Love Wins by Rob Bell A critique of the book

[gratefulgrace]

I know we have gone down this road a bit already here on CF on another thread but I just want to share this blog written by a pastor/missionary friend of mine. He was our youth pastor a few years back and has recently returned from missionary work overseas. It is a great and pretty thorough critique and I think worth reading.

missions247

 

[Mellie7]

I read that blog. Thank you. I also read the Randy Alcorn one a while back. I have to agree. This book is twisted,and I won't waste my money/time or give Bell the money for that kind of trash.

 

[The Unforgettable Fire]

I read the blog.I also read Bell's book and shared my review. I thought the book was great. I have heard arguments on textual criticism and interpretation that go on and on and never end. What if instead of criticizing, we offer a different/better point of view and address with love the questions Bell asks in his book? I think that would be true progress. I'm open to hear anyone's ideas. It doesn't mean I will agree with them, but I like that people like Bell feel free enough in their relationship with God to ask and give their "through a glass darkly" interpretations and conclusions.

 

[gratefulgrace]

Well I think my friend aswered quite succinctly the whys of dealing with textual criticism. It wasn't interpretation he was concerned with but dishonest scholarship of the original texts as well as the ommission of other texts that would shed a lot more light on the hell debate but were ignored. I believe he did that gracefully without demeaning the man but at the same time calling him on the areas of weakness he felt were there in the book. I believe as christians this is ok and should happen. Name calling and belittling or demonizing Rob Bell is not what he is after at all. And he even mentioned that he appreciates Rob's willingness to ask hard questions. But when Jesus actual words are mis translated and misquoted he took exception.

 

[Mellie7]

again, GratefulGrace said it well, and I agree with her,

 

[Gnarwhal]

I read that blog. Thank you. I also read the Randy Alcorn one a while back. I have to agree. This book is twisted,and I won't waste my money/time or give Bell the money for that kind of trash.

Wow such bigotry.

And FYI 100% of the proceeds from his books and speaking engagements go to organizations like Charity:Water.

I read the blog.I also read Bell's book and shared my review. I thought the book was great. I have heard arguments on textual criticism and interpretation that go on and on and never end. What if instead of criticizing, we offer a different/better point of view and address with love the questions Bell asks in his book? I think that would be true progress. I'm open to hear anyone's ideas. It doesn't mean I will agree with them, but I like that people like Bell feel free enough in their relationship with God to ask and give their "through a glass darkly" interpretations and conclusions.

Thank you for your balanced post.

Well I think my friend aswered quite succinctly the whys of dealing with textual criticism. It wasn't interpretation he was concerned with but dishonest scholarship of the original texts as well as the ommission of other texts that would shed a lot more light on the hell debate but were ignored. I believe he did that gracefully without demeaning the man but at the same time calling him on the areas of weakness he felt were there in the book. I believe as christians this is ok and should happen. Name calling and belittling or demonizing Rob Bell is not what he is after at all. And he even mentioned that he appreciates Rob's willingness to ask hard questions. But when Jesus actual words are mis translated and misquoted he took exception.

I read your friends blog, I appreciate his lack of hostility but I disagree with his conclusions.

Regardless, thanks for sharing it with us.

 

[Mellie7]

I am sorry you feel that way. That is great proceeds are going there. Doesn't change my opinion that he is espousing universalism.

 

[gratefulgrace]

I am sorry you feel that way. That is great proceeds are going there. Doesn't change my opinion that he is espousing universalism.
Nor mine about shoddy exegesis. I have nothing personally against Rob and it is wonderful that he is a generous man. However that alone should not be our basis for accepting what he says. Peace.

 

[Gnarwhal]

I am sorry you feel that way. That is great proceeds are going there. Doesn't change my opinion that he is espousing universalism.

Show me where he preaches universalism.

