Rob Bell, the gods aren't angry tour: San Francisco (Some Reflections & Concerns)

Rob Bell is an excellent communicator, a very likable guy, and a man whose enthusiastic love for God and others is compelling and contagious. If I were to hang out with Rob, I think I'd really enjoy his company.

That being said, ever since reading Rob's book, Velvet Elvis: Re-painting the Christian Faith (which is the most attractively designed book I've ever read, and which makes some excellent points), I've had some significant questions and concerns over Rob's handling of Scripture and some of his theological conclusions. And I'm certainly not alone in my concern.

Many Christian leaders/pastors/scholars/theologians/bloggers, coming from a diversity of backgrounds--conservative, emergent, reformed, etc., have critiqued Bell's writing. Much of the critique has centered on Rob's handling of Scripture, on how 2nd-6th century rabbinics governs his interpretation of Scripture, and on Rob's expression of the gospel which can sound rather different, or at least incomplete, from the biblical gospel. Some have thoughtfully, humbly critiqued Bell's writing. Others been less thoughtful and charitable in expressing their concerns. Rather than further rehash critique of Bell's Velvet Elvis here, I'd encourage you to google this topic and study the matter for yourself.

Needless to say, it was with great curiosity that I took my wife on a date Monday night to listen to Rob Bell speak. After a hurried dinner at the Village Pizzeria on Van Ness Blvd. in San Francisco, my wife and I walked across the street to The Grand, stop number 6 on Rob's the god's aren't angry tour.

The website bills Bell's tour as follows:

Part anthropology, part history, part deconstruction - this is new material that Rob hasn't taught before, exploring how humans invented religion to make themselves feel better.

Since in my own preaching and teaching I constantly contrast the gospel with religion, seeking to show how the gospel of Jesus is something totally different from religion, I was quite interested in the topic of this tour.

As my wife and I approached the venue the first thing we saw and heard were angry dudes with megaphones who kept yelling about Hell, who clearly weren't happy about Rob Bell's tour, and who evidently believed most people who came to listen to Rob needed to "turn or burn."      

These guys were jerks. I'd never want to hang out with these guys. Unless, of course, I had the opportunity to show them (inflict upon them) my favorite mixed martial arts move, the move I refer to as "the turn or burn." Ask me about it sometime.

Leaving the sidewalk megaphone men, we entered The Grand. The Grand is a hip venue. I'd never been there before. My guess is that 600-700 people were present. My wife and I sat in the balcony.

Part of why we sat in the balcony was because of the bar. This was the first time I've attended a Christian speaking event where a friendly bartender was available to serve up your favorite beverage.

From the picture below you can see that the friendly bartender either served me a beer or a glass of apple juice. You be the judge.

A few minutes after we settled into our seats on the left wing of the balcony, Rob Bell came on stage and began his message. Rob spoke for a long time, just a bit over 1 hour and 30 minutes. His delivery was exceptional and engaging. He began his message by telling a fictional, humorous story of the religious impulse of an ancient cave woman and cave man. This led into a survey of the religion and mythology of ancient cultures, of how all ancient cultures had some form of religion, some form of dealing with feelings of guilt and shame through offering sacrifices to their gods and idols.

Rob then placed the story of the Bible against this backdrop, showing how the biblical story was not written in isolation from these other cultures, but was written in the midst of such cultures and worldviews. Beginning in Genesis, Rob stressed the utter uniqueness of the God of the Bible, emphasizing the fact that God spoke to Abram/his people (Genesis 12) and the fact that God provided for Abraham/his people (Genesis 22). I thought Rob handled Genesis 12 and 22 very well, especially his emphasis that Genesis 22 is all about substitution, about God providing a substitute for his people. I began to get excited for how this set things up for Rob to talk about how and why Jesus substituted himself on the cross in the place of sinners like you and me.

Beginning to use the altar prop that sat on stage, Rob then spoke about the sacrificial system as recorded in Leviticus and practiced throughout the centuries by God's people, both in the Tabernacle and in the Jerusalem Temple. Next Rob spoke of the corruption of the Temple/sacrificial system and of how Jesus confronted this corruption and claimed to be the true Temple, the true sacrifice of exchange between God and humanity.

Rob then spoke a great deal from Hebrews. I loved much of what Rob did here. He gave the people solid biblical theology--he spoke of how Hebrews teaches you to go back and read the whole Bible, the whole Old Testament, as a book about Jesus. Amen. I'm stressing this same, absolutely central point as I'm presently teaching through Hebrews.

But it was here, during Rob's statements on Hebrews, that his message began to concern me. As Rob repeatedly emphasized that through the sacrifice of Jesus God has reconciled and made peace with all things, I began to see that Rob wasn't going to talk about a foundational biblical truth that runs from Genesis 3 straight through to the end of the Bible, the biblical truth which makes the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross both necessary and amazing, the biblical truth that makes the good news of the gospel so good: Sin.

Though Rob spoke articulately and personally about the guilty, shameful, inadequate feelings we all have and the false ways we go about dealing with those feelings, Rob never articulated humanity's sin problem. As Rob told the story of the Bible, he left out a central plotline. He left out a central doctrine. He left out the plotline of the Fall, the doctrine of sin, the tragedy of humanity's severe separation from God due to the distance between God's holiness and our sin. As Rob sought to convey the message of the Bible, even the climax of the Bible--Jesus' sacrifice on the cross, he failed to articulate the truth of the human condition, the complexity and depth of what's wrong with the human heart--where all of our guilty, shameful, inadequate feelings come from: our separation from a loving, holy God due to our massive sin problem.

It's evident to me that Rob Bell highly values study of the Scriptures. But it was at this point in the message that I began to feel that Rob and I read different Bibles, or at least that we read the same Bible very differently. The big idea of "the god's aren't angry" tour is that the God of the Bible isn't angry and, therefore, we're all okay, everybody is okay--we're all okay with God. Well, as I read my Bible I simply don't see this. My Bible tells of a God who rightfully remains angry, angry over sin. My Bible tells of a God who is so holy, glorious, just, and loving that he hates sin and is committed to doing away with sin. As I look around at a sinful, broken world, I find my only hope in the fact that my God is indeed angry at sin and has promised to do something about it.

An understanding of the biblical plotline/doctrine of sin and the just anger of God over sin is what makes the good news of the gospel so good, so sweet, so amazing and transforming. The biblical gospel is the good news that centuries ago, on the cross, God the Father poured out his wrath against sin and sinners upon his sinless Son. Jesus Christ lived the sinless life that you and I are unable to live and he died the tragic death that you and I deserve to die. Jesus did this in our place, as our substitute, to pay for our sins and reconcile our broken relationship with God. A Christian is someone who owns up to their massive sin problem, who recognizes a holy God's just anger towards sin, and who places their faith in Jesus, rejoicing over the reality that God poured out his anger against sin on his sinless Son, instead of on the sinner. 

This last Monday night, I didn't hear this gospel from Rob Bell. I didn't hear him deal honestly with the depths of the human condition/problem (all humans have a massive sin problem, the problem of being radically separated from the one true God who is justly angry over sin). And I didn't hear him deal clearly with God's solution to the human condition/problem (at the cross God graciously poured out his anger over sin on his sinless Son instead of on sinners, so that all who repent of their sin and trust in Jesus receive a restored relationship with God). Though I'm not saying that Rob believes this, I think the natural extension of the message that I heard from him on Monday night and the impression that any non-Christian would've had from his message is one of universalism--that God isn't angry at sin or at anyone, that on the cross Jesus has made reconciliation with all things and all people are automatically "okay" with God (no need to repent of sin and place faith in Jesus), and that God has placed humans at the center of the universe, rather than himself. This portrait that Rob painted of God and of the cross greatly troubles me.

