Rob Bell? Rob Who?

It is now well over a year since Rob Bell overplayed his wolf like hand with his book "Love Wins". Bell's universalism did not surprise those of us who knew it years ago when he wrote Velvet Elvis. But it seems that the majority of evangelical commentators were reluctant to cry wolf until Rob fully disrobed from his sheep suit.

Bell had been getting away with teaching outrageously unbiblical things for years and this may have bred overconfidence to the point where he was willing to "out" himself. The controversy that erupted over Love Wins certainly granted Rob Bell his fifteen minutes of fame. But it also paved the way for us to be blessed with his absence over the last year. It did not take long before Bell resigned as "pastor" of his "church" and left the pulpit for the far loftier heights of producing a television series about himself (I guess that is one way of channeling your immense humility). We all thought he had disappeared until this video recently surfaced displaying the winning kind of love that Rob has for those who voiced legitimate biblical concerns about his teaching:



Could you feel the love? Rob Bell seems to forget that child like faith includes trusting what God has clearly taught in His word and rejecting anything that contradicts it. That is - having right doctrine! This video does serve as a timely reminder of what we have been missing since Bell went underground. I just feel like the recipient of a bad trade when Rob Bell resurfaces so soon after Phil Johnson's departure from cyberspace. Fortunately Phil lives on in reruns and here's a great one of him reviewing Bell's book "Love Wins". Let's just say he takes no prisoners:

Oh The Pain Rob Bell Feels

We can add this one to Foxe's Book Of Emergents With Hurt Feelings. Also, can you feel the love Rob Bell has for the people who point out his blatant heresies:



Here is a fairly accurate interpretation of what Rob Bell was really saying:



Dear Rob, if you want to call yourself a Christian minister, and then produce material that teaches heresy, and then sell it publicly at a good profit, and ridicule central Christian doctrines like the atonement, and slander the many faithful open air preachers out there, then you are fair game. The only surprise is that it took so long for you to exposed for what you are - an enemy of the cross of Jesus Christ.

Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern. For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame; who set their mind on earthly things. (Philippians 3:17-20)

Beloved, I would rather have a thousand devils out of the church, than have one in it. I do not care about all the adversaries outside; our greatest cause of fear is from the crafty "wolves in sheep's clothing," that devour the flock. It is against such that we would denounce in holy wrath the solemn sentence of divine indignation, and for such we would shed our bitterest tears of sorrow. They are "the enemies of the cross of Christ" - C.H. Spurgeon

I hope that Rob Bell repents and puts his trust in the One True Christ of Scripture (not the one of his imagination) and then disappears from the public spotlight.

John Macarthur Gives Rob Bell What He Needs Most - A Biblical Thrashing

Rob Bell in his usual cry-baby style is trying to paint himself as some kind of martyr. A victim worthy of a major chapter in "Foxe's Book Of Emergents With Hurt Feelings". Attacking core tenets of the historic orthodox Christian faith really isn't that big a deal as far as Bell is concerned and he professes great surprise at the firestorm he has generated. “I never set out to be controversial,” Bell told CNN. “I don’t think it’s a goal that God honors. I don’t think it’s a noble goal". Hey Rob, "Controversy" and "heresy" may both end in the letter "y" but that doesn't mean they have the same meaning.

Bell went on to say in his usual postmodern fog, “What’s interesting to me is what’s true. And what’s interesting to me is what’s inspiring. And what’s interesting to me is where’s the life? Where’s the inspiration? That’s what I’m interested in. If that happens to stir things up, that was never my intent, but I’ll accept that.”

I can't help but think that when this thing runs it's full course Bell will experience far more serious repercussions than "stirring things up". He might as well enjoy his fifteen minutes of fame because he is destined to become just another name in the long line of Church history's hall of heretics.



Whichever way you slice it, its safe to say that John Macarthur is not a postmodernist! And he is speaking with crystal clear clarity on an issue that demands it. Over at the blog on the Grace To You website Macarthur wrote several posts concerning Rob Bell and I thought it worthwhile to quote from one of them:

Just how serious is Rob Bell’s heresy? It is not merely that he rejects what Jesus taught about hell; Bell rejects the God of Scripture. He deplores the idea of divine vengeance against sin (Romans 12:9). He cannot stand the plain meaning of texts like Hebrews 12:29: “Our God is a consuming fire.” He has no place in his thinking for the biblical description of Christ’s fiery return with armies of angels: “dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus” (2 Thessalonians 1:7-8). Bell's whole message is a flat contradiction of Jesus' words in Luke 12:5: "But I will warn you whom to fear: fear the One who, after He has killed, has authority to cast into hell; yes, I tell you, fear Him!"

