Bell's Hell - Another look at "Love Wins"

Much has been said about Rob Bell's controversial book "Love Wins."  Also, much has changed recently for Rob Bell, as he is now moving out of pastoring a mega-church to do more writing and concentrating on various speaking engagements.  In reviewing his book, I'm sure I will add nothing new since its release in March of 2011.  Having said that, I wanted to share some thoughts on my impression on not just Bell's views, but on the "Emergent Movement" in general.

Before reading "Love Wins" I had an impression of Bell already formed.  I had read some of his Internet articles and viewed some interviews, and so I had formed some opinions of him beforehand.  I must say that my impression of his views did not change after completing the book.  I have had the opportunity to visit with many Rob Bell-like people.  What I mean by Rob Bell-like people pertains to individuals who fall in line with the "Emergent Movement."  Maybe, fall in line is not a good description of the "Emergent Movement", because nothing with in the movement is perfectly lined up.  A friend of mine once said that the "Emergent Movement" is like trying to nail jello to the wall.  This is what bothers me and others who try to assess individuals within the movement.  The problem with the movement centers on the lack of answers or conflicting answers given, but more on this later.

Bell's book opens true to "emergent" form, with a barrage of questions.  It was almost like the serpent questioning Eve, "Did God really say?"  I am not comparing Bell to the serpent, only saying that all traditional beliefs (according to Bell) need to be questioned.  I am not arguing against questions.  Questions are good and necessary.  However, Bell doesn't seem to question for the sake of dialogue, but to deconstruct everything for the sole purpose of his own agenda.

Much of the book Bell raises some good points.  Although I disagree with much of his exegesis, he does rightly point out some of the problems with the church today.  He does a good job highlighting the need to have a heart for serving people, although at times his political beliefs seem to match a "Wall Street" protester.  He addresses legalism within the Church, as this too is a necessary point that constantly needs to be raised.

Now to a few points about his overall beliefs concerning hell.  Bell's biggest hangup with hell seems to be how a loving God could punish people for finite sins.  For Bell this seems insurmountable.  For God is not God if this is how God is to be seen.  Bell would see the traditional view of an everlasting hell being contra the nature of God.  Bell cannot even conceive how God would allow individuals to be eternally separated from a holy God.  For Bell, God is a monstrous being if this is reality.

Bell seems to believe that heaven and hell exist side by side.  According to Bell, "heaven and hell are at the same party." [1]  He never clarifies how this is or what justifies this position.  He does use the "Prodigal Son" of Luke 15 to relate the side by side nature of both realities, but to my knowledge this story has never been used to justify the duel realm of heaven and hell.  Bell's duel realm view is bizarre at best.  What is also bizarre is how this works out on Bell's view, for no other explanation is fleshed out to support this idea.

Trying to wrap my mind around Bell's views is a tremendous struggle.  One of the disturbing views of Bell is how all are eventually saved.  I say disturbing, not because his ideas conflict with mine, but disturbing because he doesn't seem to justify why his views should be seen as conforming to reality.  For example, it seems clear to me that Bell feels all will eventually be saved, hence forth, love wins.  The overall theme of the book is that God's love will win out and all will be saved.  Bell can say he is not a universalist, but the book is clear that this is not what is promoted.  It is Bell's view that all will be saved, however no explanation is given as to how this will work, except that God's love wins in the end.  Bell even seems to promote that post-mortem sanctification will take place.  Bell is adamant that only the nature of God's love is what counts and His love trumps all.  In other words, God's hands seem to be tied on Bell's view.

The final comment about Bell's view revolves around his view of God.  The most disturbing aspect of Bell's view is his lack of interaction with the tradition view of God's judgment.  Bell tries in a way to address the traditional view of God as a God of judgement, but he falls short in providing any scholarly argumentation to show why this aspect is not part of God's makeup.  The traditional view of the God of judgement that I am referring to is that God does judge individuals and separate them throughout eternity.  Bell seems closed to this aspect of God's nature.  If God saves all in the end because love wins, then Bell needs to leave the business of trying to lead individuals to Jesus, because salvation is guaranteed.  The need for responsibility in this life is unnecessary, because on Bell's view nothing really matters.  If God is not a God of judgment and his hands are tied in having to save everyone, then Bell's God turns out not so much a God of love, but an amoral being at best.