A few weeks I wrote a post entitled, The Cross: Your Greatest Criticism & Your Greatest Affirmation. In that post I wrote:

The cross of Christ is simultaneously the greatest criticism and the greatest affirmation you could ever receive.

The great criticism of the cross is that you are so sinful that God had to sacrifice his Son on the cross for your sins. The great affirmation of the cross is that you are so loved that God sacrificed his Son on the cross for your sins.

The cross criticizes you, it reveals the extent of your sin. The cross simultaneously affirms you, it reveals the extent of God's sacrificial love for you through Jesus.

The cross that I heard Rob Bell speak of on Monday night was a cross full of affirmation, but void of criticism. My conviction is that you don't have a true cross unless you hold together the paradox of the cross--that what Jesus did on the cross is simultaneously a radical criticism of your sinfulness and a radical affirmation of your value to God. Rob's message left me with a lot of affirmation, but no criticism. His message left me with a big vision of myself and a small vision of God.

But when I survey the wondrous cross of the Bible I'm simultaneously criticized and affirmed, giving me a big vision of a very big, very good God and small vision of myself, a sinner saved by amazing grace. I experience joy, I give glory to God, and I am of help to my neighbor and my city when I have such a perspective.

I love to quote the famous words of John Newton, the former slave trader who wrote the hymn Amazing Grace, "I'm a great sinner and Christ is a great Savior." I don't think those 10 words came to mind for many people listening to Rob Bell on Monday night in San Francisco.

I wish I'd had an opportunity to speak with Rob after the message. Like I said above, I think I'd really enjoy hanging out with the guy. If I had gotten a chance to talk with Rob I would've asked him three questions/said three things to him:

1. Rob, I felt that your message mostly ignored what the Bible has to say about the reality and extent and depth of sin. Could you share with me what you believe the Bible teaches about sin?

2. Rob, what you had to say about Jesus and the cross seemed to suggest that you don't hold to the traditional, penal substitutionary understanding of Christ's death on the cross. Could you share with me what exactly you believe about the atonement, about why Christ died on the cross and what he accomplished there?

3. Rob, I felt like your message, especially for the non-Christians in the audience, left a wide open door to universalism. I would imagine with was unintentional. Could you tell me what you believe about salvation, heaven, and hell?

Perhaps this blog post will make its way back to Rob, giving him an opportunity to answer these questions from a distance. Hopefully I fairly represented Rob's message and humbly expressed my concerns with his message. I welcome your comments, whatever you might think of Rob Bell or of this post. And, if you live in any of the cities listed here, I'd encourage you to check out Rob's tour for yourself. Perhaps you'll get a chance to ask the three questions I wanted to ask.

Comments

[Danny Slavich]

Justin,

This is a very helpful and thoughtful interaction. I have thought about going to the the tour stop here in Louisville. I appreciate the way you explained this fundamental flaw in Rob Bell's presentation. It's unfortunate that the protesters outside used such a brash and unhelpful way to present what Rob was missing -- that we are sinful.

[B. Minich]

Thanks, Justin. Very helpful and perceptive.

Now, I don't think what you had was apple juice. After all, apple juice doesn't have the remainders of a head. ;)

[Kevin]

A gracious yet discerning post Justin, thanks.
On the comparatively irrelevant other issue I'm going for apple juice. If you look carefully the 'head' is condensation on the outside of the cup, partially removed by finger prints (IMHO)!

[dani]

excellent post justin... i also have similar concerns about where rob stands on some fundamentals of the Christian faith and would very much like to see how your questions would be answered.

[Michael]

Justin,

I really liked most of your observations of the Rob Bell presentation. However I think your portrayal and contempt for the men outside was a bit hasty. Would you really want to exhibit your "turn or burn" moves on men who might be doing right when a person making a presentation just inside who might be doing diservice to the Christ on His cross in diminishing its importance and centrality in the gospel message?

What if they were telling the truth and Rob Bell did deny the need for substitutionary attonement through the shed blood of Christ? How would that effect what those men were saying about his presentation and the need to turn from it. I am sure everyone can feel good about going to it because the revenue raised will be donated to a good cause, but is the essence of what he is saying true? Or would it be true that people that adhere to a universal teaching of attonement without need for repentance, should they not come to the truth of the gospel and repent and believe on Christ would they face the complete wrath of God because of their sin?

You might want to check out this you tube video similar to the situation you described http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9XorvaC4qs

Thanks for all of your challenging posts. I really enjoyed the Dan Wallace presentation and your blog about it.

[eric]

Great post Justin,
i can't help but thing that only In rich, white, western america can a god with no wrath exist. I am sure Christian people in sudan right now who are losing loved ones to persecution are grateful for God's justice and hatred for sin. I think it is proof positive that we need to be aware of culture, contextualize to culture, but not universalize our culture over the word of God. love your blog.

[Francis]

Justin,

I thought your posting was extremely well written. It was some of the best writing I have read regarding the topic of Christianity.

I think your feedback has so much value because I see it as more than just a critique of Rob Bell, but a surgical breakdown of the way our culture desires God to be. I'm not an expert, but to me it feels like more and more people want to believe there is a God, but refuse to believe there is any conflict between us. We want to believe there is bad in the world, but that we are not bad.

I feel as though I am not surprised that Rob Bell's following has grown so rapidly. It caters to the people's deep need of God, without having them own up to their sinfulness. It is a cruel irony that our insecurity keeps us from confessing our sins to Christ. And it is exactly that which gives us security.

Quickly! Regarding the comment on the "Men Outside" the event. I agree they very well may have been correct in their assertions of Rob Bell's teachings. It is how they go about responding to it that I believe shows the true humility of one's heart. There is a way to defend God's truth without pride, self righteousness or anger. I think if you read Justin's response to Bell's talk you will see just that.

[Drew Dixon]

Thanks for this post. I have kept up a little with this tour and have recently read Velvet Elvis. I have to agree, I think if I sat down with good ole Rob we would have a lot in common. We would likely be frustrated with some of the same things and have some of the same hobby horses but I would want to ask the same three questions you posed!

My fear is that if I could sit down and ask him these three questions it wouldn't be a very productive conversation. I am worried that I couldn't get a straight answer on any of those questions. I cringe to even say that because I hate to speak for people . . . but what Bell has been saying lately sure makes me feel that way.

[Brendt]

Michael, I know the question wasn't addressed to me, but I'll respond to it anyway.

Three words: truth in love

If Justin's analysis of Bell's presentation was accurate (and I have no reason to believe it wasn't), then Bell was loving, but kinda light on at least some parts of the truth.

On the flip side, even if every last thing the guys outside was true, I'm sure it was VERY light on love.

Not knowing anyone's heart, it's impossible to know what the positive effects of Bell's talk were. But I'd bet the farm that there were NO positive effects of the actions of those clowns outside.

[Pastor Chad]

Would it not be amazing if a speaker like Bell would put his gifts to work on the whole gospel. He is such an engaging speaker and presenter that it would be a great asset to the church. I love his emphasis on the love of God, however, like you, I am worried that he does so at the expense of our responsibilities toward our own lives of sinfulness. I am not in favour of the kind of ranting presentation of sin that those protesters outside gave, because they ONLY emphasised sin. In response to them, however, I would not want to swing the pendulum all the way over to the other side to emphasise ONLY grace. We need both to truly understand what is going on.

Great post!