Bell will have none of that. He therefore tries to eliminate the authority and clarity of Scripture so that he can reinvent a god who is more to his liking. It is the sin of all sins; the sin of the serpent. Like Eve’s tempter, Bell is subtly but undeniably fomenting rebellion against the true God. He suggests that he is better—nicer, more kindly, more tolerant, more lenient—than the God who has revealed Himself in Scripture. He therefore sets aside God’s revealed Word and makes his own musings the inviolable standard.

In effect he wants to assume the role of God for himself. That is not a minor evil; it is epic. It is the original sin of Lucifer.

Rob Bell has been sowing doubt, confusion, and error in the church for years. His theological trajectory has been clear for at least a decade. The stance he takes in Love Wins is the predictable fruit of many other compromises and concessions to worldly opinion that were already well established in Bell’s teaching.

In fact, the most surprising thing about Love Wins is not the position Rob Bell takes, but the fact that so many people seem genuinely caught off guard and unaccountably confused by it. The record of Bell’s own words makes it clear that this latest book of his is little more than a distillation of things he has been saying all along. He abandoned Jesus’ teaching years ago in favor of a different religion—one more in keeping with his personal preferences. He is pointing people toward the broad way that leads to destruction.

The sad reality is that if Rob Bell does not confess the truth in this life, one day he will realize how wrong his understanding of hell really is. His view of hell will be painfully altered forever when he receives the more severe punishment reserved for those who with a Bible in their hands mock God and trample the blood of Christ underfoot (Hebrews 10:29; cf. 2 Peter 2:21).

My earnest prayer is for Rob Bell’s repentance. But I am even more deeply and urgently concerned for the many untaught and undiscerning people who are being led astray by his toxic teaching (Jude 22-23). It is time for faithful shepherds to speak up and warn the flock of the deadly peril posed by false teaching such as this.

It is also time for the people of God to proclaim the gospel more clearly and more carefully than ever, including the difficult parts of the message. For too long evangelicals have been prone to omit the full truth about sin, righteousness, and judgment—falling back instead on dumbed-down, dampened, defanged versions of the message. In all candor, that is one of the main reasons there is so much confusion over Rob Bell’s book among evangelicals today. We have a sacred duty to preach what Jesus preached in the manner He preached it—without toning it down or adjusting it to make it more suitable to secular culture.

Rob Bell - Out Of The Closet

Rob Bell's new book, Love Wins, has caused a firestorm of controversy among the wider evangelical community. Though it has already provoked a lot of discussion within this forum alone, I am not willing to put it out of its misery just yet. There are far wider ramifications than the obvious heresy of "Pastor Bell". This is fast becoming a watershed moment of a false teacher who finally managed to cross the evangelical line in the sand. False teachers have generally tended to thrive over the last few decades in a prevailing climate of "civility", tolerance, and the good old benefit of the doubt. But notice has now been served that an evangelical community that has tolerated too much for too long still has a threshold - a threshold that took Rob Bell by surprise. Bell's surprise at the outrage over his book may well have more to do with overplaying his hand than a genuine belief in his own orthodoxy.

But has Bell actually done us all a great service by turning our discernment radars on and being increasingly overt in his attacks on the historic Christian faith? I do hope this will become the shockwave that causes much needed climate change in the evangelical world - because that line in the sand took six years too long to cross.

Even back in 2005 Bell was peddling his wares:

When people use the word hell, what do they mean? They mean a place, an event, a situation absent of how God desires things to be. Famine, debt, oppression, loneliness, despair, death, slaughter--they are all hell on earth. Jesus' desire for his followers is that they live in such a way that they bring heaven to earth . . . What's disturbing is when people talk more about hell after this life than they do about Hell here and now. As a Christian, I want to do what I can to resist hell coming to earth (Rob Bell - Velvet Elvis p148).

