’m not calling him a universalist,  I’m a mere two chapters into the book) has given voice to this population. The release of Love Wins has begun a conversation that has pushed questions about the nature of the afterlife, Heaven, Hell, judgment, sin, grace, and God’s character into the forefront. Regrettably, this conversation did not begin well. My fear is that the acrimony that has filled the blogosphere has permanently poisoned the conversation, drawn dividing lines, and will cause Christians to talk past each other. I hope I’m wrong.

Here’s my initial impressions of the preface and the first two chapters. As a reader if you feel that I’ve misunderstood Bell, please weigh in on the comments.

Preface- Millions of Us

Pastor Bell has been criticized by some as being coy and intentional vague about his intentions some of his writings. I’ve only read Sex God before this, so I can’t speak to that criticism. But Pastor Bell seems straightforward in his intentions as early as page four:

“There are a growing number of us who have become acutely aware that Jesus’s story has been hijacked by a number of other stories, stories that Jesus isn’t interested in telling, because they have nothing to do with what he came to do.  The plot has been lost, an it’s time to reclaim it.” –p. 4

and

“A staggering number of people have been taught that a select few Christians will spend forever in a peaceful, joyous place called heaven, while the rest of humanity spends forever in torment and punishment in hell with no chance for anything better. It’s been clearly communicated to many that this belief is a central truth of 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 so desperately needs to hear.” p. 5

So much for beating around the bush. Rob is suggesting that someone other than he is the heretic and that he’s interested in rescuing the faith and returning it to its real, but forgotten fundamentals.

Chapter One: What about the Flat Tire?

This chapter opens strongly. Rob Bell captures the heart of the question quite well. Is it moral for God to eternally judge millions of people for a faith- decision make during a brief eighty-year life? In Bell’s words, “Is millions of people going to Hell over tens of thousands of years the best that God can do? Bell questions Calvinism and the notion that God would create millions of people but only chose to save an elect minority.

These are excellent questions that deserve serious thought. A few weeks ago, Donald Miller posted about dealing with anomalies in our belief systems. Our doctrines about Hell and election do raise important questions that deserve better answers than are generally offered.

Bell notes that the doctrine of “The Age of Accountability” thats taught in some conservative circles contains an intellectual framework that’s compatible with a “wider mercy.” If children under the age of twelve are not old enough to me moral accountable for making decisions about sin and salvation and are ushered into heaven if they pass prematurely, then why wouldn’t God offer similar grace to a thirteen-year-old in a remote African tribe who died unexpectedly. Why would the twelve year old go to Heaven and the thirteen-year-old child spend and eternity in Hell. It’s a smart argument. However, Bell doesn’t consider the possibility that doctrine itself is wrong. The psalm that many base their belief in the age of accountability is probably about a ceremony celebrating the passage into adulthood. Bell’s point still stands: Some corners of conservative Christianity teach universalism for the twelve-and-under crowd.

I appreciated Bell’s teaching that the story of Christianity is not us “going elsewhere.” N.T. Wright reminded us in Surprised By Hope that Heaven is the Earth restored and rescued from the curse of sin. We are living on the site of the kingdom come.

However, I felt the chapter made an unfortunate turn at this point. Bell began to deconstruct our American formula for Christianity; that is “say the Sinner’s Prayer and how you life matters little.”   Bell surveyed the Gospels and Epistles and rightfully pointed out that nowhere does Jesus use the words that a “personal relationship with Jesus” was the way to Heaven. In fact, Bell points out the variety of demands that Jesus placed on people. He told Nicodemus he must be born again to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but he told the rich young ruler to sell all of his possessions. He rewards the centurion for his faith and later applauds a moral outcast for praying, “Lord have mercy on me a sinner.” Bell piles up these conversion accounts, extracts what the person did to be save or to win the salvation of those around them, and then asks:

Is it way you say,

or who you are,

or what you do,

or what you say you are going to do,

or who your friends are,

or who you are married to,

or whether you give birth to children?

Or is it what questions you’re asked?

Or is it the questions you’re asked in return?

Or is it whether you do what you’re told and go into the city?’

page 14

The implications are unspoken but seem clear. If there’s something we need to do to be saved, why didn’t God just come out and say it clearly? But is the doing to be saved that bothers Bell.

“Accepting, confessing, believing—those are things we do.

Does that mean, then, that going to heaven is dependent on something I do?

How is any of that grace?

How is that a gift?

How is that good news?

Pastor Bell’s equating belief and confession with works is problematic of course when you compare them with the words of the Apostle Paul:

“If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.  For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.”

Romans 10:9-10

Bell seems to stop short of developing his argument to its logical conclusion but he seems to be implying the God is free to save someone whether they ever encounter Jesus in this life or not. Bell’s appears to be making a strong argument for God’s sovereignty, just not a Calvinistic one.

This is a long post for me so I’ll hold my thought on Chapter Two for tomorrow.