[Aaron]

I would be careful about condemning the "men outside" without having spoken with them in an attempt to discern their motives. It's possible they were protesting out of self-righteous and proud hearts. But it's also very possible they were doing so out of true humility -- a humility that loves God more than the approval of man (which is rare in our culture). It might actually be pride to say that we can know their hearts just by looking at a picture and reading a few words about them.

[Jen]

Excellent post. The Gospel has no real impact or meaning until we fully realize why, indeed, it IS the Good News. That the Almighty would go to such lengths to redeem such unworthy creatures is stunning and, yes, amazing grace. Thanks for this; it's very thoughtful and thorough.

[Mel Kizedek]

He's doing what others (Ed Young Jr, Rick Warren, et al) do: They universalize the atonement. All humans' sins are paid for. This is the conclusion when the doctrine of sin is not clearly defined. Requires courage to do that.

[Ben Pun]

Justin, I stumbled on your blog a while ago...great post. Your critique sounds very fair (i dont know i wasnt there) and the spirit of love is evident. Your questions for Rob Bell led me to go to the mars hill website, and under their "what we believe" section ( http://www.marshill.org/believe/ ) it seems like Bell subscribes to basically a christus victor/ liberation theology. When I read it, it sounds like sin is referred to as oppression, mostly in the corporate sense, not the individual sense and redemption is through Christ through kingdom living, defined as living to bless others especially the marginalized. from the webpage - "every single human being is born into bondage to sin. God wants to liberate us from sin...when we begin to use our resources, energy and power to preserve our own comfort and empire, we are sinning...[God] wants to liberate the world from physical, spiritual and cultural bondage. Most of us ahve been given great wealth, talent and energy. And God wants us to share it with others who don't have enough. What if the Church began to understand that God wants to fix this entire planet?" I agree with you while this redemption-narrative plotline is definitely biblical, the gospel of personal justification is marginalized, which is the key to everything!

[Motte]

Great post. It helps me understand some statements Rob made about homosexuality from his previous book tour, sex god. If everyone is automatically "okay," why would anyone need to turn from a sinful lifestyle.

BTW, that was definitely a beer in your hand. ;-)

[schnauzers4huckabee]

"The one who will not use the rod hates his son, but the one who loves him disciplines him diligently." Prov. 13:24
God's love, without chastening and discipline and judgment, is not love at all.
The Bible says it makes us as illegitimate children, as bastard sons, should he not love us with those aspects of His nature.
You can't say God loves you, but redefine love to mean "He really likes you alot and wants to dote on you all the time." It simply isn't true nor is it going to be helpful to any human being. He does have great affection toward his children (those who are born again,) but in that love He rebukes, disciplines, judges, withholds, etc. because He is infinitely wise and we are infinitely dumb by comparison, and He knows what is best for us, as a good father does.
In case you have been deceived, and I do not say this at all jokingly, we WILL still be facing God on judgment day guys, every single one of us, and we will be giving account for our lives-it's still in the Bible (God's word doesn't change.)
For such a scholarly fellow in theological studies, Rob sure seems to miss such elementary foundational principles.
I never knew truth was open for interpretation until he said so. I wonder, does he let his children run out in front of cars- since it may not be true they really would be run over? I mean, may be it's not REALLY what would happen. Maybe, all these years, we've just been interpreting gravity and heavy moving objects coming at small kids in the road at 55 miles an hour all wrong. Does he test out that theory?
Also, for all who believe that Rob Bell is "such a gifted speaker" - it may be so, but I believe he uses the gift of serious manipulation and soothsaying. He manipulates truth, reshapes it out of his intellect to sound clever and eloquent, and uses it to further manipulate your mind to stay focused on what he wants you to be thinking about- instead of allowing the Holy Spirit to reveal truth to your heart.
He does not worship the same God as true born again evangelical Biblical Christians - he worships the god that he created in his mind to suit his lifestyle, his ministry, and himself- which is idolatry.
At best, we ought to pray for him, his cohorts, and his followers to be convicted by the Holy Spirit to repent and put their trust in the real Jesus, who died for their SIN, and to walk out their faith with fear and trembling before the Almighty Triune God, by His grace, because of His everlasting love for us.
I have no intention to judge Rob Bell in any way other than to judge the fruits of his ministry, the lies in his books and his numerous videos, etc.
I believe God wants Rob to go to heaven and NOT to hell, and that He loves him very very much. However, Rob's false teaching is offensive to God- He was aware of the truth at one point and he defiled it, spreading this mishmash confusion of universalism, self love, and rubbish meology.

[Michael]

Brent,

Thanks for your kind reply.

I also believe Justin’s analysis of Rob Bell is accurate from the perspective from a member of the audience and an audience to his books, sermons and videos.

I truly think the Holy Spirit of God has testified to Justin, and many more that have commented here on this post that something about it just isn’t right. That the Crux of the Gospel message of Christ being the personal propitiation for our sin was lacking. That while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. To leave people in a state of belief that Christ died to redeem the whole world and yet leave out the response to “What are we to do?” (Acts 2:37) leaves the people in a worse state than what they might have come in with God is not angry with you. You are okay. We need to just save the planet and help each other. To me that is not loving in anyway. I think the United Nations is doing that too. What is loving is standing like Peter on Pentecost (Acts 2), proclaiming Christ as Messiah, our guilt at slaying that Christ, Proclaiming His resurrection, Wrath and promise to make His enemies His footstool, and once again in vs.36 our guilt in His execution.

I wonder if any of us had passed by that day in Jerusalem would we have wagged our heads and said “Jerk! That is totally unloving.” “All that talk of wrath and our guilt is not going to bring anyone to your Messiah, maybe we should just give them the old “turn or burn”.

Aside from that I have listened to almost every sermon from the Mars Hill website posted in the last year. I did this because I wanted to be informed and I was growing uneasy about the teaching that was coming from some of these very popular books, videos and resources. Also because of Rob Bell’s association with Doug Pagitt, and Brian Mclaren. Both of these men, and others in the Emergent Conversation, however loving and pleasant, hip, relevant they may seem are slowly drifting and mutilating the faith and gospel presented in Scripture. Some possibly denying or not affirming the Virgin Birth of Christ, another questioning the Deity of Christ or saying its importance in the Gospel needs to be re-examined. The move by some of these in questioning homosexuality as something that equates to it is time the church takes a new perspective on sexuality and re-imagine it is very disturbing. He also allows these men to come and fill his pulpit or teach those entrusted to his care.

Mark Driscoll gave a good presentation at the Convergent Confrence in September. He gives a good testimony about his involvement with the growing emergent movement and his knowledge of these men’s beliefs and teachings, including Rob Bell. Here is the link: http://sebts.edu/Convergent/GeneralInfo/

You would have to just go back a couple of months in their sermon archive to listen to Brian Mclaren and Doug Pagitt. If you go back to around last April you would a clearer view on what Rob believes about Hell, what it is and who goes there, the return of Christ, the Rapture, ect. Some of it doesn’t quite match the doctrinal statements posted on the church website.

Lastly, you are correct in that if the men outside did not present the death of Christ on the Cross as the only way to escape the coming wrath of God at the least they would not be loving and just be an annoyance.

Yet if they had done it in love and with the truth then I have to conclude that they have followed just as Paul said in 1 Cor 4:10 We are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are wise in Christ. We are weak, but you are strong. You are held in honor, but we in disrepute.

I would not bet the farm yet, just maybe that Chia pet.

Thanks for the lively discussion.

[Dean]

I used to feel kind of bad about myself because I thought God was angry with me for trying to ignore Him all my life. Now I don't feel bad about myself anymore because God isn't angry with me. I guess that means I can keep ignoring Him.