[1]  Bell, Rob, Love Wins, p. 176

• A great article dealing with the exegetical problems of Love Wins.
• A short debate revealing Bell's view of God and hell.

Bell, Baptists, and Hell

After controversy, Baptists affirm belief in ‘eternal’ hell

June 16, 2011

Categories:Christian, faith, news, RNS

By ADELLE M. BANKS
c. 2011 Religion News Service
(RNS) Southern Baptists on Wednesday (June 14) called hell an “eternal, conscious punishment” for those who do not accept Jesus, rebutting a controversial book from Michigan pastor Rob Bell that questions traditional views of hell.
Citing Bell’s book “Love Wins,” the resolution urges Southern Baptists “to proclaim faithfully the depth and gravity of sin against a holy God, the reality of hell, and the salvation of sinners by God’s grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone, to the glory of God alone.”
Several leaders during the Baptists’ two-day meeting in Phoenix coupled warnings about hell with pleas for evangelism — especially in areas where there are no churches or missionaries.
“Is hell real? Is hell forever? Did God really say sinners would perish in eternal torment forever and ever?” asked pastor and author David Platt of Birmingham, Ala. “Oh, readers of Rob Bell and others like him, listen very carefully be very cautious, when anyone says, `Did God really say this?”‘
Bell’s book, released in March, criticizes the “misguided” view that “select Christians” will live forever in heaven while the rest of humanity will suffer eternal torment in a punishing hell.
Earlier this year, the Southern Baptist-affiliated Lifeway Christian Stores quietly removed warning labels from certain books — including Bell’s — that “could be considered inconsistent with historical evangelical theology.”
“At the center of the Christian tradition since the first church has been the insistence that … hell is not forever, and love, in the end, wins,” Bell wrote in “Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Has Ever Lived.”
Southern Baptist Convention President Bryant Wright prayed that Southern Baptists would take to heart the statement they passed on hell.
“Father, because the reality of hell is so real, the permanent separation from you is so real, and our hours here on this earth are so limited, we pray that you will give us a fresh sense of conviction of preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ,” he prayed right after the resolution was adopted.
On Tuesday, Baptists elected a black pastor from New Orleans as first vice president, the highest office in the denomination ever held by a black man. Pastor Fred Luter of New Orleans is already being talked about as a prime candidate for SBC president next year.
“It’s a great feeling,” Luter said in an interview Wednesday, comparing his election to the accolades he received when he was tapped as the first African-American to give the convention sermon in 2001.
The mostly white denomination, which traces its roots to Civil War-era defense of slavery, voted Tuesday on specific measures to increase the ethnic diversity of its top leadership — which Luter cited as a genuine shift.
“I think the change is that the denomination is purposely at the point where we know we have to open up the doors for more ethnics to be involved in leadership roles in the convention,” he said.
As for a possible presidency, Luter said he’s not campaigning.
“I do hear the people talking,” he said. “They talk to me about it. But I’ve been telling them, ‘Let’s just take this one day at a time, one year at a time.’ … I’m praying about it and just praying that God will just lead us.”

Read more: http://blog.beliefnet.com/news/2011/06/after-controversy-baptists-affirm-belief-in-eternal-hell.php#ixzz1Pl5O91Zy

Is God just?

One of the most often debated subjects deals with the Christian God's sense of justice.  Statements like, "I would never serve a God who condemns individuals to hell" or "Why does God call for the destruction of others."  Usually, most individuals are just acting on sound bites of information they have heard other spew their way.  This perception of God has also troubled individuals within the church.  Looking recently at Rob Bell's interview on CNN, would seem to indicate that he has trouble with a just God.

