How My Grandpop Helps Us Understand Rob Bell’s Position
Rob Bell
Is Rob Bell an universalist? I would have to wholeheartedly say, “No, he’s not an universalist.” But let me breakdown what I hear Rob Bell saying:
(a) God loves everyone
(b) Since God loves everyone, he will not encroach on human free will
(c) Since God loves everyone and will not encroach on human free will, if a human resists God in this life (i.e., chooses “hell” in this life), he or she will receive hell in the next. If a human accepts God and embodies compassion and godly attributes in this life (i.e., chooses “heaven” in this life), he or she will receive heaven in the next:
Love demands freedom. It always has, and it always will. We are free to resist, reject, and rebel against God’s ways for us. We can have all the hell we want (p. 59)
(d) After death, God gives people chances to be redeemed (cf. p. 55).
(e) [*spoiler alert*] In the end, “love wins” because God loves us so much to give us what we want (shown by our actions)–if hell, then hell; if heaven, then heaven:
If we want hell, if we want heaven, they are ours. That’s how love works. It can’t be forced, manipulated, or coerced. It always leaves room for the other to decide. God says yes, we can have what we want, because love wins (p. 61).
(f) Therefore, God does not save everyone but only those who desire God.
From the above, we can see Rob Bell is not an universalist. He clearly lays out that some people will go to hell because they chose hell, and some will go to heaven because they chose heaven.
Who won’t be happy with this?
- The Neo-Reformed Folks — The neo-Reformed aren’t a very happy bunch to begin with. So, obviously, they aren’t going to be happy here. The “in” crowd is not clear enough. It’s not distinct enough. It’s not Calvinist enough. Rob Bell says God’s grace can be resisted? How dare he!
- Those Who Deny Free Will — obviously, a huge part of the argument hinges on human choice. Thus, if you don’t believe human choice exists, you won’t be happy with this argument.
- The How-Good-Is-Good-Enough People — there are those who would say, “Well, how do we know if we are good enough to “want” God? How do we know we desire God enough for God to give us heaven? Once again, it’s not clear enough. We want clarity!
On one end, I understand these arguments. #1 and #3 want clarity. We need to know who’s “in” and “out.” We say to ourselves, “We can’t have Gandhi in heaven because, if he is, our theology breaks down. And I’m no Gandhi. How can I ever be as good as him?” I understand this argument. We desire clarity. But the fact of the matter is, the desire for clarity is over-emphasized in evangelicalism.
Left to right: My brother Jon, Grandpop, Me
My Grandpop used to say,
The more I know, the more I realize I don’t know.
Now, he’s not the first to say this, but he taught me this. The more I uncover in Scripture, the more I realize there is mystery. The more holes I fill, the more I realize there are open holes–large gaping ones, staring at me. The more “clear” things become for me, the more I realize things aren’t so clear.
Why do we desire clarity? Is it really important? Where does the Bible say things have to be or are “clear”?
Think about the messages we send to our people. We make everything relevant so people can understand. We make our teaching relevant. We make our Bible translations relevant. Why? So, people can have “clarity.” Is clarity a biblical ideal?
I’m not sure.
Do I think clarity is wrong? No. Do I think we shouldn’t help people understand? Yes, please do help them. But this constant desire for clarity is an obstacle to the faith. We simply just don’t know (not some things) a lot of things.
So, is it clear who will be in heaven and who will not? No, it’s not 100%, crystal clear, and Bell’s right to point it out. I’ve heard people tell me Mother Teresa is not in heaven. Really? I’ve heard people conclude Billy Graham won’t be there. Really? Is it really clear? Hence why Rob Bell opens his book with that story about the clarity (or lack thereof) of Gandhi’s eternal destiny.
Am I saying we don’t have any idea? No, I think there are indicators in Scripture, but I am more concerned as to why we want everything to be so clear. It’s just not as easy as we’d like it to be. It’s not as simple as “Suzy’s in, and Timmy’s out.” It’s not that simple (mainly because God knows our hearts, but that’s another topic for another day)
The eternal destiny of all humans in not clear-cut for Rob Bell. But, perhaps Christianity shouldn’t always be so clear. Why not leave room for mystery? Mystery makes people fell uncomfortable. But ignorance is bliss. So, I would encourage you to seek understanding, but, as my Grandpop used to say, “The more I know, the more I realize I don’t know.”
So, why do we desire clarity?
I like this post. Would you say his position is similar to C.S.Lewis’s in the Last Battle or the Great Divorce?
@Ben, I would say his view is very close, if not the same as, Lewis’ view. The problem is that I vaguely remember The Great Divorce, but Bell does reference in his “Further Reading” section. Thanks for the encouragement!
Evan, does Rob Bell discuss everything in this book in terms of the salvation of the individual, or does the church play something of a role in his argument? It seems to me that Paul (who we usually look to for a theology of salvation) is less concerned with a theology of individual salvation and more concerned with helping the new Jesus-following communities work out their identity as a multi-ethnic family of God.