[Big Chris]

Justin,
Thanks for posting this. Very interesting read, and from what I can tell a fair critique. I have a friend who is going to be attending Bell's presentation in Indy, and I'll pass this onto him and see what he thinks afterwards.

Big Chris

[Brendt]

Michael

On Driscoll, I'm already there. As a self-confessed Driscoll fanboy, I listened to that message some time ago.

I hear what you're saying, and maybe I'm biased because I grew up around a lot of Pharisee-ism, but that sign just SCREAMS to me, "I thank thee, that I am not as other men are".

[Brendt]

Michael

On Driscoll, I'm already there. As a self-confessed Driscoll fanboy, I listened to that message some time ago.

I hear what you're saying, and maybe I'm biased because I grew up around a lot of Pharisee-ism, but that sign just SCREAMS to me, "I thank thee, that I am not as other men are".

[Francis]

I know there has been a lot of discussion about the protesters outside. Their level of effectiveness in what they are doing I won't comment on. The issue of whether or not it is Godly I think comes down to the state of their heart.

I would venture to say even those who made jokes about these people in reality want the best for them. I won't speak for others, but I feel as though whenever evangelism contains human anger, it is unGodly or prideful. It disturbed me the most when I clicked the youtube link a commenter provided that, in what I saw, was justification for "flexing" on other people in the name of the father, because Jesus himself did that.

I actually had a lady a year ago justify some anger she had in her heart towards "sinners" with that story from scripture. I was too young a Christian at the time to bring this point up then so I'll do it now. JESUS is GOD, we are not. That type of table flipping, finger pointing, "you're gonna burn in hell" anger is OK for Him only. We on the other hand never have the right to harbor anger. "He who is angry at his brother has committed murder". We are taught not to offer up any sacrifices to God until we have let go of our anger towards our brother. Jesus forgave people's sins in the street and we don't try to copy that for the same reason.

I don't want to judge those people because I don't know them. Maybe there is no anger in their hearts and they are just simply trying to convey God's just anger while at the same time giving the good news. I'm just concerned with this idea that if you're not doing what those people outside are doing it's not real love. It's soft and it's ignoring God's wrath. Justin for example has told me to my face, at great personal discomfort that areas in my life were sin and greatly angered God. That I needed Jesus in order to rectify those areas. But his posture and energy was that of a fellow sinner, he doesn't tell me through a bull horn outside my house, wearing a shirt whose largest word is BURN.

Maybe there is no pride or personal anger in what these people are doing. But I wonder if they would consider wearing a sweater or holding a sign that said, "I'm the worst sinner of all, but Jesus saved me from death and he can save you too" just as Paul did.

We may disagree on some points but I get the feeling that many of the readers of this blog agree on the most important thing, Jesus! God bless you all and see you at the supper of the lamb. Pass the gravy.

[Jason]

Hiya,

Very Even, kind, discerning post. But I would think that because in reading Velvet Elvis, reading along, mmhmm, yes, mmhhmmm, hey!ummmmhuh? I came to a few points where I felt he made a summative statement and I found myself disagreeing with the summary of multiple points with which, individually, I felt I could agree.

In fact your review read as I felt while reading his book.

Thanks for helping with the discussion in such a kind manner

Jason

[Justin Buzzard]

Everyone, thanks for the thoughtful, mostly humbly-stated comments.

-So far, I think the most thought provoking comment comes from Eric.

-So far, I'm shocked that there have been some comments (both here and in a few of the 75 or so blogs between America and Australia that have linked to this post) defending the bullhorn, "turn or burn" guys.

-Answer to the beverage question: beer. I do, however, appreciate a good glass of apple juice when the mood is right.

[Kevin Williams]

It's pretty obvious what's wrong with Rob Bell's message. 1, he's not saved, and 2. he's not saved.

Maybe Rob Bell should have taken the advice from the people outside, because clearly according to Scripture, if he doesn't turn he's going to burn.

Mt 7:13-20:"“Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits."

"For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths." 2 Tim 4:3-4.

"Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock;" Acts 20:28-29

[brian]

I appreciate your thoughts on the tour. I am attending tonight's presentation in Dallas.

I guess my response would be that we cannot forget who the audience is. Although Christians may want to come, I would say, Rob's tours are generally targeted toward people outside the church - on the fringe. Take the tagline: the gods aren't angry - why humans invented religion to make themselves feel better - that is not a line that necessarily attracts theologians. So, that coupled with the adult beverages I think provide a sample of the target audience. An audience that knows about sin, and has been told God is angry at them BECAUSE of their sin. That is not scriptural.

[Justin Buzzard]

Kevin, I think your comment is lame. I think your judgment of Rob's salvation status, a guy you don't even know, is immensely presumptous and lacking a spirit of humility.

Brian, I think it would be good to think through your comment a bit more. Saying that's it's "not scriptural" that God is angry at sin/sinners who haven't come to trust in Christ and his cross work is a rather unscriptural stance.

[Kevin Williams]

Justin, I'm judging Rob Bell's salvation based on Scripture, and Jesus said you will know them by their fruits. Rob Bell is a Ravenous wolf saying the way is wide. What was it Paul said about if someone comes to you preaching another gospel.

Also this examination of Velvet Elvis may interest you and others: http://www.sohmer.net/Velvet_Elvis.pdf
It includes:
Heretical Errors:
Wrong View of the Trinity.
Wrong View of the Exclusivity of Christianity.
Wrong View of the State of Mankind
Wrong Gospel.

Aberrant Theology:
Wrong View of Jesus’ Purpose.
Wrong View of Heaven and Hell.
Wrong View of Rabbinic Judaism.
Wrong hermeneutics:

[John]

I think you are critiquing Rob a little too much.

If you take a step back and look at the whole of the message, Rob was saying that "since people think God is angry at them, these people continue to offer sacrifices over and over again to make peace with God." We still do it today.

The goal was to press this truth into people over and over so that they would stop trying to earn favor with God and rest in Jesus' sacrifice on our behalf. To me, this talk emphasized Jesus' work and convicted us to stop trying to take away from the work of the cross.

I think "the fall" was emphasized by the fact that everyone in the world is trying to get back to God, bu we are unable to because we don't trust in Jesus' sacrifice, but continue to make our own.

[Brendt]

Justin, if you knew your Greek, you'd know that "you will know them by their fruits" actually translates better to "Kevin will be able to unequivocally judge what God has chosen".

[Justin Buzzard]

Kevin, I'll have to check out your link. Thanks for providing it.

John, thanks for your thoughts. I agree that, for a Christian, Rob's message did offer a helpful critique of "religion" (trying to live a good life in order to earn God's acceptance). However, since this wasn't sent against the backdrop of the the great problem (sin/separation from God/being under God's wrath against sin) that people are falsely attempting to fix with "religion," the problem that can only be fixed by the gospel, I think Rob's message was not fully biblical and therefore misleading for non-Christians and inadequately nourishing for Christians.

John 3:36 is just one example of what I'm talking about: "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not...the wrath of God remains on him." What does Rob do with that verse, and with many other passages like it? Out of LOVE for non-Christians, you've got to tell the truth that God is perfectly holy and, therefore, justly angry at sin and so committed to his own glory and the good of his people that his wrath will fall upon sinners who refuse to turn from their sin and trust in the sinless Son. I just think that's so basic. It's what the church has taught for 2,000 years.

[Woody]

Guys,
Its so easy for us to pick at one another but where does judging one another come in?
Saying who is saved and who is not definitely crosses that line. God sees straight into our heart. We men & women don't.
If we are concerned about the teaching of Rob Bell, pray for him. Pray, do not judge as you will be judged.