Introduction to Mars Hill podcast
Rob: My name is Rob and I live in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and I am a Christian. And I believe in Jesus and I believe Jesus is the way, and I believe in heaven and I believe in hell and I believe the Bible's God's Word, and I'm not a universalist because I believe that God's love is so great God lets you decide. I believe in the communion of the saints, I believe the church of the fullness, I believe in the New Heaven and the New Earth. I believe in healing, I believe in miracles, I believe in salvation, I believe in the power of prayer that God is alive and working. I believe there has been a resurrection and there is a whole new creation bursting forth right here in the midst of this one, and I also believe it's best to discuss books you've actually read.

Nor mine about shoddy exegesis. I have nothing personally against Rob and it is wonderful that he is a generous man. However that alone should not be our basis for accepting what he says. Peace.

Subjective.

 

[Mellie7]

#1 Chilled, we aren't allowed to debate, since your icon is of a different denomination,#2, I won't get into an argument, with someone who came out of the gate calling me a bigot and was quite honestly, nasty towards me for no reason, other than I have a different opinion than you. If you would like to apologize for this, maybe we could stir up a converstation. Other than that, I have no interest in engaging with you in meaningful discussion. bless you.

 

[Timothew]

I know we have gone down this road a bit already here on CF on another thread but I just want to share this blog written by a pastor/missionary friend of mine. He was our youth pastor a few years back and has recently returned from missionary work overseas. It is a great and pretty thorough critique and I think worth reading.

missions247

I didn't read Bell's book. Perhaps I should. I did read the missions247 blog. In the interest of scriptural accuracy, perhaps Isaiah 66:24 should be posted in it's entirety:
"And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind."

The blogger leaves the part out about the dead bodies of those who rebell against God. Perhaps the wages of sin is death, after all? Perhaps the new testament agrees with the old.

 

[Gnarwhal]

#1 Chilled, we aren't allowed to debate, since your icon is of a different denomination,#2, I won't get into an argument, with someone who came out of the gate calling me a bigot and was quite honestly, nasty towards me for no reason, other than I have a different opinion than you. If you would like to apologize for this, maybe we could stir up a converstation. Other than that, I have no interest in engaging with you in meaningful discussion. bless you.

Really? By that logic you shouldn't be criticizing Bell since he's a different denomination too. And frankly I think what I said was accurate, bigotry by definition is a behavior of someone who's intolerant of beliefs other than their own. You chose to accept the "truth" as told by someone else, not the source, and then you labeled his book "twisted" and "trash".

So, who exactly "came out of the gate nasty"?

I run a search for Bell's name once in a while because there are a lot of ignorant people on CF who love to slander people like him with no basis for the accusations being made, and with no understanding of anything about him other than what they read on Joe Schmoe's blog. And people on blogs can write whatever they want without any proof or accountability, meaning they can say incredible untrue, inaccurate, hateful and hurtful things.

If his teaching just isn't a flavor someone enjoys, that's cool, I can respect that. But heresy hunting the guy with no first-hand insight into his teaching is wrong on many levels.

I've had a Non-Denominational icon since I registered, I only changed it cause I was considering whether CMA falls under ND or "other church".

 

[Faulty]

Really? By that logic you shouldn't be criticizing Bell since he's a different denomination too. And frankly I think what I said was accurate, bigotry by definition is a behavior of someone who's intolerant of beliefs other than their own. You chose to accept the "truth" as told by someone else, not the source, and then you labeled his book "twisted" and "trash".

So, who exactly "came out of the gate nasty"?

I run a search for Bell's name once in a while because there are a lot of ignorant people on CF who love to slander people like him with no basis for the accusations being made, and with no understanding of anything about him other than what they read on Joe Schmoe's blog. And people on blogs can write whatever they want without any proof or accountability, meaning they can say incredible untrue, inaccurate, hateful and hurtful things.

If his teaching just isn't a flavor someone enjoys, that's cool, I can respect that. But heresy hunting the guy with no first-hand insight into his teaching is wrong on many levels.

I've had a Non-Denominational icon since I registered, I only changed it cause I was considering whether CMA falls under ND or "other church".

