<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ODUvw2McL8g" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Apparently Rob Bell has angered a great many evangelicals with his questioning (and, it should be noted, he has done so with a book hasn't even come out yet). I find this very interesting - there are a number of Christians who appear very thoughtful and who aren't afraid to state their views, but they seem to get shouted down by the much bigger and much louder "evangelicals." "Team Hell" is a term coined, I think, by Christian-blogger Fred Clark at http://www.patheos.com/community/slacktivist/. He's referring to the "evangelicals" who insist that everyone unlike them is going to hell. Here is a very thoughtful article on the subject of hell in the bible. I have bolded some parts for those of you who don't like reading interesting stuff. Fred Clark at http://www.patheos.com/community/slacktivist/2011/03/02/team-hell-gets-loud/ [rquoter]The evangelical blog world seems all atwitter over a forthcoming book by Rob Bell, pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Mich. The book’s title, “Love Wins,” is apparently regarded by many American evangelicals as an astonishingly heretical and controversial claim. Love wins? How dare anyone suggest such a thing? Even more controversial is the book’s subtitle: “Heaven, Hell and the Fate of Every Person Who Has Ever Lived.” Bear in mind that the book hasn’t hit shelves yet, so nobody’s actually read it yet, but that subtitle and this promotional video from Bell were more than enough to prompt Team Hell to spring into action. I’ll say this for Team Hell, they’re not afraid of repeating themselves. Maybe they’re not very good at supporting their arguments and not very interested in doing much more than sputtering reflexive condemnations, but they sputter with great enthusiasm and they’re never shy about getting loud. For a taste of the loudness and the repetitive sputtering, browse about in the Google Blog search results for “Rob Bell,” or check out the summary from Christianity Today’s liveblog: “Rob Bell’s Upcoming Book on Heaven & Hell Stirs Blog, Twitter Backlash on Universalism.” We’ve seen Team Hell in action before, illustrating their power by bankrupting the ministry of Carlton Pearson and his Higher Dimensions Family Church of Tulsa, Okla. Once Pearson questioned the idea of Hell and the supposed biblical basis for that idea, Team Hell’s response was swift, fierce and merciless. “Heretic,” they said. “Bible-denier.” But what they never said then in their attacks on Pearson, and what they haven’t said now about Bell’s book, is why anyone, anywhere who has ever actually read the Bible would accept that their fiercely defended doctrine of Hell had anything to do with that book. Because, to be clear, this doctrine of Hell is not biblical. This is why Team Hell’s strategy is always the same: Step1: Loudly attack opponents of Hell as heretics and Bible-deniers. Step 2: Loudly assert that the doctrine of Hell is biblical. Step 3: Even more loudly re-assert that the doctrine of Hell is biblical. Step 4: Repeat Step 3 until you’re the only one left talking. That’s not a very compelling construction for an argument, since it doesn’t involve logic or evidence. But if loud, angry repetition of unsupported assertions isn’t an effective way of winning an argument, it can still be an effective way of ending one or avoiding having to engage one. And since Team Hell doesn’t have access to either logic or evidence as support for their position, they figure that will have to do. By Team Hell I mean those real, true Christians who adamantly argue for a non-negotiable belief in Hell as a physical place that the Bible says is the destiny of all non-RTCs who will go there to receive eternal torment. This belief, they insist, is central to Christianity and anyone who says otherwise, they claim, is abandoning or attacking the Bible. But again, this idea cannot be found in the Bible. So what the heck is going on? Why do so many devout “authorities” on the Bible get so very upset at the possibility that someone may have written a book challenging an extra-biblical invention? And why do they all shout so loudly and so enthusiastically that any criticism of this cruel invention constitutes an attack on the Bible itself? Team Hell, of course, disagrees that the idea cannot be found in the Bible. Check out that CT post or any of the posts linked to it and you’ll find dozens of members of Team Hell loudly insisting that the Bible is all about Hell — that Hell is such a basic and central part of the Bible’s message that to reject the idea of Hell is to reject scripture altogether. But what you won’t find is any of these members of Team Hell actually discussing where the Bible says this, or what the Bible says, or how what the Bible says could possibly be taken to mean this. Because this supposed “biblical Hell” does not exist. The Bible doesn’t teach this. Dante teaches this. Jack Chick teaches this. Iron Maiden (the thadeus says \m/ \m/) and countless B movies teach this. But the Bible does not. The doctrine of Hell can be, with only partial success, taken from Dante and Chick and Iron Maiden and grafted onto the Bible. But it cannot be derived from the Bible. I would invite anyone who says otherwise to try to make their case. All these teachers, authorities, theologians and self-appointed bishops of evangelicalism’s market-driven hierarchy are invited, in other words, to go to Hell. By that I mean, of course, only that they should open their Bibles and go to the passages they claim teach this invention of Hell and attempt to show how those passages support their endlessly repeated assertion that this idea is “biblical.” Most of Team Hell doesn’t even bother to try doing this. They’re too busy attacking the infidels — Rob Bell or Carlton Pearson or me — and accusing them of abandoning the Bible. That would be the same Bible I have open right here in front of me — the same Bible that absolutely and unambiguously does not say and cannot be made to say what they are saying it says. The Bible simply is not part of Team Hell. The Hebrew scriptures offer no support for Team Hell. None. The pages of the Old Testament mention “sheol,” or “the grave,” but not Hell. Moses, Elijah, Isaiah and Amos are not a part of Team Hell. Nor is the apostle Paul. Paul had much to say about “Heaven,” or at least about the heavenly meaning of resurrection, but nothing at all to say about Hell. Team Hell loves to quote Paul despite this. They’re particularly fond of Paul’s frequent statements about accepting “this gospel” and no other gospel. Team Hell loves to apply such statements to Rob Bell or to anyone else they think might be deviating from their extrabiblical dogma. “There be some that trouble you and would pervert the gospel of Christ,” Team Hell says, as though this verse from Galatians were speaking of anyone who believes that Love Wins. And they warn that if anyone “preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” But the thing is that this gospel Paul spoke of to the Galatians, the Corinthians and Thessalonians — the gospel that Paul laid out in an extended argument in his letter to the Romans — that gospel makes no mention of Hell. The gospel as Paul preached it, as he described it in his epistles, does not include the doctrine of Hell. If you want to add Hell to Paul’s gospel, then you’re preaching a gospel other than that which he preached. Paul is no help for Team Hell. Paul is, in fact, a major obstacle and contradiction to the claims of Team Hell. The case for Team Hell, ultimately, comes down to three passages.These aren’t the only passages that mention Hell, but the others that do so do only that — mention it without any explanation of what the Hell they are mentioning means. The question of what “Hell” means in all those other passages is answered, for Team Hell, in just those three main passages — two from the Gospels and one from John’s apocalypse. They provide the entire foundation on which Team Hell has constructed the gigantic edifice of its doctrine. And they are not sufficient to bear its weight. We’ve gone over these three passages before, but let us do again here what Team Hell almost never does and actually read the three passages on which every claim of a “biblical” Hell depends. 1. Luke 16:19-31 There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate lay a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, who longed to satisfy his hunger with what fell from the rich man’s table; even the dogs would come and lick his sores. The poor man died and was carried away by the angels to be with Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried. In Hades, where he was being tormented, he looked up and saw Abraham far away with Lazarus by his side. He called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in agony in these flames.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in agony. Besides all this, between you and us a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who might want to pass from here to you cannot do so, and no one can cross from there to us.’ He said, ‘Then, father, I beg you to send him to my father’s house— for I have five brothers—that he may warn them, so that they will not also come into this place of torment.’ Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; they should listen to them.’ He said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’” 2. Matthew 25:41-46 Then he will say to those at his left hand, “You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.” Then they also will answer, “Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?” Then he will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.” And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. 3. Revelation 20:11-15 Then I saw a great white throne and the one who sat on it; the earth and the heaven fled from his presence, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also another book was opened, the book of life. And the dead were judged according to their works, as recorded in the books. And the sea gave up the dead that were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and all were judged according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire; and anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire. That’s the whole ball of wax — the whole ball of fire and brimstone — right there. That’s the “biblical” case that Team Hell is always on about. Pretty weak. Did you notice anything else those three passages have in common? They all explicitly lay out a soteriological framework that directly contradicts what nearly every member of Team Hell claims he believes. In our earlier discussion of these passages, we looked at why these passages’ references to a “lake of fire” or “eternal fire” or torment in “Hades” cannot easily be read as teaching that this is the proper understanding of the cartography and logistics of the afterlife. That’s not what these passages are about. The author in each case is utterly disinterested in the cartography and logistics of the afterlife and each author is so consumed with the primary focus and meaning of what is really being said here that it’s hard not to imagine them being extremely angry to learn that their words would one day be conscripted by people mainly interested in arguing for the “literal” existence of Dante’s Inferno. But the really strange thing about Team Hell invoking any of these passages is that none of them supports anything like what Team Hell has to say about who belongs in Hell or why they should wind up there. What one finds in all three of these passages, instead, is a seeming Pelagianism. All that matters in any of these scriptures is deeds and actions. Not a word anywhere here about grace or faith or the power of Jesus’ death and resurrection. Deeds and actions and those alone are what determines the eternal fate of everyone in each of these passages. They couldn’t be any clearer on that point — the main point of each passage above. What determines if someone is to be cast into Revelation’s “lake of fire”? The dead will be judged, Revelation says, “… according to their works, as recorded in the books. … according to what they had done.” Who are the accursed “goats” on Jesus’ left hand who will be consigned to “the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels”? Those who did not feed the hungry, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked or comfort the lonely. And why was the rich man in Luke’s gospel sent to Hades? Jesus never quite says, but he seems to suggest that the rich man went to Hades because he was rich just as the poor beggar Lazarus goes to Heaven just because he was a poor beggar. Awkward, that. Insurmountably awkward, I think, for those members of Team Hell who want to insist that these passages must be interpreted “literally” in support of a sadistic notion of eternity. Because if we read these passages in the “literal” manner that would allow us to regard them as teaching the existence of Dante’s Hell then we must also “literally” accept what they say about who that Hell is for. (And it clearly isn’t for Gandhi.) Now as it happens I don’t think these passages are about soteriology any more than they are about charting out the details of Heaven or Hell. I think anyone turning to these passages for such things is reading them wrong — that a “literal” reading that turns out to be about something other than what the passage is actually about isn’t really “literal” and isn’t really “reading.” Reading shouldn’t be about missing the point. The point of these passages, clearly, is ethical instruction and I don’t think they can really be made to accommodate any other reading. Luke 16:19-31 is not about Hell and it’s not about how to avoid being sent to Hell. It’s about how you and I ought to respond to the beggars at our gates. Matthew 25:41-46 is not about Hell and it’s not about how to avoid being sent to Hell. It’s about how you and I ought to respond to the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the naked, the sick and imprisoned. Emphasize anything else and you’ve missed the point. You might as well not have read them at all. The strongest case for Team Hell, in other words, involves a perverse reading of passages that excludes the very reason those passages were written. And that’s the strongest case. Underlying this pretense about the supposed “biblical” basis for altering Paul’s gospel to include eternal torment in Hell is something even stranger. The odder, larger question is why the members of Team Hell so very much want this imagined eternal torment to be true. It can’t simply be that they believe this because “the Bible tells me so,” because, as we have just seen, the biblical case for this belief is terribly, terribly thin. So, again, what’s really going on here? And why? It’s tempting to speculate that this belief has less to do with a desire to uphold biblical truth than it does with a desire for control. The doctrine of Hell, after all, may be biblically indefensible, but it’s a terribly useful thing for keeping one’s followers in line. But such speculation would of course be irresponsible. I can’t know the contents of anyone else’s thoughts any more than they can know the contents of Rob Bell’s book before they’ve read it. Just because I can’t think of a decent or commendable reason someone would plausibly get angry over the thought of love winning doesn’t mean that their motives are necessarily bad.[/rquoter] I find this very interesting. I've read the Bible, but it never really occurred to me that 'hell' has very little presence in the book. I'd love to hear viewpoints on this debate from Christians and otherwise.
I think hell is just as made up as heaven, but dude...this blogger is making a serious stretch here when he says it's not biblical. "And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." "This is the second death, the lake of fire; and anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire." seems like a straight forward message to me.
I'm very interested in reading Bell's book. The traditional teaching of who goes to heaven and who goes to hell has always been troubling to me. As I mentioned in a previous thread, though I am a Christian, I fully recognize that the primary reason I am is because I was raised as one. I know that if I were raised a Muslim, I'd likely be a Muslim and that if I were raised Hindu, I'd be Hindu. I can't blame anybody of any other religion for belonging to those religions because I know that I could very well be just like them. While it doesn't apply to everybody, I believe that the choice of religion (or not believing in any) is largely a product of upbringing and culture and that most people really have little choice at all. I know that when I was growing up, I wasn't aware of any other religions. I wasn't even away there were people who didn't believe in God. But I sit in church every Sunday and watch 6 year old come down the aisle to make a "decision" for Christ that I know isn't really much of a decision at all because it's never like they were ever going to choose another religion to begin with when Christianity is all they know. And I believe it's the same with the other religions too. The likelihood of a child growing up in a Muslim country with Muslim parents choosing to become a Christian isn't very high. If Christianity is the one true religion, should that kid be punished and sentenced to hell? Should the people who've never had the opportunity to hear God's Word be sent to to hell automatically despite never even having the opportunity of becoming part of a religion they never knew existed? The traditional teaching of hell says the answer is "yes" and that's always troubled me. I'd like to think God wouldn't do something like that. But that's also me projecting my own feeling and logic. So I'd be interested to see if Bell basically takes the same position and is able to back it up biblically.
I think I have a few problems with the way Clark has dealt with those passages, but I’m much closer to his position than I am to Team Hell’s. I agree with Clark’s comments about use and abuse of the concept of hell to create fear, and to use that fear to control people. In my experience a lot them use fear to compel conformity to the law, which is something Matthew 23 speaks to: 25 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean. 27 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. 28 In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness. Christianity happens from the inside out. It’s not about conformity, and in particular it’s not about conforming to a certain standard to avoid hell. See also 1 Corinthians 13 1-3: 1 If I speak in the tongues[a] of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing. And then see 1 Corinthians 13 4-13: 4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. 13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
I've read Velvet Elvis, and Sex God by Rob Bell. They were both fantastic books. Bell is so knowledgeable and brings so much of that study to his writing yet he makes it easy to understand. His writing style is very simple, not even particularly that impressive, but his knowledge and insight more than make up for it. Velvet Elvis is one of my favorite books of all time, and it helped me grow as a Christian more than anything in decades. I recommend it for anyone who is Christian or not. I've always believed that hell isn't the literal brimstone and fire version where non-Christians go for eternity. I don't believe the bible supports the existence of it either.