[Nicole Sagert]

Thank you so much for taking the time to write this!

[nicole sagert]

I Was going to leave my comments as they are above...

I am curious, did the talk/message/chat from Bell leave you with the impression that religion was Man's idea? I guess I think of Cain, and Abel with their offerings, (Gen 4, Rom 9) or even of Noah (Gen 8:20 &f)(and, are we not all descendants of Noah as well as Adam?) and I have always understood that the idea of offerings was God's way of setting the stage for Christ's atonement on the cross - as the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world He was laying forth a pathway that, when Christ comes along, man can say "aha!" a permanent sacrifice! A once-and-for-all covering of my sins!

I have not gone to the tour - I just wanted clarification - I have always been under the impression that a sacrifice being necessary was God's idea - because God, in His infinite holiness required blood... am I wrong? Is not all religion really a bastardization of a relationship with the one true God, that HE established with man, when He created the earth?

[Donny Pauling]

Some of the comments to this blog entry turn my stomach.

God is a perfect parent. He loves all of us. As Rob said, sacrifices were made for US, not for God.

Sin, my friends, is simply the opposite of God's plan for our lives. Each parent makes a "plan" for their children. The problem, however, is that free will allows us to decide not to follow the "plans" our parents make. This includes God.

If one of our children, when entering adulthood, decides to shoot heroine in his/her arms, and we've done everything we can to stop them, there might come a point when we can no longer watch them destroy their life. It would hurt to much to watch that happen. Likewise, isn't it possible that the reason God can't look on sin simply because it hurts too much?

I like Rob's approach to sin: don't give it attention. Why not? Because if you focus on LOVE, the sin problem takes care of itself. If you fall in love with someone you want to do everything in your power to please them. If people fall in love with Jesus, truly in love, their sins go away because they no longer WANT to do them.

You would never want to marry someone you had to scare into loving you. God doesn't want to marry a "bride" that has to be scared into loving HIM either.

Rob is part of a movement that is changing the world. The XXXChurch ministry, which is based out of Rob's church, changed MY life with a message of love. Being raised in a legalistic, "hellfire and brimstone" type church, I hated Christians all my life. I didn't believe in God or the Bible. But XXXChurch was used by God to change all that. How? By telling me there was nothing I could ever do to make God love me any less. Love wins. Love wins. Love wins.

There is no need to focus on sin. Love wins. Jesus didn't come into the world to condemn the world, but to save it through His sacrifice. Let's teach love.

Love.

Wins.

[Reconciler]

Woody... there's a fine line between judging which is often translated as "condemning" and judging with a view to rightly discerning truth and appropriate actions in response to the truth.

We are not to judge one another in a sense that we are not to condemn one another. We are not the ones with the right to condemn. God is.

However, scripture clearly teaches that we are to judge one another in a sense that we are to help one another removing specks from our eyes and to help keep the church pure (removing unrighteousness from our midst). To do so requires a lot of humility, and an inward examination of our motives FIRST before we attempt to address "stuff" with others.

Scripture also teaches clearly what will happen in the "last days" where spiritual leaders will not all be "right" in a sense that they will not be God sent. Some will appear so, sound so, and our ears will be pleasantly tickled as we hear what we WANT to hear.

Not all of those teachers are from God. So we have to discern rightly those to which we should listen and those which we should ignore and occasionally those which we should confront or correct (if we're ever in a position to do so).

It's a tough position. Discerning right from wrong and truth from error is going to require help from the Holy Spirit and from investing time in God's Word which doesn't change.

Satan was a master at taking truth and twisting it ever so slightly when he tempted Christ. Christ's response? Correct the erroneous use of scripture with proper use of scripture. And we can do better without an intimate knowledge of scripture? I doubt it.

About love winning (Donny). Yes. Love wins in the end. But, judgment still comes in an eternally permanent way for everyone who doesn't have Christ. Justice also wins in the end. Sin has consequences. We all have a choice of one of two paths. (1) Accept Christ's substitutionary redemption for our personal sins, and enjoy an eternity in the presence of God, enjoying his love; or (2) Reject Christ's payment and choose to attempt our own way into God's presence... which will be futile and eternally rejected by a just and righteous God who has the right to make the rules of consequences.

Anything other than accepting Christ's payment is rejection. Deferring until a later time is rejection. Contemplating without accepting is rejection. Outright opposition is rejection. Rejection may have several shades, but they're all in the dark side of the color spectrum.

Light repels darkness of all shades.

Teach love? By all means scream it from the mountain tops. Proclaim it in the valleys. But, to ignore the responsibility to respond rightly to God's demonstration of His love for us by individually accepting Christ as our substitute and Saviour... can have fatally eternal consequences.

[Justin H]

Hello Everyone,

I very much appreciated the well written critique of Bell's event. I would like to answer the question by "BRENDT" as to whether or not I would wear a sweater that says I'm the worst sinner in the world . . ." Yes I would, and if you would like to mak it for me, I will send you my address. :) I often say much the same thing when I am preaching, and I am certain that I said that several times during the Rob Bell event.

I would like to share with all of you that my friends and I have, and had, no hatred in our hearts for Rob Bell, or anyone at that event. I can understand why you would think that we might have, but if you would have talked to us (like several people did do) you would have found us to be rather calm. We would have also Biblically articulated why we were there, and why we disagree with Bell. I will not take the space to do that here, because many have already done that in this thread. However, I will say that one of the reasons that we did what we did the way we did, was because many people are taken in by Bell's sophism. We feel that they need be warned, because their souls are on the line. With the stakes so high, and the likelihood of them stumbling on a blog to find the truth so low, we were willing to have people think us fools so that they might be warned.

I would like to happily share with you that we had several conversations with people who came up to us and said that they had never really heard of Bell before and wanted to know why we thought he was wrong. We were able to share with them, and they left ready to Biblically and thoughtfully consider what they were about to hear.

I feel that I have written more that I intended to. I apologize if I am coming off defensive, that was not my intention.

God Bless

[Tony Stiff]

Justin thanks for the digest of the night, and some post-night critical thoughts. I thought you walked charitably and openly with the way you shared your concerns. I think Eric's point is a good one. Having not seen the Rob Bell event I'm silent as to issuing an opinion of Rob's views on sin...curious what he said about Hebrews to be sure, but open to waiting and finding out for myself. The guys is a communication phenom, and as you said he has an evident love for scripture and contextualization.

If Rob missed Eric's point about the cultural locatedness of our white, suburbia that's really unfortunate...better stay away from Bosnia Bell, or if you enter it then re-contextualize your presentation. Makes me thankful for guys like Miroslav Volf and his "Exclusion and Embrance" as well as Hans Boersma's "Violence and the Hospitality of the Cross."

Thanks again for the post here JB.

Blessings,
Tony Stiff

[Brendt]

Not sure why my name got put in "QUOTES", but I didn't say anything about sweaters -- I'm getting overheated just thinking about it. I think the question was posed by Francis.

[Donny Pauling]

Justin H,

I think you're giving Rob way too much credit. He doesn't have the power to put anyone's soul on the line with the words he speaks. Salvation comes by faith in Jesus Christ, and Rob Bell has received his salvation through Jesus.

It's okay to have a different interpretation of scripture. That has been going on since the beginning of time. It will go on until the end of time. If you also proclaim Jesus Christ, I am absolutely certain you and Rob share the foundational beliefs... the ones that actually matter.

As a former porn producer of 9 years, I passed by every picketer standing outside the porn conventions I attended each year. I'd wave to most of them with one finger. They accomplished nothing with their protests.