Why is it that some within the Church have trouble with this aspect of God's nature?  I could be wrong, but it is my belief that a little egotistical attitude enters the equation.  Within the "Emergent Movement" there seems to be a disdain for a God of justice.  If hell is so wrong for some, the obvious push in the opposite direction would be toward universalism, but is this how God is described in the bible?  Absolutely not!  One of the aspects of God's nature is that of justice, for without justice, God is no longer loving. 

2 Peter 3:9 states, "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance."  In other words, God does not take pleasure in some one's choice to continually rebel against Him and consciously separate themselves from His goodness.  For those who have a problem with the justice of God, are they not guilty of judging where only God can judge?

Bell's firestorm

I wanted to offer three posts that deal with Bell's recent book, Love Wins.  The first post can be found here.  This post is from Tawa Anderson who runs the blog, "Tawapologetics."  The article analyzes the book, as Anderson has just finished reading it.  The second post is from Dan Grossenbach and can be found here.  Dan runs the apologetic site, "Apologetic Junkie."  Dan focuses on the subject of hell, and the many misconceptions of hell.  The third post is one I wrote a few months back called, "Reconciling God and Hell."

I think this (the truth question) has always been the problem with certain aspects of the "Emergent Movement."  At what point does one say truth does not matter?  Ultimately, if truth does not matter then we might as well create our own feel good religion.  But, if God's word means something, we have to look at it in its entirety and not pick and choose what we want to believe.

Do not judge?

Recently Rob Bell, pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church, generated a firestorm with his upcoming book and interview. The book is titled Love Wins. In one particular interview Bell seems to dodge every question thrown at him. The overriding question being asked of Bell is, "Is Jesus the only way?"; Bell never answers. Why? It is my belief that Bell does not want to pronounce judgment or suggest that anyone will be condemned to hell. Christian universalism is the belief that all will eventually be saved by Jesus. Is Bell correct, if this is his view, and how are Christians to answer the judgment questions?

Jesus does indeed say that we should not be judgmental in Matthew 7:1. This judgment is a hypocritical judgment where one is solely wanting to tear someone down. It is also clear that as Christians we should not condemn anyone to hell, as this type of judgment is left only to God. However, Later on in Matthew chapter 7, Jesus tells his followers to enter through the narrow gate (vs. 13) and to watch out for false prophets (vs. 15). Both of these verses imply that Christians need to make certain judgments. God expects us to make judgments as James indicates, "You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world means enmity against God? Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God (James 4:4)." Hell itself is a choice. So, why does Bell not want to say that Jesus is the only way? Again, I suspect Bell wants to create the impression that part of God's nature does not involve judgment.

Being a loving God is just one aspect of God's nature. Being a just God is another aspect of God's nature. Will individuals who rebel against Jesus (sinners) be condemned to hell if they persist in their rebellion? Yes! This is the story from Genesis on, that sin separated all humans from a holy God. The other message, that gives us all hope appears early also (Genesis 3:15), in that redemption can occur through the promised messiah - Jesus. Hell is a reality that the bible describes as many choosing to go to (Matthew 7:13-14).
One of the problems of the "Emergent Movement" is the relativizing of truth. I believe one of the reasons Bell leans this way is because of his belief and many "Emergents" that you should never offend anyone. Jesus claimed to be the exclusive way (John 14:6) and he also stated that the truth of his message would be hated (Mark 13:13). Is Jesus the only way? Absolutely! Will the message of Jesus offend? Yes! Should Christians be offensive in how they present the gospel? Absolutely not!

There is an aspect of Bell and other "Emergents" that all Christians need to follow, and that is being aware of our Christian witness. Unfortunately many Christians come across as too judgmental. Many non-Christians view the Christian community as quick to condemn. This type of attitude only hinders the Christian's ability to dialogue with those who do not know Jesus. Jesus came full of grace and truth (John 1:14). Too many Christians get involved at one end of the spectrum or the other. In other words, some Christians are all about grace leaving truth by the wayside, while others are on the truth side abandoning God's grace that needs to be extended to all people.