I think there are problems with trying to figure out who is bound for “heaven” (i.e., New Heavens and New Earth) and who is bound for hell. What *can* be ascertained is whether or not someone identifies herself as part of the Jesus-following. To use the age-old analogy of marriage - when a person takes vows, s/he enters a marriage relationship and is identified as a partner in that relationship. This does not ensure, however, that s/he will be faithful in that marriage or that s/he will not end up doffing that identity-marker of marriage and leave the relationship. It’s something that must be worked out along the way - but it is not worked out alone.
I wonder if questions like the ones Rob Bell tries to address might disappear if we stopped desiring clarity in terms of “who’s in” or “who’s out” and thought of it more in terms of, “Well, we’ve cast in our lot with Jesus so we’ll work hard to live in this relationship.” At the same time, I think we ought not think we can determine anyone’s salvation (inside the Jesus-following community or out), acknowledging that all we can see are their identity-markers and there may be some who know God even if they have a different identity marker.
P.S. I think it’s very strange when people say that Mother Teresa is in hell, since she was a devoted (Catholic) Christian, which means she identifies herself as a Jesus-worshipper (part of a specific Jesus-following community) and appeared to take that relationship seriously.
I love reading your thoughts.
@Rebekah, Greetings from the States! Bell doesn’t hit the discussion of church v. individual salvation all that much. I think if he was hard-pressed he would lean away from individual salvation, yet I’m not sure he would develop an argument that the church plays a major role…if that makes sense.
[...] light–the subject of eternity needs less rash judgments and more loving approaches, and that our desire for clarity on this subject (and others) is idolatrous; the book is still incredibly exclusive in its [...]
Amen, amen, amen.
Just discovered your blog, Evan. Really like it. Your grandfather and I must be kindred souls. I’ve always said, “The older I get, the less I’m sure of–and I’m okay with that.”
Maybe that’s why Jesus spent so little time working on what people believed and so much time loving people. If I had been Jesus (I hate sentences that start like that!), and I knew I only had three years of ministry, I would have said and done things the same way every time so my twelve knuckleheads would be “clear” on it later. But he didn’t. He embraced the mystery and ambiguity. Sometimes we Americans forget that our faith is essentially an Eastern one, not a Western one.
@Tom, thanks for the encouragement! I have tried to argue that mystery and ambiguity are OK, and God is actually OK with it, too.
Hello Evan: I had a very good friend years back who said to me “my Grandmother said quote….Its good if you like it”. Well who can argue with that? I think thats where gramps fits in, its just an axiom that suits a mindset thats all.
Im the epitome of Neo-reformed pain in the neck-needing clairty, demanding scriptural i’s dotted and t’s crossed stereotype. I consider salvation so important and so necessary that on my scale of thinking mystery is left to the pagan fools who pretend that mystery is somehow spiritual and exact knowledge is the game of idiot youth. This kind of pseudo-spiritual thinking permeates our american culture, namely because its non-confrontational live-and-let-live philosophy. I dont find any help for anyone with that kind of thinking.
Im the epitome of demanding exactness in scriptural speaking, Im the ridiculous modern pharasee that will never be satisfied with lying drivel packed in american christian culltural terms all neatly arrainged in post-modern methods of delivery. Dont get me wrong, Bell is just the latest preacher to paint a bull-eye on his chest because the Brian Maclarenite mindset of ‘we need to reinvistigate everything’ which blankets skepticism and atheism.
Its probably true I am looked upon as critical, mean spirited, harsh, judgmental, cruel, vicious and an impediment to getting folks in the doors to hear about the Jesus who has a love that wins….and in the end win all people into heaven.
You know what stumbles other folks of mindsets such as mine? Its that Sister Teresa is assumed in heaven irregardless of a denial of the the doctrine of justification by faith.
Its a huge stumbling block to christians like me (If you consider me a Christian) that cannot reconcile the pagan hindus Ghandi and the words of the Aposltes and Christ.
I cant fit the two together so I cant fit Ghandi in heaven, now way no how, no chance….unless of course I adopt the mystery and skeptical approach of Christianity.
Im not of that mindset, I cannot and will not approach an eternal hell with ‘well I might miss it’ thinking. I know to much, I believe to much, that makes me careful to be more exacting and specific in regards to eternal destination. Anything less to me is unbiblical foolishness.
When the apostle John said “That you may know you have eternal life”….I take that as a mystery remover, not a mystery installer.
So, I dont expect you to respond, Im only saying Im so different and so polar opposite my first reaction is to denounce Bell and tell folks such as you and those who find some kind of ‘truth’ in Bell that he will end up deceiving you and turning your from the faith that you claim to have.
By the way, I do find your posts thought provoking and interesting even though I find them incredibly naive. Thanks for being so kind to post other responses that are diametrically opposed to your POV.
Clarification….Neo reformed like me…well the ones I know are really happy folks, they love Jesus and have joy in their lives….but they are serious, maybe intensly serious and that comes off as ‘unhappy’ to other folks. But maybe that unhappiness is really what some folks feel within themselves, they feel the neo-reformed are unhappy with them because of differing POV.
Clarification again, Im not unhappy with folks who defend Bell, Im just serious about stomping on error with no apologies from me.