What got inside my head, however, was this group call XXXChurch (which is based out of Rob's church in Grand Rapids). They had a booth set up inside with us and they were telling us that there is nothing any of us could ever do to make God love us any less. I gave them a lot of crap for 2 years, yet they responded with love.

See, John 3:16 doesn't tell us that in order to attain salvation we must believe in Jesus AND follow the path of legalism. It tell us quite clearly how to achieve salvation. Once we've achieved that salvation and fall in love with Jesus our lives truly change. Not because someone tells us what to do, but because it becomes evident to us how life should be lived. Through the Holy Spirit. God calls us to be fishers of men. We catch 'em, HE cleans 'em.

Too many Christians make attempts to remove the speck from the eyes of others. That needs to stop. It is not our place. There are very few who God trusts to counsel others about their lifestyles. I seriously doubt any of those posting in this thread are of any authority whatsoever to pass along spiritual advice to others.

We all, however, are definitely capable of sharing what God has done in our lives. We're capable of being walking billboards for God.

Instead of bad mouthing Rob, why not take the meat and spit out the bones? God's once used a jackass to do His work. Do you think it's possible he could use Rob Bell? I do.

Rob himself will tell you not to blindly accept everything he says.

His message was great. The problem only lies with those who are offended that he didn't do things they way THEY think he should have. Instead of holding signs telling everyone about the problems with Rob Bell, perhaps the sign should have read "I AM THE PROBLEM!"

[Elgin]

Hi. I stumbled upon your blog after looking up info on the latest Rob Bell tour. I do find your blog insightful and helpful, however, some of the comments have been a bit over-the-top. How can anyone, based on the limited information we actually know about Rob Bell's true beliefs, make the claim to know that he's not saved. I don't know about you, but I can't really attest to anyone else but me being saved.

And like you said, he "left it open" for the universalist perspective to be adopted. But he didn't say that's what he believes. Maybe he didn't focus on the problem of sin & the need of repentance because he knows that only mainly Christians are coming to hear him - people who already know this fact.

Good thoughts, and I really hope that Rob finds this and replies!

[Donny Pauling]

Great GREAT comment, Elgin.

[abu daoud]

Just went to hear Bell last night.

Have written about his talk/performance/monologue here:

Islam and Christianity

http://islamdom.blogspot.com/2007/11/rob-bell-gods-arent-angry.html

[Rob Barry]

Thanks for the blog. My two closest friends saw Rob Bell Friday night in Dallas. We were shocked to hear a denial of substitutionary atonement and what sounded like universalism. I just finished typing up a 4 page reaction to his message to present to our church staff here in dallas. I heard you may have the audio, is that true. I'm trying to determine if he made any other connections with Jesus' death outside of "Jesus died to abolish a violent sacrificial system". Did he give any other reason Jesus died? Thanks again, Rob

[Justin Buzzard]

Donny, I'm so thankful for your conversion. What a story you have. I agree with much of what you said above. I actually agree so much with what you had to say about the importance of God's love that I disagree with what you had to say about sin (not giving it attention/air time, etc.).

I think you'd agree with me that what makes God's love for his children so incredible is that even though we didn't deserve God's love, even though we deserved God's punishment for our sin, God the Father loved us so much that on the cross he punished his sinless Son in our place. Without such a backdrop in view (the doctrine of sin), the gospel ceases to be GOOD news and becomes, simply, news.

Rob, no, I don't have audio from Bell's message. I wonder how that word got spread...

[Francis]

Donny, I too share your concern with Christians who feel they are better than others or worse, judge others. Righteous finger pointing definitely takes away from what following Christ is all about. It especially burns the most when it happens with Christians who have positions of great influence, almost representing believers to the public.

I'm so stoked to hear that you have put your faith in Christ. I've been to a triple X event and it was great. I downloaded their software and it was a big part of me kicking pornography. Just got married a month ago.

Your comment earlier on different interpretations of scripture and it not really mattering as long as we all proclaim Christ struck a cord with me. I hear where you are coming from on that, but I'd humbly ask you to consider that in some cases, it matters a whole lot.

Yes sometimes blogs like this seem like bickering over tiny details, but Satan is real. And scripture teaches us that he is the master at taking truth, and adding tiny lies that can change it's entire meaning. Mormons proclaim Christ... Jehovah's Witnesses proclaim Christ... and in my opinion, their interpretations of scripture can lead away from this great Savior of ours.

I agree that Eric's post was the most thought provoking. Culture is such a huge culprit as a barrier to God's truth. Most of my family that is not saved have a religion just cus it was a part of their culture and they were born into it.

One last thing. Reconciler your post was so tight! Reminds me that my writing has a long way to go. Hit the nail on the head to say the least.

[Rob]

Last night I attended "The gods Aren't Angry" gathering. I have to say that I absolutely disagree with your assessment of Rob's speaking. All the stuff you just regurgitated is stuff we've all heard a thousand times before. Just because Rob didn't address the obvious, doesn't mean he doesn't believe it. He gave an unique look at Scriptures and history that opened the eyes to many.

He in no way did any injustice to God or the truth of His personality. You make God out to sound like the God the guys outside the event were screaming about. Which way is it?

You can't bash Rob's message by saying all the things he didn't mention. To do so, would be like me bashing your post for not mentioning the exodus of the Israelites, or the beattitudes. It's totally irellevant.

[Seth]

Interesting discussion here. I love it when people trot out the and "judge not lest ye be judged" and "who are you to judge another man's servant" and by extension "who are you to judge me?" arguments. I appreciate the post that connected judging with condemning - that was insightful by reconciler. There's a fine line to walk between "discerning of spirits" and "condemning."

As I peruse the comments I see two points of view that jump out at me - one of the heart and one of the head. The heart says "connect me with Jesus and that's all that matters - I want love" and the head says "here's the explanation - here's why - here's what the Bible says about that here, here, here, and here." One without the other is useless - we become Biblically illiterate or we become Pharisees (my personal struggle). Where do you think the balance lies on this topic? I think that it lies within Buzzard's most recent post.

[Peterzog]

Instead of trying to decide if Rob Bell is saved or not, lets deal with the scripture... how do you interpret what Paul means when he says "all things" are reconciled to Christ (Col 1:20)? This is the verse Rob points to very often. His common quote - which he uses in this tour - is "and if you look in the greek the meaning for 'all things' is .... 'all things'."

[nicole sagert]

I think there has to be a framework for it Peterzog - taken within the context of the rest of Scripture... All things cannot mean "all things" in the literal sense - ie. God is not about to reconcile Himself to Satan and the demons. I am still struggling with my understanding of this verse, and will leave the rest of the handling of it to more capable hands...

I would still love someone's thoughts on my earlier comment (Sat, Nov 17)....

