Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Love Wins- A Book Review

The rumors were flying fast and furious a couple of weeks ago.  "Has Rob Bell gone completely off his rocker? Is he a (audible gasp) Universalist?"  I couldn't wait to get my hands on the book "Love Wins" and see if it lived up to its title and Rob Bell had joined the ranks of us heretical universalists. My question was "Is Rob Bell one of us?" The answer?  Well, keep reading...

A little background in case you don't know Rob Bell.  He's the pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church a megachurch in Michigan (but, I won't hold that against him).  He's a young (40 years) pastor who in addition to having a way cool look produces videos called Nooma that are cutting edge in their production and appeal to young people.  Bell was raised in a traditional Christian background, but his view of God seems (to me) to have expanded quite a bit. I read his book Velvet Elvis several years ago and enjoyed it very much.  Bell has been described as a "rock star" in the Christian world.  So, when it was rumored that he might have given up on the belief in hell, people really got their panties in a bunch.

The book, like Bell's other book I have read is written in a very casual, easily accessible style.  It took me all of two days to complete the entire book.  Bell asks a lot of very important questions we should all be asking ourselves, encouraging people to not just take his word for things but to think through them for themselves.  I like that about his books. Bell asks most of the questions I asked.  Questions, whose answers led me away from believing in the God I was taught about in Sunday School, a cruel and hard taskmaster who could hardly wait to throw me into Hell, unless somehow Jesus managed to save me from Him. 

If you want to be kept in suspense about how Rob answers the questions about hell and whether love actually wins or not, you can stop reading now and know that the book is worth getting.  If you're not afraid to think or confront these questions, pick up the book and don't be afraid to read a "heretic's" point of view. If he's wrong, you can say "He's wrong." and put the book down.  No harm done.



[SPOILER ALERT]


So, what is the answer to "Is Bell a Universalist?"  If I had to give a one word "yes" or "no", the answer would be "no".  Bell has not gone so far as to say there is no hell (as has been reported).  Bell does not go so far as to say that all will eventually be saved (or get to heaven).  So, in the strictest sense, Bell is not a universalist.  What  has got some so upset though is Bell has expanded the love and grace of God way beyond it's traditional limitations.  Bell says that Jesus (Christ) is accessible to all, even to those who have never heard His name.  Bell believes that all are saved through Christ. But, Bell points to Paul's story about the water flowing from the rock that Moses struck with his staff.  Paul says that water was "Christ".  Bell reasons if Paul can see Christ everywhere, including in the desert hundreds of years before His birth, others can have access to Christ- others who are not Christians.  Bell also says that God gives us what we want. I don't agree with that.  We get a lot of things we don't want and don't get a lot of things we do want.  But, one thing we do have (and I think this is what Bell is talking about) is we have choices.  Bell doesn't think it makes sense that those choices end at the moment of death.  The picture of God as all loving and willing to do anything to save us before death and turning into a monster that casts us into eternal torment the moment we die, Bell rejects.  

In a sense, I guess Bell is a universalist.  He believes salvation is available to all.  But, he does not go so far as to say that all will choose salvation.  He points to the picture in Revelation of a new city where the gates are never closed.  He says that there will be a judgement day, a day of separation where God puts everything right and says "No more, here."  Choices will still be available.   Choices that can lead us farther from God or choices that can lead us closer to God. Some choices will not be available to those who choose to stay "here".  God will say "You can do what you like.  But, you can't do it here."  (I paraphrase).  This part of the book reminded me of my friend Bob Edwards who just can't get all the way to universalism. He says that God allows suffering here. So, why should we believe that God will not allow people after death to make choices that continue to cause suffering?  He points us to the new city in the book of Revelation where the gates are never closed.  Never closed might mean those outside the city can enter.  It would also mean those in the city could leave (so, I guess in heaven, we'll have the choice to make those choices that disqualify us to remain there). Like C.S. Lewis in the "Great Divorce" (reference in the Further Reading in Bell's book), Bell seems to think if there is a lock on hell, it's locked from the inside. Bell talks about those who continue and continue and continue to make choices that lead them further and further from God.  Do they eventually give up their humanity entirely?  Is the image of God so distorted in them that it's irretrievable?  If the answers to those questions are "Yes." Then, I'd say the title of the book needs to be changed to "Love wins, sometimes." or "Love wins, most of the time."