Rob Bell may say he isn't a universalist, but it's kind of like Bill Clinton giving a sworn testimony:

This reality, this forgiveness, this reconciliation, is true for everybody. Paul insisted that when Jesus died on the cross he was reconciling ‘all things, in heaven and on earth, to God. This reality then isn’t something we make true about ourselves by doing something. It is already true. Our choice is to live in this new reality or cling to a reality of our own making (p83).

We also learned early on that Bell's copy of the Bible is a "Robert Schuller severely abridged" version:

I can’t find one place in the teachings of Jesus, or the Bible for that matter, where we are to identify ourselves first and foremost as sinners (p130).

He also did away with that tired notion of differentiating between believers and unbelievers:

If the gospel isn’t good news for everybody, then it isn’t good news for anybody (p167).

Bell realized that many problems of the historic Christian faith could be solved by humanizing God and elevating man:

Who does Peter lose faith in? Not Jesus; he is doing fine. Peter loses faith in himself. Peter loses faith that he can do what his rabbi is doing. If the rabbi calls you to be his disciple, then he believes that you can actually be like him. As we read the stories of Jesus’ life with his talmidim, his disciples, what do we find frustrates him to no end? When his disciples lose faith in themselves…. God has an amazingly high view of people. God believes that people are capable of amazing things. I’ve been told I need to believe in Jesus. Which is a good thing. But what I’m learning is that Jesus believes in me. I have been told that I need to have faith in God. Which is a good thing. But what I am learning is that God has faith in me (p124-125).

And none of this is a problem if you think that Sola Scriptura was a foreign exchange student you met in the 80's:

It wasn’t until the 300s that what we know as the sixty-six books of the Bible were actually agreed upon as the ‘Bible’. This is part of the problem with continually insisting that one of the absolutes of the Christian faith must be a belief that “Scripture alone” is our guide. It sounds nice, but it is not true. In reaction to abuses by the church, a group of believers during a time called the Reformation claimed that we only need the authority of the Bible. But the problem is that we got the Bible from the church voting on what the Bible even is. So when I affirm the Bible as God’s Word, in the same breath I have to affirm that when those people voted, God was somehow present, guiding them to do what they did. When people say that all we need is the Bible, it is simply not true. In affirming the Bible as inspired, I also have to affirm the Spirit who I believe was inspiring those people to choose those books (p67-68).

Let's hope that this controversy causes the "evangelical line in the sand" to have a seismic shift towards the Apostle Paul:

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed (Galatians 1:8-9).

The Story Behind Martin Bashir's Rob Bell Interview

If you live under a rock and haven't already seen this then you need to go back to this earlier post which contains Martin Bashir's sensational interview of Rob Bell. Bashir is famous for exclusive media interviews with famous people including Lady Diana and Michael Jackson. It seems that Bell showed up for the interview expecting a secular interviewer who would not venture into the realm of biblical exegesis and church history. Bashir was like a dog on a bone when it came to Bell's distorted retelling of history and selective use of Scripture. It was a long time coming and it is a shame that this didn't happen a long time ago by a theological heavyweight. Bell was left looking like a little boy waiting outside the headmaster's office.

Of interest to many after the interview was whether Bashir is a Christian, and what was the story behind such a provocative interview. Paul Edwards of "The Paul Edwards Show" interviewed Bashir and found out whether or not he is a committed Christian and if the blog rumors are true that he attends Tim Keller’s Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City. For those of you who are curious about the story behind the interview, and what makes Martin Bashir tick, you will find this to be a fascinating interview.



In this first segment Martin Bashir points out Rob Bell's disgraceful handling of history, Scripture, and the beliefs of Martin Luther. I was already aware of Bell's Luther quote and how reprehensible it is. Gene Edward Veith, a Lutheran, had this to say on the subject on his Cranach blog:

The evangelical blogosphere is all abuzz over a new book entitled Love Wins by the influential evangelical pastor and author Rob Bell, in which he argues for universalism, the notion that God will save everyone, whether or not they have faith in Christ. I had assumed that this debate did not concern us Lutherans, since we have our theology thoroughly worked out and this is just not an issue in our circles. But now I learn that Bell enlisted Martin Luther in his cause, quoting a letter from 1522 in which he said that no one could doubt that God could save someone after death.

