It’s been difficult to keep up with all the blog buzz regarding Rob Bell‘s forthcoming book, Love Wins—a book in which, some have predicted, Bell exchanges the doctrine of hell for some form of universalism.
The book’s promotional video has caused quite a stir. Even the title of the book has been critiqued, perhaps causing some to ask: does love really win in the end?
Justin Taylor, the best I can tell, initially provided the largest platform for the video. (There are currently 1,321 comments posted beneath that post.) Since then, I’ve seen links to posts from Denny Burk, Trevin Wax, Joshua Harris, Kevin DeYoung, and Albert Mohler, each of whom has written about Bell and his latest book. There have been, I’m confident, scores of other responses written thus far, as well.
Wax’s post reminded me of Timothy Stoner’s, The God Who Smokes. (Wax posts relevant excerpts from that book.) Stoner recalls in The God Who Smokes a conversation that took place among members of his theology discussion group. He inquired as to whether Rob Bell really believed that sincere adherents of non-Christian religions—”they reject Jesus”—would be saved. After a moment of palpable silence, a man who had been a founding member of Bell’s church and served in leadership roles there—and who was on a first-name basis with Bell—blurted out, “Of course that’s what he believes!”
In reflecting on that conversation, Stoner notes that he has not been able to confirm or deny the accuracy of this man’s statement, but what troubled him was that “this is what a friend who really ought to know is convinced Rob believes. That’s the danger of posing too many questions,” Stoner continues. “You may wind up confusing your own friends, if not yourself.”
Yesterday evening Darrin Patrick pointed to (the first part of) a review from someone who’s read Bell’s new book. Here’s what he has to say about Bell on hell:
But he [Bell] makes no apology for his declaration that while Hell is a real place, and people will go there, it’s not forever. Ultimately, God’s love will prevail for every person and they will be restored. So I would say that what the recently-released promo video for Love Wins suggests, the book confirms.
I hesitate to state it, given my not having read the book, but that view of hell sure sounds a lot like that of (the anathematized) Origen to me.
Tony Jones has provided his own take on the Bell situation. (HT: AW.) Jones, no stranger to evangelical critique, predicts that Bell will respond to all the controversy over his latest book with a general sense of apathy.
Until Love Wins hits bookstores—or, at least, hits amazon.com—most of us may be left to conjecture, or to the opinions of the better-informed. Bell on hell will likely be an evangelical discussion topic of choice for a season.
But regardless of how all of this turns out, I do hope that evangelicals won’t concede the language of “love wins” to Rob Bell. Love does win, after all. “God is love,” John writes (1 John 4:8), and Paul notes that love is the underlying theme of the eschaton: “So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love” (1 Cor 13:13).
At judgment, Jesus Christ will make the final pronouncement for each of us (Matt 25:31-46). Sheep or goats. Righteous or unrighteous. The kingdom or…hell.
At judgment, each of us will be looking Love in the eye. He’s won. He’ll win.
March 2nd, 2011 | 10:06 am | #1
Does Love Win?
Or does God Win?
March 2nd, 2011 | 10:55 am | #2
Origen was not anathematized for his view of hell or damnation, but rather for his view of the pre-existence and inherent immortality of souls along with his lack of clarity regarding the equality among the divine persons.
March 2nd, 2011 | 12:09 pm | #3
1. I think the Church has covered this topic before.
2. I wonder if Bell believes we will see Satan in the new heavens and new earth.
March 2nd, 2011 | 12:12 pm | #4
God is love.
March 2nd, 2011 | 12:24 pm | #5
3. The Church hasn’t reached much of a consensus on this issue (unless we have an extremely parochial view of “the Church”)
4. It’s far from clear the Church has satisfyingly addressed the forceful concerns about this issue.
5. Most Christians aren’t very informed about the Church’s own past conclusions, even such as they are.
March 2nd, 2011 | 12:51 pm | #6
Stephen, as far as I know, Origen was also anathematized for his view of the ultimate restoration and salvation of all things, or at least the doctrine was anathematized. That’s universalism. Is that wrong?
March 2nd, 2011 | 3:07 pm | #7
Jeff,
Amen. There’s nothing more that needs to be said about love winning out or not.
March 2nd, 2011 | 4:26 pm | #8
What the Bell??? http://tinyurl.com/n63p82
March 3rd, 2011 | 8:47 am | #9
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-latondresse/farewell-rob-bell-or-john_b_829409.html
‘I almost Tweeted, “Looks like @JohnPiper has doubled down on being a belligerent jerk since his sabbatical.” Except I would have used a different word than “jerk” (I’ll leave that word to your imagination).’
March 3rd, 2011 | 9:51 am | #10
I found an old sermon from Rob Bell with the same title as his forthcoming book. Could it offer a glimpse of the position he’ll take in the book?
I posted a link to the message on my blog. Love to here your opinion.
Thanks,
Dave
March 3rd, 2011 | 1:40 pm | #11
Interesting post. I anticipate that Bell’s book just isn’t for those of us who have been interested in the “what happens when you die?” question. So, for all the flack it may get, the ones criticizing it will be the very people who are in no need of it. I am sure that Bell will bother conservative evangelicals as usual, but the rest of us will probably get a breath of fresh air from it.
March 4th, 2011 | 5:16 pm | #12
God is love.
But it does not follow that God is in favor of Othello strangling Desdemona, however sincerely Othello might believe that he did it because he “loved [her]…too well”.
March 5th, 2011 | 1:48 pm | #13
Can we have goodness without judgment and redemption? Can pure goodness exist without be terrifying? Is God constrained by our sence of fairness (read Job). Without reading Bell’s new book, but rather based on his theology when he was an intern at Calvary Church in GR, he appears more interested in a heavenly grandfather, than a heavenly father. As C.S Lewis stated a senile benevolence or Santa Claus in the sky who only wishes to make us feel good about ourselves. The love that Piper, Driscoll, DeYoung talk about is a harsh love, but love it is. I predict that the theological influence of the New Calvinist will flourish. If what Rob has said to date is right, why do we need to bother with redemption?
March 5th, 2011 | 6:32 pm | #14
I once saw a bumper sticker saying “Jesus Wins.” After seeing so many around that say “Love Wins,” it was so refreshing and beautiful. Love wins? Human love? Imperfect human love? Never. He who knows God not knows love not. It seems Rob and his fickle followers are more concerned with love and peace and their own end to happiness than they are about truth and God. They are more willing to listen to a story than they are the truth. Jesus said he is the way, the truth and the life. He is love in perfection. How can we say love wins when the statement includes our own filth in it? How can we say Jesus wins without understanding that perfect love etched within those two words?
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact