Sunday, July 31, 2011
Heaven, Hell, Chan & Bell (Part One)
Tweet
I am a little late to the "Rob Bell, Love Wins" controversy. I was more than a little overwhelmed by the initial hype and online bantering, and so I didn't read the book right away. However, I borrowed Love Wins from my brother-in-law last week and read it. At the same time, another friend was reading Francis' Chan's "Erasing Hell." We engaged in some friendly dialog about the books and the topics covered therein. I've since finished both books, and have some specific thoughts to share.
I am a little late to the "Rob Bell, Love Wins" controversy. I was more than a little overwhelmed by the initial hype and online bantering, and so I didn't read the book right away. However, I borrowed Love Wins from my brother-in-law last week and read it. At the same time, another friend was reading Francis' Chan's "Erasing Hell." We engaged in some friendly dialog about the books and the topics covered therein. I've since finished both books, and have some specific thoughts to share.
First, some thoughts about Bell and Love Wins:
The book is written in Bell's now notorious style: conversational, short sentences, lots of spaces, more like a blog post than a book. It is not an academic book; there are no footnotes, very few references to theological big names past or present, and Bell rarely even offers the exact Biblical reference. Rather, he'll say something like, "In John 3 Jesus tells a man..." When I first started reading the book, I was a little disappointed, and thought that it wasn't Bell's best work.
The book is written in Bell's now notorious style: conversational, short sentences, lots of spaces, more like a blog post than a book. It is not an academic book; there are no footnotes, very few references to theological big names past or present, and Bell rarely even offers the exact Biblical reference. Rather, he'll say something like, "In John 3 Jesus tells a man..." When I first started reading the book, I was a little disappointed, and thought that it wasn't Bell's best work. He begins by asking some of the questions that surround heaven and hell, questions that most people are afraid to ask. Like pulling on a loose thread in a hand-knit sweater, Bell keeps tugging, searching, questioning, showing that our tightly-knit theological doctrines have more than a few holes. For example:
"So demons believe,
and washing Jesus's feet with your tears gets your sins forgiven?
We could go on,
verse after verse,
passage after passage,
question after question,
about heaven and hell and the afterlife
and salvation and believing and judgment
and who God is and what God is like
and how Jesus fits into any of it.
But this isn't just a book of questions.
It's a book of responses to these questions." (pgs. 18-19).
The most common and basic accusation against Bell is that he is not "Scriptural." However, you can see even from this short selection, that he is looking at Scripture. But he correctly points out that the Bible presents a myriad of stories and descriptions about heaven, hell, salvation and sin. Bell's book is full of Scripture, and initially he tries to show that the Bible is far from clear on these issues, and if we are really honest, we have a lot of difficult questions to answer.
So Bell moves forward, trying to paint a better picture of heaven and hell. This is a bold task, and one that Bell attempts all the while employing his casual, conversational tone. So, in some places the book feels thin and lacking support. But, in short, Bell is trying to help Christians think differently about heaven and hell. He isn't necessarily refuting or rejecting the evangelical doctrines, but rather trying to broaden our vision of the future so that our lives can really be changed in the present. He states,
"It's very common to hear talk about heaven framed in terms of who 'gets in' or how to 'get in.' What we find Jesus teaching, over and over and over again, is that he's interested in our hearts being transformed, so that we can actually handle heaven." (pg. 50)
And again,
"Eternal life is less about a kind of time that starts when we die, and more about a quality and vitality of life lived now in connection with God." (pg. 59)
In my opinion, these are far from controversial statements. These are necessary and helpful corrections to doctrines that can quickly get out of control. However, some of the strongest responses haven't come against what Bell says about heaven, but rather what he says about hell. Again, Bell tries to take on the giant task of reframing an entire theology, in one short chapter. He cites all the verses in the Bible that use the word "Hades" or "Hell" explicitly, and he explains how these words have complex meanings. Most importantly, he reminds us that our concept of "hell" cannot be read backwards onto Scripture.