Velvet Elvis is my favorite book ever. Seriously, it was like reading my own thoughts on God back to me. It's the book I'd write if I were talented enough to write it. I'm SHOCKED to see a thread about this here, honestly. It's been the subject of discussion between me and some Jesus Freak friends over the weekend, though. My take: read the damn book first before you comment on it to the press and attempt to paint its author as irrelevant or heretical. holy crap. I haven't read the book yet, so I don't have an opinion. These guys already had negative views of Bell, so they've taken it upon themselves to critique a book they never read. In Velvet Elvis, he was painted as a heretic for allegedly denying the Virgin Birth....but you had to either 1. have not read the book, or 2. been too dense to understand. He used it as a hypo..."what if you found out tomorrow that the Virgini Birth weren't real...would that shake your faith entirely? if so that's a pretty weak faith!" Two pages later he says, "I affirm the traditional, orthodox views of the Church on the Virgin Birth." Of course, his critics come after him saying he denied a central tenent of the faith, entirely. Ridiculous.
I've mentioned before that I get paid to play music at a very conservative church. Last week, the pastor brought up Rob Bell and his new book briefly was naturally pretty negative (though it was a sermon about how people are inherently bad). I made it about to write down Bell's name (hadn't heard of him before) because I figured that if the pastor didn't like him that he'd be someone I'd probably agree with.
I think for the most part Christianity is falling apart in America on both sides of all these issues.
I thought this said: Rob Bell vs. Taco Hell. So I immediately thought of Taco Bell. Then I was like wait....why are the taco's going to hell? But then I read the article and was disappointed.
Using the word 'hell' throws this discussion out of context There are three significant issues that must be discussed before anything could be sorted out 1. The value of God and the value of man must be understood in relation to each other. 2. The character of God and the character of man must be clearly understood 3. The concept of mercy must be rightly defined Without clarifying God's holiness, character and mercy Jesus death and resurrection will be misunderstood which is the basis of the division over biblical reference to eternal justice I think a lawyer could explain this better but essentially if you go to court you are seeking a just decision In a perfect courtroom with perfect justice an innocent party that is accused would need justice not mercy- in other words when you are innocent justice will exonerate you. In a perfect courtroom with perfect justice a guilty party would be far better off with mercy- in other words the guilty party suffers unless mercy is given. This simple principle is what sets the table for Jesus death on the cross Anyways I don't know why people are going at Rob Bell and I haven't read this book so I am commenting more on how these conflicts might develop
got the book on Kindle today, and will start reading it this weekend. I'm really looking forward to it.
durvasa, God's character is love, but it is not the love you and I have, the love we have is selfish in motivation. Jesus used a word 'agape' for love-basically love that is not selfishly motivated, at least that is in the bible scripts and through out the NT it is defined in terms of disinterested, unselfish, and just; benevolence. disinterested means without partiality by social status, ethnicity, intelligence, wealth, works, association- in other words perfectly impartial= equal for all unselfish means that the choice of love is not motivated by personal gain but by the value of the choice just means that there is not any cheating or dishonesty- absolutely no injustice benevolence- means it is always what is best for all- not just one or a few Now with a basis of love as God's character we can begin to understand more about God, he is just, he is compassionate, he is holy, he is kind, he is merciful, he is righteous, he is wise, he is patient, he is generous and on and on. The problem of evil in people is a great challenge to a just and holy God. God loves all people. But God does not just look at choices but he looks from the perspective of love- in other words he goes to the heart. This is why Jesus said 'in the Old Testament God said do not commit adultery against your wife but I say if you lust after other women and you are married in your heart you are an adulterer.' God sees and understands that evil and wickedness originate in the heart, in the motivations of people. Greedy people, selfish people, hateful people, etc all have issues in the heart and God sees that. It is the heart of man that God wants to change. This is his mission. Evil and wickedness are responsible for all the suffering in this world. With perfect justice there is a retribution or a punishment for evil and wickedness. In Revelations chapter 6 there is a place where people who suffered greatly at the hands of evil men cry out to God and ask "how long God until you avenge our blood at the hands of the wicked people on earth?" I don't want to post 100 scriptures on this, but let me say this about God and his character. He will comfort those who are humble, unselfish and righteous and have suffered so much in a world full of evil and suffering. He will judge the selfish, the liars, the wicked. He will not make a mistake and there will absolutely not be one case of injustice with God. Thanks for discussing
I’m not following what you’re trying to say in the first part, but in answer to the bolded comment, they’re attacking him for the same reason Catholic Church leaders attacked Martin Luther. Bell is holding up the Bible and exposing their false teachings, which are the source of their power. They teach hell and they lead people to hell. They teach, and use as manipulative tools, judgementalism, legalism, fear, shame, but in Love Wins Bell uses the Bible to show that God is love. It’s very interesting to see how people like DeYoung treat the Bible like a hot potato in their responses to Love Wins, because it’s essentially the Bible that’s exposing them, not Bell. I have a few issues with some things in Bell’s book, but overall I think this is an extremely important book and a must read for every Christian, and anyone interested in Christianity.