Now Luther, in his long and tumultuous and developing career, said all kinds of things, including things that were flat out wrong. They mean nothing for Lutheran theology, which is defined by the confessional statements collected in the Book of Concord. But Westminster Theological Seminary Professor Carl Trueman dug out what Luther actually said (in bold with Bell’s quotation in CAPITALS):

If God were to save anyone without faith, he would be acting contrary to his own words and would give himself the lie; yes, he would deny himself. And that is impossible for, as St. Paul declares, God cannot deny himself [II Tim. 2:13]. It is as impossible for God to save without faith as it is impossible for divine truth to lie. That is clear, obvious, and easily understood, no matter how reluctant the old wineskin is to hold this wine–yes, is unable to hold and contain it.

It would be quite a different question whether God can impart faith to some in the hour of death or after death so that these people could be saved through faith. WHO WOULD DOUBT GOD’S ABILITY TO DO THAT? No one, however, can prove that he does do this. For all that we read is that he has already raised people from the dead and thus granted them faith. But whether he gives faith or not, it is impossible for anyone to be saved without faith. Otherwise every sermon, the gospel, and faith would be vain, false, and deceptive, since the entire gospel makes faith necessary. (Works, 43, ed. and trans. G. Wienke and H. T. Lehmann [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1968], 53-54; WA 10.ii, 324.25-325.11)

Talk about taking something out of context! Bell takes a sentence out of Luther while ignoring what he says about it! And ignoring Luther’s conclusion, that, yes, faith in Christ is necessary for salvation.

Bell's despicable actions in using the great reformer to support his heresy should give us a clear picture of the lofty heights Rob Bell has achieved as a theological clown. The rest of the interview between Paul Edwards and Martin Bashir can be heard below in the following three audios where Bashir reveals the truth about his own convictions:

Rob Bell's Love Wins - What They Are Saying

Rob Bell's brazenly heretical book "Love Wins" has caused a firestorm of controversy which started with his promotional video. Though the controversy is, by my estimation, five years late (go here and scroll down for earlier articles on Bell), there are some positives to "emerge" from all of this. One of the positive aspects to this saga is that when people become more overt in their apostasy/heresy, they make it far easier for undiscerning church goers to decide when to run full speed out the door. Another interesting illumination is found in the number of high profile people who have responded and taken a side. Thank you, thank you, thank you for removing that boggy middle ground and finally drawing up some battle lines!!! The following list of "for" and "against" may prove most helpful to you the reader in being selective about which wells we drink from . . .

FOR

It isn’t easy to develop a biblical imagination that takes in the comprehensive and eternal work of Christ…Rob Bell goes a long way in helping us acquire just such an imagination — without a trace of the soft sentimentality and without compromising an inch of evangelical conviction - Eugene Peterson (back cover endorsement)

Wow! Let's just hope that the spaceship returns soon to take Eugene home. If you were ever deluded enough to believe that "The Message" is a legitimate Bible translation, this latest comment from Peterson should seal the deal. "Without compromising an inch of evangelical conviction" - yeah right!!!

Rob Bell is NOT a Universalist (and I actually read “Love Wins”) . . . I know many readers will want my opinion on whether or not Rob is in fact a Universalist . . . I’m not sure; read the book for yourself and figure it out . . . I strongly doubt Rob would describe himself as a “Universalist.” But even if he did, I would recommend Love Wins just as enthusiastically as I already have - Greg Boyd

The gaps in Greg Boyd's self refuting statements are getting shorter all the time. It seems that Greg Boyd is open to a lot of things and not just theism!

A great book, well within the bounds of orthodox Christianity and passionate about Jesus. The real hellacious fight is between generous orthodoxy and stingy orthodoxy. There are stingy people who just want to consign many others to hell and only a few to heaven and take delight in the idea. But Rob Bell allows for a lot of mystery in how Jesus reaches people - Richard Mouw

Richard Mouw is the president of the very large and influential Fuller Theological Seminary. I have been asked before for an opinion on Fuller Seminary and I'll give it right now - don't go there, don't send your kids there, don't send them any money, and the leader of the Seminary has no clue what the "bounds of orthodox Christianity" are.