One of Bell's major points is that Hell is a current reality. Again, he is trying to broaden our vision of the issues, and in my opinion, this is necessary for modern American Christians. Death, famine, war, and abuse are every day realities for people around the world, but these are far away concepts for Americans. What Americans are familiar with are things like depression, suicide, sexual abuse, addiction, divorce and death. But rarely do we allow the full weight and severity of these realities enter our church doors. Church is a happy place, a place where we ignore the hells in the world around us and the world inside of us.
But Bell doesn't stop there. He uses Scriptural stories, from Jesus, to more fully explain the concept of hell and punishment. But he does this in a way that is not simplistic or childish. For example, using the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus, he states (about the Rich Man):
"He's alive in death, but in profound torment, because he's living with the realities of not properly dying the kind of death that actually leads a person into the only kind of life that's worth living...How do you communicate a truth that complex and multilayered? You (meaning, Jesus) tell a nuanced shocking story about a rich man and a poor man...Brilliant, just brilliant." (pg. 77)
To accuse Bell of not being Scriptural is not accurate. Rather, he is reading and using Scripture in a very different way. Not just a different interpretation of verses, but his understanding of what Jesus was doing when he was teaching is very different. Most of Bell's opponents read Scripture looking to piece together a tight theology, a scientific encyclopedia that has all the answers. Bell reads the words of Jesus, and he sees a "brilliant" teacher, who is telling transformative stories that are true on a level that goes beyond scientific fact. Bell clearly has the utmost respect for Scripture and the teachings of Jesus, and I found myself learning a great deal from his exegeses, as well as being challenged to transform how I live.
I started by saying that I didn't think Love Wins in Bell's best work. However, as I got past the midway point, I found myself strongly resonating with what Bell was writing. I found myself agreeing on almost all of his points, but more than just agreeing, my soul was responding with a deep yes. After the two chapters on heaven and hell, Bell's writing really hits a stride, and each page is filled with beautiful explanations of the words of Jesus. His chapter "There Are Rocks Everywhere" is a simple, provocative and compelling argument for Christian Inclusivism, and when he concludes with the chapter "The Good News Is Better Than That," Bell brings all of the issues home to a personal level, dealing with self-mutilation, abuse, jealousy, misconceptions about God, and finally summing up the love of God the words of Scripture, "You are always with me, and everything I have is yours."
For me, this is a Christianity I can really believe in, that I can share with my atheist friends, that can change the world." For me, I find myself thinking, "Finally, someone is putting together all the ideas and inclinations about God and faith that I've been feeling for so many years." Bell states on pg. 135,
"How many people, if you were to ask them why they've left church, would give an answer something along the lines of, 'It's just so....small?"
Me. I would. I've felt that way for years.
Bell continues,
"Of course. A gospel that leaves out its cosmic scope will always feel small. A gospel that has as its chief message avoiding hell or not sinning will never be the full story."
YES.
In short, I think that Bell gets the Christian story - on a grand scale - very right, and I wish that more Christians would read his work, not just from a perspective interest for the sake of conversation at dinner parties, but for the sake of changing the way they are living now. As Bell says at the end of his book,
"Whatever you've been told about the end -
the end of your life,
the end of time,
the end of the world -
Jesus passionately urges us to live like the end is here,
now,
today." (pg. 197)
____________
In part two, I'll talk about Francis Chan's book, "Erasing Hell"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Thanks Jesse. I like you have been slow to dive into this book. I'm not sure why...just hasn't felt like the right time for me. I've wanted to since I first heard about it but something kind of checked me. Lots of folks I know are up in arms about it of course...From what you've shared it sounds like Bell affects you the same way he does me...whether via the written page or his Nooma platform or live tours he awakens something in me or causes this really "too good to be true" resonating in my heart! It's so refreshing that it's scary. Hahaha, there's a statement that shows how much religiosity I've still got to shed! I think I'll grab a copy of it soon:)
I read Rob Bell’s “Love Wins” with a very open mind. I have for a while believed that Hell is not an absolute or foregone conclusion as God’s best option for punishing people who don’t choose salvation. I would hope God would have a better plan than that too.
I like the idea of beliefs expanding to be inclusive allowing God and the Gospel to become larger.