Ok, since this is a very important topic I’ll be frank. Your post is obtuse and largely off topic, and it looks like an attempt to lead people off track. I strongly suggest that you read the book, because it addresses beliefs and teachings like this: This is essentially the antithesis of what Christ taught, and of the new covenant that he established. Christ died on the cross so that our sins could be forgiven. There’s no retribution in that equation, just mercy and forgiveness. At the very least you are saying that Christ’s justice is imperfect, and what does that amount to? This is the kind of thing Bell is talking about in this book.
I've only read 14 pages so far. I think this is on track to be Bell's best book. I don't give that title out easily since Velvet Elvis was so important to me. It's fascinating. It makes me really want to talk about it with everyone, who has even a remote interest in the subject, but I don't know anyone that's read it yet. Things are put into such concise perspective, and light is shed on a lot of questions come up with people all the time on this board, that I've encountered in life, but especially questions that arise in my own mind. I can't recommend this book enough, no matter what your opinion on Christianity is. It is great, refreshing, makes sense, and sometimes makes me sad about the state of Christianity today.
I can't agree with you. I don't think you understand clearly what I posted, but in summation- right with Jesus- good not right with Jesus- bad I hear a lot of Christians talk about helping people, giving to the poor, caring, showing compassion etc but I don't find too many that sell all they have and give to the poor and live like Jesus- that is what Jesus asked I listen to people who sell all they have, the rest I love Joh 5:26-29 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; (27) And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. (28) Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, (29) And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
You’re being very vague, and I’m sure that’s deliberate. In your defence I think you’re in a tough spot. I understand that you’re a good guy who does good things for many people, but I suspect that as a minister you were taught a doctrine that isn’t consistent with the Bible, and because of your denomination and probably your church body you feel compelled to keep teaching it. That’s my guess, and that’s a tough situation to be in. With respect to this thread I wouldn’t blame you if you stayed out of it, but if you’re going to post in it then please be clear about what you’re saying. I’m not sure where you’re going with that parable, but you’re a little off on your interpretation. Jesus wasn’t telling everyone to sell all their things and give the proceeds to the poor. He was telling that specific man to, because he knew that material wealth was an issue for him, and indeed the man turned around and sadly walked away. Incidentally Bell deals with this parable in this book. Also, let’s use translations that people understand. Using a translation that is neither original nor current has no value, and it only serves to obscure the meaning of a passage. John 5 24 “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life. 25 Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man. 28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned. 30 By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me. There are all kinds of very interesting questions here. What does it mean to be condemned, for example? Does it mean you’re going to hell? What does the Bible really say about heaven and hell? Since Jesus has the power to judge, what did he say about judgment? Luke 23 34 Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” What does it mean to "believe God"? Bell’s book is far more thorough and nuanced than this, but these are the kinds of questions it addresses.
When this thread came up, I ordered "Velvet Elvis" and read that. "Love Wins" came out during that time so I bought it too and just finished it a couple of days ago. I enjoyed both a lot. The teaching on hell that I grew up with didn't sit right with me once I got older and thought about it more. Bell has been accused of being a universalist. He denies it. His basic position is that because God is loving, he gives us what we want. If we want to be separated from God, we are. And that's what hell is and that's how you get there.