Rob has come to see that the biblical story is bigger and better than a narrative about how souls get sorted out into two bins at the end of time . . . A courageous minority will become more courageous because of Rob's courage in this book . . . to seize this opportunity, displaying the courage to differ graciously . . . and speak up for Rob whenever the opportunity presents itself - Brian McLaren

AGAINST

It is unspeakably sad when those called to be ministers of the Word distort the gospel and deceive the people of God with false doctrine - Justin Taylor

Farewell Rob Bell - John Piper

The Emerging Church movement is known for its slick and sophisticated presentation. It wears irony and condescension as normal attire. Regardless of how Rob Bell’s book turns out, its promotion is the sad equivalent of a theological striptease. The Gospel is too precious and important to be commodified in this manner. The questions he asks are too important to leave so tantalizingly unanswered. Universalism is a heresy, not a lure to use in order to sell books. This much we know, almost a month before the book is to be released - Al Mohler

...there are dozens of problems with Love Wins. The theology is heterodox. The history is inaccurate. The impact on souls is devastating. And the use of Scripture is indefensible. Worst of all, Love Wins demeans the cross and misrepresents God’s character - Kevin DeYoung

Repent of it, Rob: repent because there’s no shame in turning away from even decades of wrong teaching to turning over a new leaf and teaching that Jesus saves sinner from their own sins and from God’s displeasure if they repent and believe. That is actually the message of the NT, and it ought to be your message if you’re really concerned with the real people you meet every day - Frank Turk

Bell's latest heresy neither surprises nor interests me. What does intrigue me is the tragic drift of popular, mainstream evangelicalism. Here we see clearly why the evangelical movement is in grave trouble: The passions of today's self-styled evangelicals are easily aroused in defense of someone who makes a career dabbling around the edges of truth. Rob Bell likes to play with damnable heresies as if they were Lego bricks, and yet anyone who points out the glaring errors in Bell's teaching will be met with a wall of angry resistance from young, self-styled Christians who grew up in the evangelical mainstream. Where is that much passion ever employed these days in defense of the truth? - Phil Johnson

Bell is an inveterate syncretist who loves to blend “progressive” and politically correct dogmas with eastern mysticism, humanistic jargon, and Christian terminology. His teaching is full of barren ideas borrowed directly from old liberalism, sometimes rephrased in postmodern jargon but still reeking of stale Socinianism. What Bell is peddling is nothing like New Testament Christianity. It is a man-centered religion totally devoid of both clarity and biblical authority. - John Macarthur

One critique of your book says this, there are dozens of problems with love wins. the history is inaccurate, the use of scripture indefensible. that’s true, isn’t it . . . you’ve indicated one of the problems with the book, you’re creating a Christian message that’s warm, kind, and popular, for contemporary culture but it’s, frankly, according to this critic, un-biblical and historically unreliable. that’s true, isn’t it . . . you’re amending the gospel so that it’s palatable to contemporary people who find, for example the idea of hell and heaven very difficult to stomach. so here comes Rob Bell, he’s made a Christian gospel for you and it’s perfectly palatable, it’s easy to swallow - Martin Bashir (interviewing Rob Bell)

If that doesn't clear it up then this video will (here is the video it is a response to) . . .

Robbed Hell - C.A.S.T. Pearls Presents from Canon Wired on Vimeo.

Rob Bell's Dangerous Perversion Of History

The Christian Gospel isn't the only thing that Rob Bell perverts. He also does a bang up job of sounding authoritative in his handling of history.

Rob Bell disappeared off the radar of this blog for a long time and I was of the hopeful opinion that Bell's theology was in the cargo hold of the "emergent ship" when it sank. But alas, Bell managed to grab an enormous amount of publicity through his latest book "Love Wins" where he becomes a lot less vague about some of his heretical views including universalism. On the positive side of the ledger, Bell is doing a lot more strutting around without his sheep suit these days and it appears that he may have shot himself in both feet in the process. Even Zondervan (a greek word meaning "anything that'll make a buck") publishers ditched Bell because of his latest book (I don't know if it was principle or pragmatism)!

And to his legion of defenders out there in cyberspace, Bell's confession that "I am not a universalist" is not exactly a watertight legal defense. The proof is in the pudding and Bell has been writing and preaching a whole lot of pudding for more than half a decade now. And all that hate mail is a great way to champion your "love wins" motto!