Should Christians judge? It depends on the type of judgment being addressed. All followers of Christ would agree that judgments are required on a daily basis on how to live your life. The real question that Bell and others seem to have problems with is, "Should we throw God's truth out so as not to offend others?"

• To read a blog I did on the need for Grace and Truth click here.
• Rob Bell's promotional video for his book, Love Wins, can be found here.
• A review of Bell's book, Love Wins, can be found here. 
• To read what some (Southern Baptists) are saying about Bell and the emergent Movement click here.

Reconciling God and Hell

Visiting with a Christian friend a few years ago, he pointed out that one of the most difficult concepts of Christianity is reconciling a loving God with the concept of hell. There are many aspects of hell that people find disturbing in trying to understand why God would have such a place. What are some of the arguments individuals have problems with and how can these arguments be resolved?

1. Why hell in the first place, this seems contrary to God's nature?

• Hell exists because of sin. Sin literally means to miss the mark, but it is better understood as rebellion toward God. God cannot tolerate sin and, therefore, hell exists.
• Concerning God's nature, being a God of love is just one aspect of His nature. God also has the nature of being a just God.
• Is there justice in allowing the actions of Hitler to go unpunished? Being an unjust God would also mean that God is not loving and unworthy of worship. God's love and justice go hand in hand.

2. Why are people punished in hell?

• People are punished in hell, because they freely choose to rebel against a holy God. In essence, the punishment of being eternally separated from God is self-inflicted.
• God does not torture individuals. The suffering is due to an individual's eternal rebellious nature and the separation that exists from a holy God.
• God wants no individuals to go to hell (2 Peter 3:9).

3. Why can't God direct the actions of individuals? Why can't He keep them from sin?

• God will not violate a person's free will.
• Merely to override a human will...would be for Him (God) useless. He cannot ravish. He can only woo. [1]
• Forced love is not love; it is rape. A loving being always gives 'space' to others. He does not force himself upon them against their will. [2]

4. Why doesn't God allow second chances?

• The bible is clear that there are no second chances, "Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment (Hebrews 9:27)."
• Everyday God gives second chances for individuals to accept Jesus.

5. Why is hell eternal? How do you reconcile finite sins with an infinite hell?

• First, God's word implies the eternal nature of hell.
• Second, We were created to live for eternity (Ecclesiastes 3:11).
• Third, God does not want to destroy (annihilate) beings that were created in His image.
• Concerning finite sins with an eternal hell, finite crimes on earth are given life sentences. What is God to do for those who incessantly rebel against their Creator, except to confine them for all eternity away from Himself.
• To think that a person could go through their whole life constantly ignoring him (God), constantly mocking him by the way they choose to live without him, saying, 'I couldn't care less about what you put me here to do. I couldn't care less about your values or your Son's death for me. I'm going to ignore all of that' - that's the ultimate sin. And the only punishment worthy of that is the ultimate punishment, which is everlasting separation from God. [3]

6. Isn't there a better way God could have taken instead of sending people to hell?

• Again, God does not send individuals to hell, they freely choose to go there by rejecting God.
• No other options exist without God violating man's free will. Without free will man does not have the capacity to love God. God desires our love, but respects our right to reject Him.
• For those who reject God, "There is an increasing isolation, denial, delusion, and self-absorption. When you lose all humility you are out of touch with reality. No one ever asks to leave hell. The very idea of heaven seems to them a sham." [4]
• The better way is found in the person of Jesus. No one has to go to hell, for God has opened the door to heaven for all who accept the free gift of Christ (Revelation 3:20).

[1] Lewis, C.S., The Screwtape Letters, p. 38

[2] Geisler, Norm, Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, p. 311

[3] J.P. Moreland quoted in The Case for Faith, p.252

[4] Keller, Timothy, The Reason for God, p. 78

How Can A Loving God Send People To Hell? - Lee Strobel