Many of the people slamming Rob Bell (most?) have not read the book.  I know because their criticisms came before the book even came out.  But, Rob Bell is not a universalist.  According to his critics, he's still a heretic. Some of them still think he's a universalist.  It's also not true, even though it's been widely reported, that Rob Bell believes there is no hell. He's expanded the grace of God and the reach of Jesus far beyond what makes some people comfortable. But, according to Bell, it's still possible to outrun the reach of God.   God's love is not inescapable, as others of us have concluded.  Rob Bell is not one of us, yet.



Enhanced by Zemanta

7 comments:

UncleJesse said...

Hey Brian! Great review, I'm still waiting for my copy from Amazon. Maybe Bell is just challenging the establishment without being an outright "heretic."

brian said...

Oh, they're still flaming him. Even though he says there will be suffering in "hell". It's not good enough for them. They need the exclusivity that only Christians can get to heaven and that hell is permanent. So, Bell's still a heretic (according to them). He's just not a universalist.

Crystal Lewis said...

Thanks for this review! I cant wait to read the book for myself. I really love that he's opened the lines of communication concerning this topic. I think it's a shame that people who haven't read the book are so staunchly against it, but I guess that's just the way things are, eh?

By the way, I skipped the spoiler. Thanks for the warning. lol :)

Sammy said...

Well, I just finished Love Wins. I have to agree that, if you go by what is written in the book, Bell is not a universalist, although he is about as close as you can get.

However, I do think it is possible that Bell himself is a universalist, but purposefully did not cross the line into universalism in his book. If he did, no traditionalists would even touch his book. Bell didn't write Love Wins for universalists. He isn't trying to preach to the choir. He wants to reach those traditionalists.

Because Bell does get so close to universalism, quite a few fundamentalist Christians are going to condemn him as a heretic. However, some might actually listen. Most of the universalists I know grew up in fundamentalist or evangelical Christian churches. Somebody reached us. It's possible Bell is trying to reach those who are beginning to doubt a schizophrenic God who infinitely loves you one minute and throws you away like trash to be tortured for all eternity the next.

Overall, I think Love Wins was quite good. I especially liked Bell's more inclusive definition of Jesus. It truly unique and it forces people to reconsider who and what Jesus really is.

Of course, as a staunch universalist myself, I would have been happier if Bell's book revealed him to be a universalist too. But, it's a step in the right direction at least.

brian said...

Sammy, thanks for your comment. I agree 100%. Bell has taken a huge leap forward here and may be stopping shy of being a universalist to give his "flock" (for lack of a better word) time to catch up. We all witnessed what happened to Carlton Pearson when he tried to spring universalism on a conservative following. It literally destroyed his church and got him kicked out from the inner circles he was in.

Yes, the book is quite good and much needed. If traditional Christians can move even as far as Bell, that would be wonderful.

Rhonda said...

Love this, Brian!

Bell is lighting a fire on the Evangelical earth--the kind of fire that the bible DOES teach about! How exciting is THIS? God bless him! :) --rhonda

Cindi said...

I haven't read the book...although from your review, Brian, his views are a lot like those of Greg Boyd, the open theism guy from another mega church in St Paul who also discounts the traditional view of hell. And there's another guy...can't think of his name..the pastor of a very large (the largest) United Methodist Church in the country who wrote a book called Seeing Gray in a Black and White World. He also discounts the traditional view of hell.

I can believe there are choices to be made after we die and that, at least for a season, those choices can lead us farther away from God. But ultimately, every knee will bow and every tear will be wiped away from ALL faces..just like Scripture proclaims.

Cindi....