If you read the New York Times today, you might have noticed there’s another “mess” brewing in the blogs and twitter feeds in the evangelical community. Rob Bell, closest thing to a Christian celebrity rock star is apparently coming out with a new book that questions the great separation after death – Christ’s followers going to be with Christ, the rest entering eternal separation from Him in Hell. The book hasn’t yet arrived, but the teaser video was enough to ignite the defenders of orthodox doctrine (i.e. Justin Taylor, Kevin DeYoung, Al Mohler, etc, or John Piper’s tweet – “Farewell Rob Bell”).
Part of me really doesn’t want to chime in. As Christopher Hays advised just last week, we Christians sometimes need to just chill out. When we don’t, stuff we don’t like winds up selling like hotcakes.
What interests me though is not so much the ideas of Rob Bell, but more the way folks from my own side of the Christian fence talk and defend. We tend to be pretty interested in doctrinal issues, rightfully so I think. Sometimes though, the impression conveyed in our God-talk is that our whole identity and raison d’etre is the defense of the propositions we hold dear. Part of me understands this because we view it as defending God, or better yet, advocating for God and the rich life that is only enjoyed through reconciliation with Him. But another part of me really wonders if we’ve gotten off track in our whole defending bit.
Here is Rob Bell proposing “Love Wins” in the end. The response? Denouncement, dismissal, and carefully reasoned Biblical rebuttals. Okay, but seriously, shouldn’t we at least, even first and foremost, be recognizing and even sympathizing with the sentiment that motivates Bell (down right or wrong paths)? Shouldn’t our first responders make every effort to convey to a Hell-drowned world the agony and tears that first consume us when we merge our doctrine with the real lives we rub shoulders with?
As I read the responses, I can’t help but wonder, where are the pleas of Abraham as he stood between God and Sodom? Where are admonitions of Moses (“God, you can’t do this!”) as he dared come between God and His rebellious people? Where are the cries of Jeremiah, the agonized heart of Paul, and not least of all the tears of Jesus as He mourned over His city that would not turn?
Is it wrong that every ounce of my heart hopes I’ve got it wrong, wishes that I could look at my neighbor and know that Christ’s love will certainly win out over his sin? Is it wrong of me to wanna read 1 John 2:2 simply at face value? Is it wrong that my heart, whether I want it to or not, resonates with Bell’s heart?
I digress a bit. Getting back to my concern about our way of defending doctrine, the responses I read suggest to me that perhaps we’ve detached ourselves from the real and hurting world to go conduct business in the realm of abstract propositions. And I think we are prone, for some reason, to do this a little too often.
The consequences are severe in this case. The world reads us talking about hell with coldness, apathy, and maybe even scorn towards those we view on the road thereto (did you notice the title of the Times piece?). They perhaps wonder if they aren’t a distant second-best to our beloved doctrine. Maybe they’ve long since stopped caring.
Furthermore, if our doctrine-talk becomes detached, haven’t we lost the essential nature of doctrine? Wouldn’t that suggest we’ve forgotten how the supreme truth-content, the ultimate doctrine of God (Heb. 1:2) lived in walked among us, with flesh and bone, along the darkened streets of a shepherd-less world.
Doctrine should always be real-world stuff. It’s God-talk with human skin. Its hell-talk with tears, cruciformly standing between God and sinners, longing to do so even to the very end.
Having been gone from the Internet for a few months, I’m behind on this controversy, but have heard just enough for me to know I don’t want to know all about it.
I appreciate and empathize with your response.
It seems like somewhere along the line, “christianity” lost it’s original message of love and redemption.
Now it’s all about hate. God hates fags. God hates democrats. God hates baby killers. etc…
It doesn’t surprise me at all when I hear people talking about how ” have a VERY hot place waiting for them. Oh yeah, they’re gonna BURN before a righteous and just gawd”.
It takes far more fruit-of-the-spirit-mentality to say “I forgive you” than it does to say “just you wait, you sinner, you”. It seems like christendom has forgotten that.
oh.. oops. Apparently stuff inside less than and greater than symbols get edited out.
“about how ” have a VERY hot place…”
was supposed to be
“about how “<those people> have a VERY hot place…”
Silly wordpress.
I’ve read some of Rob Bell and he should be taken in context with some of his other writings. We are called to contend for the faith. How we do that may be an issue, but it has to be done. Mr Bell is weak in his defense of the once for all delivered faith.
I hear what you’re saying Aaron, but to grasp the Gospel, the bad news has to be understood before the good news.
Uncle Dean, it’s certainly true that you need to understand the problem before you can think about the solution. But wouldn’t you agree that christendom (paticularly protestant america) has a fixation on hell and damnation?
Uncle Dean – yes defense is part of our mission from Christ. Its more that whole “how we do it” I’m curious about. To defend effectively, I would think we need always to be concerned to speak truth into people’s lives and into those areas of the heart actively worshipping false gods. Talking about Hell and its inhabitants without much hint of sadness suggest to me we’re doing our defense out in the stratosphere. But yeah, I’m not implying that to bring it down means we avoid the subject altogether…or pretend the problem doesn’t exist.
anon – I think you might be aiming at a slightly more distinct, and hopefully decreasing, wing of my side of the fence (the very angry fundamentalists…with a southern drawl – type). I wouldn’t even classify that hell-talk as defense, more just using the idea of hell to satisfy personal rage. Interesting question though why the fixation…
Yes, I was talking about the more pentecostal, jesus camp, style of christianity.
I don’t think the fixation is isolated to any one particular group. There seems to be an inbuilt drive toward hating those that are not like us.
That’s why I do in fact love some of the teachings of jesus. Love your neighbor AS (not invariably more than but AS) yourself. The good Samaritan. The sower.
Seems like many christians today aren’t comfortable with moving on from the rocky soil to the good soil. They’d rather fixate on plowing the crap out of that rocky soil until it just HAS to take seed.
Anon and Aaron:
I don’t believe Protestant America has a fixation on hell. In fact I think hell has been removed by Protestantism.
I take no pleasure in sharing with guys at work about the realities of hell and the eternal wrath of God on those who die with their sins unforgiven. Yet Jesus bore the wrath and became our Substitute
It’s rare to hear a sermon on hell. I’ve been going to church all my life and can count on my one hand the number of sermons teaching it. The message of the cross along with the realities of wrath and hell are offense to the unbeliever. A deficient Gospel saves no one.
Perhaps the more I realize and grasp what I have been saved from will deepen the love for the lost that you speak of, Aaron.
I have really been saved from God Himself.
Perhaps a a response like this is more what you were hoping for, Aaron?
That hyperlink doesn’t appear to be working. How about this: http://www.patheos.com/community/jesuscreed/2011/04/11/exploring-love-wins-5/
That article makes some good points Mr Sheemy. And let’s not forget Matthew 25:41. Hell was made for the devil and his angels. I guess the same fate awaits those human beings who rebel as lucifer did.