To Hell with Rob Bell?

This also is a direct confrontation to our traditional methods of Bible interpretation. Trying to view the Bible through different interpretive lenses is outrageous to those who have thought about the Bible wearing the same glasses for their entire lives. Do different interpretations about the doctrine of hell open the flood gates toward various interpretations regarding the rest of the Bible? What parts of the Bible can we really put our confidence in? I don’t like the doctrine of hell. I want it to go away, but I still want to maintain solid interpretive practices and something solid to grasp onto.

In Mark 9:43-44 (NASB), Jesus says, “If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire, where THEIR WORM DOES NOT DIE, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.”

Hell is real. Jesus encouraged us to avoid it. We should want to avoid it – and help others avoid it – pointing them toward repentance and the Savior whose blood can make them righteous before God.

Let’s say for the sake of argument that universal reconciliation is correct. What is the level of concern among its advocates at the thought that anyone might have to go through even temporal punishment in a place as painful as hell?

Any belief in a hell that punishes – whether temporally or eternally – should inspire us to help lead the lost to salvation through Jesus Christ.

Luke 13:24,28 (NASB)
Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able.
In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but yourselves being thrown out.

Matthew 25:34, 46 (NASB)
Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.

John 3:14-15 (NASB)
As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.

John 5:23b, 24 (NIV)
He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him.
I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

John 6:35, 40 (NIV)
…I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.
For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 11:25 (NIV)
…I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies;

John 12:48 (NIV)
There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day.

John 17:3 (NIV)
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

What I glean from these passages is:

- there is a bad result
- at its best, the bad result is a lack of eternal life, not being able to enter the door, being thrown out of the kingdom of God
- at its worst, it will involve weeping and gnashing of teeth, eternal punishment, condemnation, judgment, death

- there is a good result – inheritance of the kingdom, lack of condemnation, eternal lack of hunger and thirst, being raised up, eternal life
- the result is based on whether one goes through the narrow door, is righteous, honors the Son, hears Jesus’ word, believes God who sent Jesus, looks to the Son, believes in Jesus

Jesus Himself uses the term “eternal punishment.” Also, He frequently references “eternal life” and what one must do to enter into eternal life. The inference is clear that there is something else that is lesser and which will be our lot if we don’t do the things needed to enter into eternal life.

If we are to accept Jesus’ own words, we must discard the idea that there is no eternal punishment, or, at worst, only a temporal punishment. Hard to accept? In my human limitation, I don’t particularly like the idea, but to believe Jesus is to accept His words, even when they make me uncomfortable.

Re: universal reconciliation, perhaps my understanding of the nuances of universal reconciliation (UR) is incomplete, but the impression I get from its advocates is that they’re mainly looking toward the very end, when they believe all will be in Heaven, even though they leave open the possibility that there may be a temporal punishment for some before entering Heaven. The thrust of what I hear from UR advocates seems to major on Godly living, but downplays the need for belief in Jesus specifically as Savior.

What I was asking is: why do UR advocates appear not to care very much about the possibility that, even from their own perspective, failing to promote belief in Jesus as Savior could result in a number of people going through temporal punishment? (I am open to writings, etc., indicating that I am misperceiving UR advocates.)

Shouldn’t even the possibility of temporal punishment lead UR advocates to actively promote belief in Jesus as part of the overall equation of a person’s eternal destiny?

In sum, though, Jesus Himself taught of the importance of believing in Him and His Father who sent Him. Therefore, we should actively include this teaching in our efforts to tell the world the Good News of the Savior who died for our sins.

D-Dawg, I think you need to consider that the verses you are quoting may not contribute to your theological stance in the way that you assume them to. Yes, there are more words and phrases than “hell” used to defend the doctrine of eternal conscious torment (ECT), but the consideration is that while there might be universal reconciliation means that there is a form of justice that will bring about reconciliation to God that will be “hellish.”