The guy's been a theological problem for several years now. This is just the most recent manifestation and not the first time universalism has been found in his teachings or expressed from his pulpit.

If you want to align yourself with him, that's your choice, but please don't assume that everyone concerned about this book is a first-timer when it comes to Rob Bell, because that would be a rather silly assumption on your part.

 

[Gnarwhal]

The guy's been a theological problem for several years now. This is just the most recent manifestation and not the first time universalism has been found in his teachings or expressed from his pulpit.

If you want to align yourself with him, that's your choice, but please don't assume that everyone concerned about this book is a first-timer when it comes to Rob Bell, because that would be a rather silly assumption on your part.

I never said anybody was a first timer. I'm pointing out the "silliness" in making a judgment call based on someone else's opinion, and not actually listening/reading for oneself.

He's a "problem" because he doesn't teach your brand of "spirit filled" Christianity? Show me an actual quote of his where he advocates universalism beyond a shadow of a doubt.

 

[Faulty]

He's a "problem" because he doesn't teach your brand of "spirit filled" Christianity? Show me an actual quote of his where he advocates universalism beyond a shadow of a doubt.

In the other Rob Bell thread, I linked around 4 places of FULL interviews, some well over an hour in length, concerning him in his own words, his new book, and universalism.

If you actually care to know, feel free to hear him in his own words, in context.

Be warned however, write down the definition of universalism before you start so it's there for you to review. He's one slippery dude and loves to redefine terms to make them mean something else than their actual meaning before answering. He's a natural born politician in that regard. Also, watch out for his liberal use of the word 'but'. He also has a nack of saying one thing in the first part of a sentence, then adding a 'but' and taking it all back and actually turn another direction.

When you've carefully critiqued his words, then we can discuss it more.

 

[Usernametaken]

Well I think my friend aswered quite succinctly the whys of dealing with textual criticism. It wasn't interpretation he was concerned with but dishonest scholarship of the original texts as well as the ommission of other texts that would shed a lot more light on the hell debate but were ignored. I believe he did that gracefully without demeaning the man but at the same time calling him on the areas of weakness he felt were there in the book. I believe as christians this is ok and should happen. Name calling and belittling or demonizing Rob Bell is not what he is after at all. And he even mentioned that he appreciates Rob's willingness to ask hard questions. But when Jesus actual words are mis translated and misquoted he took exception.

Well thought out and very nicely stated. Our pastors fellowship came to almost the identical conclusion. It was interesting to note how the author made changes to the definitions of words and then supported his stance on those changes.

Thank you for your mind reply.

 

[Mellie7]

chilled, all of your posts have been nasty and very condescending. as I said, IF you would like to apologize for your nastiness, then and only then will I engage in a conversation with you. There is enough links as Faulty said, and enough research done (I have done alot on my own, not posted here, had no reason to) to know, Rob Bell espouses universalism. Follow Faulty's advice. Good day.

 

[~RENEE~]

troll alert troll alert.

 

[gratefulgrace]

I didn't read Bell's book. Perhaps I should. I did read the missions247 blog. In the interest of scriptural accuracy, perhaps Isaiah 66:24 should be posted in it's entirety:
"And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind."

The blogger leaves the part out about the dead bodies of those who rebell against God. Perhaps the wages of sin is death, after all? Perhaps the new testament agrees with the old.

If you are referring to my pastor friend's blog that I posted or to another one I am not sure. He was never disagreeing with that scripture.You may want to reread the blog if you are confused about his stance.Thanks.

 

[cubinity]

So, i only just heard about this book, and I read the first two chapters of it, and I read your friend's blog.

I think both Bell and your friend make great points.

Bell is way liberal, and heavily challenges the evangelical norms, which I agree need to be challenged in many ways.

However, your friend's blog is insightful about the fact that these challenges need to be done with great concern for accuracy and a high level of integrity if they are gonig to be successful.

So, in so far as I understand each person's position, I agree with both, and believe their combined messages are important for Christianity.