[Christianity 2.0]

I went to the Hard Rock Live last night to see Rob Bell. I thought the speech was
excellent. I like what he had to say about repentance the most. He said we
repent because we now (after you become a Christian) understand the
ultimate reality in Christ. To not repent and seek after God after being
saved just doesn't make any sense. He warns us that many use religion to
hold people in bondage and use it as a means to take advantage of them.
Thats what the Sadducees and Pharisees were doing in Jesus time. Its also
happening today even in Christian circles. Bell was focusing in the fact
that Jesus Christ has made the ultimate act of redemption and that nothing
we can do can change that. Christ has made peace for us with God when he
was sacrificed. Because of this God is not angry with His creatures. The
part where Bell needed to be clear in was that Christ has made peace for
those who love God or will love God in this lifetime. Thats where it gets
a bit cloudy. I didn't hear any heresy but I believe he should have
mentioned the "particular redemption" that God offers His creatures through
Christ. It is possible to see how one may walk away thinking they are ok
with God when they really are not. I don't know Bell's intentions but I'd
like to think that he is not purposely trying to teach universalism. I say
this based on the other Nooma videos I have seen. Now Bell did mention
that there was really only one God and that only through Jesus do we have
peace with God. This dispels any notion that Bell is teaching that you can
believe in any religion and you are ok. All in all I thought the message
was good. The danger is when people try to read more into what was
actually said. I'm not saying to throw away your thinking cap. I would
make sure we take what He says in context and see if it stands up to the
ultimate truth found in the bible. If it stands great, if it doesn't throw
it out.
God Bless,
Christianity 2.0

[Tony]

I think the key verse in the reconciled debate, is verse 23. Depending on your translation it says..."provided, of course, that you continue in your trusting, grounded and steady, not letting yourselves be moved away from the hope offered in the Good news you heard."

Our reconciliation is available and possible if our trust remains in Christ, Period. And I know from hearing other things Rob Bell says and writes, he would agree with this assessment.

I saw the talk last week and thought it was brilliant and thought provoking at the same time. After all we are all here talking about it, and I think this is the stuff Rob Bell wants to see from his messages…topics and talks that provoke us all to search the depths of God’s heart for the answers. And good healthy dialogue among Christ followers that make us all think more clearly about what we believe no matter what faith tradition we hold to. And the key to faith is not worrying so much about the answers, but understanding that as we search for the answers we will find Christ; and in Him all the answers reside, even if they remain a secret in this day and age, in the age to come we will know all there is to know!!!

Good chatting with you all! Thanksgiving to our God!

Tony

[Francis]

I have come to notice that there are an infinite amount of ways to manipulate the Gospel into being about simply "loving God, community, God's forgiveness of all creatures, loving God at some point in your life, being a good person, caring for the poor, showing love to others etc" in order to avoid the part where we come to terms with the fact that we are dirty rotten sinners from birth, desperate and otherwise doomed without Jesus.

Prior to being saved, I had gone to great lengths to avoid that process which felt like a root canal to my pride. Dodging repentance and the intensity of our sin has authored some interesting Gospel interpretations.

"Being a Christian means understanding the ultimate reality in Christ" - Sounds like one of them.

Nicole, I am not sure regarding your question. However as I was reading your post I found myself agreeing with you. Much like how Moses brought his people out of slavery and into salvation was a small metaphor for Christ, in my opinion so too is the idea of sacrifice in order to atone for sins. However, I believe it depends on how religion is defined. My definition of religion is not a very positive one, to me it represents our pride in thinking we can make things OK with God through our actions. I don't really see God creating THAT definition per say... Sorry I couldn't be of more help.

[Robert]

I really enjoyed reading your point of view. I seen the tour in Washington DC this past weekend and enjoyed it very much. I listen to Rob Bell A LOT; messages on marshill.org, noomas, I have been to mars hill church for a seminar. Rob is a very gifted speaker and very knowledgeable about the scriptures, but still sometimes I wonder why he doesn't seem to portray the whole picture all at once. I hate it when people bash him for doing things a little different (which I am not accusing you of) but like those people outside the venue in the pictures above. One thing I will say about the man is that people who would never set foot in a church to hear the truth about God's love hear it through Rob Bell.

[Tony Simoncini]

For the record, the people outside of this event were there to judge and judge only. In fact they looked me in the eyes and said said I was going to follow Rob Bell to hell if I didn't repent, and then accused me of "you honor your wife more than you do God". Funny thing though...none of these people actually spoke to me first, as far as they knew I was there to write a rubatal of what Rob Bell said; but in all of there wisdom they just threw out the accusations and judegment upon me and my wife and that was it! These guys are really good for the kingdom of God. Is there anyone who can show me this is what Jesus would be doing if he were here on the earth today?-

[Nicole]

Not Jesus - maybe John the Baptist : )

I do not think it accomplishes anything in our society... I cannot imagine anyone that's about to enter the doors, pause, and ask themselves if the angry people outside have a point... I wonder sometimes, if it is not merely a self-righteous, misguided attempt to prove one's love and passion for God... as though picketing (and subsequently taking the heat for holding up signs) is a new form of self-inflicted martyrdom.

[Tony Simoncini]

I'm sure it's some of that, but the truth is these guys think they are right and everyone else that thinks differently are wrong and in danger of hell!! Becasue we all know that the requirements for heaven is getting everything right!(PLEASE!) I've encountered these types before and even chatted over coffee with some to help them see just how bad it is for the gospel and the God they claim to love to scream at and judge the average person they have never spoken to or know anything about! Most of these guys I have been able to have an honest discussion about the issues have at some point have come to grips with the fact that they have acted like [Tony, I deleted your cuss word here, don't cuss on my blog] in the past with their harsh judgement of people, churches, and other doctrines not like theirs. They are not evil at heart, just lost in the land of knowitall!
Peace

[godbreathed]

We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.
And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others; if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men (for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)— if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment. This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature and despise authority.
Bold and arrogant, these men are not afraid to slander celestial beings; yet even angels, although they are stronger and more powerful, do not bring slanderous accusations against such beings in the presence of the Lord. But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish.
They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done. Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you. With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning; they seduce the unstable; they are experts in greed—an accursed brood! They have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Beor, who loved the wages of wickedness. But he was rebuked for his wrongdoing by a donkey—a beast without speech—who spoke with a man's voice and restrained the prophet's madness.
These men are springs without water and mists driven by a storm. Blackest darkness is reserved for them. For they mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of sinful human nature, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error. They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity—for a man is a slave to whatever has mastered him. If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. Of them the proverbs are true: "A dog returns to its vomit," and, "A sow that is washed goes back to her wallowing in the mud."

[Francis]

Justin,

Would you comment on Godbreathed's post. Especially on the part of scripture he posted that says "it is better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them"

A reader may confuse it as meaning if you know and accept Jesus but slip up once again in old sins/habits/addictions, than it's better to have never known and accept Jesus in the first place.

[Tony Simoncini]

So what of the post from Godbreathed, just curious what side your one here :)

[Justin Buzzard]

Tony, I don't understand your comment--are you asking me how I think the comment from "GodBreathed"(people need to use their real names--I get the clever reference, but come on) relates to Rob Bell? The "GodBreathed" post is a quotation of 1 Peter 1:16-2:22. I think the point this person is attempting to make is that they think Bell's message falls under this false prophet/teacher category.

I think my post is clear in expressing my significant concerns with Bell's message.