I just got Love Wins, and it is sitting here on my desk. It isn’t very thick and it has big print. Rob Bell isn’t writing a treatise. But from the little bit that I’ve read, the bulk of his “evangelism” is to get people here and now and in this life to embrace Jesus and follow him.

If UR is true, you may be right that the “destiny” part of it is minimized compared to the ECT doctrine because ECT is based on avoidance/escapism. But that doesn’t make it true or untrue, it just makes the good news very good for the afterlife, but even better for now and the afterlife.

You can go back and read some of my posts in this blog, but stated broadly: “Jesus has come to restore the world from brokenness to wholeness.” It could be stated another way: “Jesus is Lord” (which implied in his own day, “…and Caesar is not!”). It could be understood another way: “The world is astray and God is seeking us to bring us closer to God.”

Rob Bell: “Love Wins!” Critics: “Like Hell!”

So D-Dawg (did your parents name you that?), is it hard to write with one hand or no hands? Is it hard to know what Doug wrote with no eyes? Wait, you have both hands? You have both eyes? But I thought you were taking these verses literally? Have you really never masturbated? You’ve never once looked at a girl with lust?
Oh, you have but those words don’t mean what they actually say? I mean it says, “CUT IT OFF.” Why is half the verse literal but the other half is not?

Thank you for your reply. I guess I have difficulty defining the bad news and good news too broadly. The bad news isn’t simply brokenness, which is a result that doesn’t necessarily imply separation from God, but sin, a cause which results in a type of brokenness, and then ultimately death.

God, in His holiness, cannot bypass the reality of sin. Sin makes us unacceptable to Him, yet the good news is that He has provided a way for us to become acceptable: through the shed blood of Jesus. If we die in our sin, we remain separate from God, but if the blood of Jesus covers us (by faith in Him and confessing Him as Lord), we can stand before God, made righteous through Christ.

I think the distinction between “making the broken whole” versus “redeeming humankind from their sin” is important because “brokenness” alone doesn’t explain humankind’s problem, nor does it inherently point to lasting consequences or judgment for remaining broken. To many ears, “brokenness” evokes only images of earthly suffering, not spiritual deficiency before God. Many sinners aren’t suffering in an earthly sense. Thus, to reach them requires that they become convicted that they are broken spiritually, sinners in need of a Savior.

To be saved requires that there be something to be saved from. Thus, I think it is of vital importance that the entire witness include what Jesus and the Bible say about the consequences of sin, so that sinners may see that there is a choice – the wages of their sin, or the Savior who saves and forgives their sin.

What is your view on including the idea of the sinner’s choice in the proclamation of the Good News?

“But if “hell” and “unquenchable fire” have no meaning, literally or metaphorically, then why should we avoid sin?”

For me the answer to this question is to say it’s the wrong question to ask.  In my life, I don’t seek to avoid sin…ever.  What I DO do is seek Christ.  I seek Christ because he is my heart’s desire, because I love him, because he is everything good and everything I TRULY want.  Jesus is the way.  When we seek him we avoid sin simply by not coming across it (ideally, obviously!).  

And of course I DO sin…don’t we all?  But I don’t really need any motivation NOT to sin other than wanting Christ more than anything else.  And yes, sometimes I get distracted/confused/selfish and want other things more than him.  But in the end it always comes back to me finding that nothing satisfies like Christ.

I figure: it’s like this, the life God is offering us is a five star hotel.  A life of sin, of rejecting God is a Holiday Inn at best (sorry Holiday Inn).  The only reason anyone ever choices the Holiday Inn is because they don’t really GET that God is offering them something MUCH BETTER.  

And sometimes, yes, we have lived our lives in such a way that sin seems appealing.  But avoiding sin purely to avoid punishment is totally missing the point, the good news, and Christ himself.

“Delight yourself in the LORD and he will give you the desires of your heart.”

Personally, I have found, that Christ IS the desire of my heart.  And in seeking him first (because I WANT to) he has given me ”all these (AWESOME) things as well”.