And yet as I open God to something larger—I find myself asking, “Who is God now?” My previous beliefs (from the Garden of Eden to Heaven and Hell) defined God for me and somehow provided a way to relationship.
For the first time, I am attempting to have a relationship with God without knowing what I believe about God.
Author Richard Rohr teaches that each of us will come to a point in our lives where we are completely at a loss—a time where all of our experience, knowledge, talents, resources and gifts are not enough [A fall] that is necessary for growth and maturity. This is the time that my ego is displaced (and it must be).
This fall is completely disorienting. My natural response is to replace, reconstruct and refill the place of loss, but that is my ego taking over again.
Maybe a better choice for me is to take that more humble road that mystics traveled--contemplation, Scripture, silence and prayer.
It is a good way to begin again and of course I don’t have to wait for Heaven for a good ending.
Scot: I agree, "so refreshing that it's scary" - Even though it's not ground-breaking, "Love Wins" is certainly a good read, and it is refreshing.
Nancy: As always, thank you for your thoughtful and transparent comments. I think that Bell is helpful in taking some of the first steps toward a fresh understanding of God. Or perhaps better said, he points in that direction. He makes few direct statements and certainly doesn't provide a systematic theology. But as you said, we don't have to wait until heaven to have a good ending :) I think the type of Christianity Bell points to is one that I want to continue to explore.
Jesse, "It's better late than never", of course that's something you hear quite often from us procrastinators, but I feel it's an appropriate response to your commentary on this controversial collection of "blog posts", in Love Wins.
I begin by saying that I'm a huge fan of Rob Bell and have been listening, reading, and watching his material for about eight years. When I say material I mean exactly that, Teachings (what he calls his sermons), Conferences, Tours, Noomas, Books, I even have a left-handed autograph of his, obviously I am completely biased in my opinions.
I don’t believe Love Wins was intended to be an academic treatise on theological matters, but, just as he said, "to be a response" to post-modern questions on two easily misinterpreted ideas---Heaven and Hell. I would invite those who would like to get a more academic approach to his theology to read "Velvet Elvis" or "Sex God", two of his books which are footnoted and would open your mind to how deep and mysterious he believes this art of living (being) really is.
In comparing the styles of seeing Scripture--from Bell's reading and usage in a "different way" to his opponents need for a "scientific encyclopedia that has all the answers"--I think you hit the nail squarely on the head. How we see, study, read, and live scripture, is perhaps an overarching theme in this book, but most importantly, a major theme to his ministry.
This book has reiterated that Hell is something definitely literal. It's something we can imagine. Fires, darkness, being alone, are all places we could find ourselves in and apart of. Ask anyone who has had to experience a loved one go through a horrible deteriorating disease, or listen to accounts from prisoners of war, or rape victims. Look at the faces of the African children in the midst of a famine that is currently destroying countless lives. Hell is all around us and it becomes more noticeable by our lack of response. Again, it is real.
Heaven, on the other hand, is only an idea. "No eye has seen, no ear has heard", as the apostle Paul has said. Even our imagination falls drastically short when it comes to the subject of Heaven. To think that ALL THINGS will be reconciled, or put to back to right (N T Wright reference), isn’t a concept we can fully grasp in our finite minds. I just finished reading Anne Dillard’s "Pilgrim at Tinker Creek", in which she describes chapter after chapter of the intricate nature of the lives of the living things all around us. To read how much violence and cruelty is present at any given second in our own back yards, I feel, is need for some contemplative thought. Are we active terrorists just by mowing the lawn? Is it true when we read in Scripture "ALL THINGS", it is a reference to ALL death, to ALL pain, to ALL suffering, of ALL created things? Thoughts like this bring new meaning to the "grand scale" you referred to in the closing of your post.
As I said before, I am a fan of Rob's work, but sadly I wouldn’t consider myself a follower. These ideas are so new and so foreign to how I was raised and taught to believe, just like Scott, they seem scary. I'm glad we can discuss tough topics and learn from each other in the cohort, hopefully with the intent of practicing the ones that convict us and discussing the ideas that so damningly divide the Christian religion.
Post a Comment