[Ty]

J~

Excellent analysis and I agree with you on all points. There are several points lacking possibly and I do wonder about some of Rob's views. On the other side of the coin, and I'm sure someone has pointed this out...I didn't take the time to read all the comments, what really struck me was near the end. Rob really emphasized the inadequacy of our sacrifices. As one who sees a very disgusting display of performance around the church today I thought the message made a strong point...especially towards our hidden gods that we still try to please. I suppose one needs to consider his audience and what parts he intended to leave exposed or unexplained. In our audience it was mostly christians who needed to hear more about what truly pleases God and the true meaning of repentance and reconciliation...sure this convo could go on forever - but, cheers that Rob is taking the time to tour and bring light to the scripture in a creative fashion

let's continue to pray those seeds are healthy and bear God honoring fruit even if delivered in incomplete ways

[Tony Simoncini]

Justin,

Thanks, I got that he was quoting 1 Peter, my point or question about the comment was in search of an opinion from him about the tour. This is a blog...I guess I expect people to share their opinions, views, etc. I understood he was accusing Bell of false prophecy (I'm not that ignorant); I guess I wanted to hear his view of the talk! Quote a scripture, but good lord give us some explanation of your view here! The reference to 1 Peter opens up a whole can of worms for anyone who wants to put that on Rob Bell; or anyone who preaches anything for that matter! I think SOME people on this blog are the type of people Jesus had problems with. Some seem to assume they have the gospel nailed; they have perfected the art of interpretation of the scriptures and their "clear" meaning. Accordingly those who present some slightly different ideas; true followers of Christ who want people to think outside of a western culture version of the Christian status quos are always labeled false prophets. I get that Rob and many, many, many others don’t follow the angry God who hates all sinners, and elects a special few to join Him in heaven plot. I get that if I used the measuring stick a lot of other people use for declaring false prophets I would hold that label above many believers. I think the concept of total depravity is not a true biblical understanding of God’s creation of humanity, I think the idea that Jesus came, died, and His blood is only for a limited amount of people and only they can and will (or have to) receive His grace because they are chosen, is not a true biblically supported idea. I hear and read hyper-Calvinists calling other respected formed pastors and teachers false prophets all of the time because they (respected reformed guys) teach that sinners can actually hear the word of God; they can believe in Jesus, and they can pray because God works in the heart of sinners! These guys are persecuted for teaching this stuff and labeled as false prophets! STUPID!! My point is this…do I put friends and others who hold to these beliefs as false prophets, no; do I wish the beliefs didn’t exist yes, but I will not throw them all into a category that claims I know their heart, and hell will be their home!

Funny thing is, this is why Jesus was crucified. He challenged the way Jews of His day approached God, they way they prayed, looked at other nations, tribes, people, Jesus turned the religious and political world upside down and they killed Him for it. They spit on him, claimed He was filled with a devil, even accused Him of blasphemy. So I get that a lot of people have opinions about Rob and others unlike them as False prophets, my point here...this is a blog about the talk Rob gives on the tour, and if your opinion is not based on the talk and just regurgitating what others say about followers of Christ outside their traditions without hearing, reading, or studying for themselves what the whole story is, then its ignorance at work.
Peace
Tony

[Justin Buzzard]

Tony, you commented, disapprovingly, about readers of this blog that, "Some seem to assume they have the gospel nailed; they have perfected the art of interpretation of the scriptures and their 'clear' meaning."

It concerns me that this concerns you. I certainly share frustration alongside you over the occasional comment here that is expressed without a spirit of humility. I want this blog to be know for humility. AND, I want this blog to be know for its orthodoxy. Humble Orthodoxy is the goal. Contrary to your comment,this blog stands for having the gospel "nailed" and for the conviction that the Scriptures do have a "clear meaning." I don't think that's a prideful stance, I think it's a biblical stance, an orthodox stance, a humble stance. I believe we are a broken enough people and God is so kind, that he had to speak very clearly to us in his Word. He has communicated a very clear gospel message to us.

As for your discussion of Reformed vs. Arminian theology, I didn't even discuss these issues in my post. As I shared in paragraph three of my post, the concerns I expressed regarding Bell's message are common ground concerns shared by people of many different theological camps, Reformed and Arminian.

[rico]

I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel.

They did not receive the love of the truth... for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie.

[Heather Lux]

Justin, so glad that you posted this. There's a new book, "Surpremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World" by Piper (excellent book by the way) that addressed some of Rob's theology and how it contridicts what the Bible says. It's sad to think that all those people here in SF heard the wrong Gospel message.

[Tony Simoncini]

Justin,

The points I made that you call Arminianism vs. Calvinism were not based on either view per say but to point out that false prophecy is declared all too often by both sides, heck all sides. So again my point is you say your orthodoxy is humble, and I grant you the fact that your bog is much more gracious than other reformed folks I have read, but if Free-Will is taught in a church, some "reformed" folks would call that heresy, and the deliverer a false prophet. So where can you draw a line that says they are wrong in their "orthodoxy" but not a false prophet?

To the other points; if the message was so crystal clear, why are there so many variations? I'm not denying Christ his atonement, His death, Resurrection, etc. But there sure seems to be too many different variations and interpretations of an awful lot of scriptures for you to humbly say you have it ALL nailed!

I think it takes more faith to say all of the answers are not crystal clear, but one thing is true, perfect, and right, and that alone is Jesus!
Tony

Justin & Tony...

Nice dialogue!

The gospel message is disarmingly clear. It may be the most clear message in scripture. What we DO with that message (our response to God's demonstration of His love, mercy and grace towards us), is the less clear thing.

I think it's clear in the scriptures, but it's not clear to those who want to apply it, as they seem to want to add or take away something as it just seems too simple.

Jesus is the answer. Most of us agree about that. But is He the savior to one who will not accept his gift? Yes, and no. His death is sufficient to pay for everyone's sins. But, if we reject his gift, we choose to pay for our own sins. That would dictate that while Jesus COULD be a rejector's savior, He ends up not being that savior with respect to the rejector.

The Calvanism/Arminianism debate is energized, but not necessarily fruitful. Was Jesus a Calvanist? (tongue in cheek)

Scripture is pretty clear that without God's opening our eyes, we can't and won't understand His revelation to us, as we prefer darkness rather than light and we view scripture as foolishness.

So, God initiates, and He opens our eyes. Now we can see and understand it from His perspective. That alone is not enough. We have responsibility to do something with that new revelation. There is a difference between knowing OF Christ and knowing Christ. If we choose to leave it at knowing OF Christ, we are still facing a dark eternity. If we choose to know Christ, we are responding properly, with the concomitant eternal inheritance.

Romans is a very hard book. Chapters 9 through 11 appear to conflict. That likely is our inability to fully comprehend. How is it that one chapter says God grants mercy to whom He chooses and hardens whom He hardens, and the next chapter says that if we confess with our mouth and believe in our hearts that Jesus is Lord and God has raised Him from the dead we will be saved? Is it God's mercy and grace that saves me or is it my confession of Him as my savior that saves me? Or is it actually somehow both?

To me, there are the essentials that should be clear, and the lesser (but not insignificant) things about which we might disagree without jeopardizing unity or fellowship.

If we are called to be known as His disciples by our love for one another, then if we're infighting and arguing, we likely don't attract anyone to Christ. That central point is what Satan chooses to attack. If he can get us arguing and fighting, then while he loses the war, he might win the battle for a soul here or there.

I expect we all can agree that not all answers are crystal clear. However, that said, the gospel message SHOULD be clear. It is that rare topic where scripture is clear that anyone who preaches a gospel other than what was taught should be accursed. I can't take that lightly. That focuses my vision to making sure the gospel I embrace and present should be consistent with the one presented by the apostles.

Last but not least, consider whether the Calvanist/Aminian debate is misguided in the sense that both groups may find themselves inclined to want to weigh in on whether someone ELSE is saved. That is not our task.

If I see someone who professes faith Christ but who shows no fruit or evidence of that faith, it's not necessarily wrong for me to privately challenge him to revisit his relationship with Christ, as my friend's eternal destiny may be in the balance. For me to tell him (or anyone else) that I've concluded that he's not saved may simply result in an argument and still leave him in that eternally delicate position.

Proclaim Christ. Proclaim Him crucified. Proclaim Him raised from the dead. Proclaim Him at God's right hand, positioned to come again. Proclaim Him the perfect King and Judge and Ruler.

... and walk humbly with my brothers and be committed to loving in a uniting way...

That means I have to look at my "hills" and eliminate many of them as unworthy of "dying on" (excuse the poor grammar).