A big part of Bell's MO in gaining believability in the false gospel he proclaims, is the way he sounds so credible in the way he reinvents history (always at the expense of historic orthodox Christianity). A very popular post that was done on this blog at the end of 2009 gave a compare and contrast between the Gospel according to John Piper and the gospel according to Rob Bell. I recently had an interesting video from James White drawn to my attention that I thought would be very worthwhile posting on my blog today. If there's one thing I know about Dr. James White it is that he has a brain the size of a planet. If there's one thing I don't know about Dr. James White it is how that giant brain fits inside his regular sized head. Whatever the reason, the guy has an excellent working knowledge of church history and the following critique is an excellent rebuttal to Bell's "gospel presentation" and perversion of history that appeared in that post. This is well worth the look for all of us who heard the alarm bells (pardon the pun) but didn't know enough history to put our finger on what the exact problem was with how Bell recounts church history:

Rob Bell - Al Mohler's Verdict

Rob Bell's new book "Love Wins" is a case of a book that you can judge by its cover. Bell certainly removes his sheepsuit for the promotional video. But I thought I might step aside today and let someone way smarter and more articulate than myself comment on this current controversy swirling around Rob Bell's newest book/assault on biblical Christianity. When it comes to theological heavyweights they don't come much bigger than Al Mohler who is the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. With Mohler you get careful, well thought out critique, through a sharp biblical lens. Mohler undertook the aggravating task of reading "Love Wins" and here is what he found . . .

This brings us to the controversy over Rob Bell’s new book, Love Wins. As its cover announces, the book is “about heaven, hell, and the fate of every person who ever lived.” Reading the book is a heart-breaking experience. We have read this book before. Not the exact words, and never so artfully presented, but the same book, the same argument, the same attempt to rescue Christianity from the Bible.

As a communicator, Rob Bell is a genius. He is the master of the pungent question, the turn-the-picture-upside-down story, and the personal anecdote. Like Harry Emerson Fosdick, the paladin of pulpit liberalism, Rob Bell is a master communicator. Had he set out to defend the biblical doctrine of hell, he could have done so marvelously. He would have done the church a great service. But that is not what he set out to do.

Like Fosdick, Rob Bell cares deeply for people. It comes through in his writings. There is no reason to doubt that Bell wrote this book out of his own personal concern for people who are put off by the doctrine of hell. Had that concern been turned toward a presentation of how the biblical doctrine of hell fits within the larger context of God’s love and justice and the Gospel of Jesus Christ, that would have been a help to untold thousands of Christians and others seeking to understand the Christian faith. But that is not what Bell does in this new book.

Instead, Rob Bell uses his incredible power of literary skill and communication to unravel the Bible’s message and to cast doubt on its teachings.

He states his concern clearly: A staggering number of people have been taught that a select few Christians will spend forever in a peaceful, joyous place called heaven, while the rest of humanity spends forever in torment and punishment in hell with no chance for anything better. It’s been clearly communicated to many that this belief is a central truth of the Christian faith and to reject it is, in essence, to reject Jesus. This is misguided and toxic and ultimately subverts the contagious spread of Jesus’ message of love, peace, forgiveness, and joy that our world desperately needs to hear.

That is a huge statement, and it is clear enough. Rob Bell believes that the doctrine of the eternal punishment of unrepentant sinners in hell is keeping people from coming to Jesus. That is an unsettling thought, but on closer look, it falls in upon itself. In the first place, Jesus spoke very clearly about hell, using language that can only be described as explicit. He warned of “him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” [Matthew 10:28]

In Love Wins, Bell does his best to argue that the church has allowed the story of Jesus’ love to be perverted by other stories. The story of an eternal hell is not, he believes, a good story. He suggests that a better story would involve the possibility of a sinner coming to faith in Christ after death, or hell being a cessation of being, or hell being eventually emptied of all its inhabitants. The problem, of course, is that the Bible provides no hint whatsoever of any possibility of a sinner’s salvation after death. Instead, “it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment.” [Hebrews 9:27]

He also argues for a form of universal salvation. Once again, his statements are more suggestive than declarative, but he clearly intends his reader to be persuaded that it is possible — even probable — that those who resist, reject, or never hear of Christ may be saved through Christ nonetheless. That means no conscious faith in Christ is necessary for salvation. He knows that he must deal with a text like Romans 10 in making this argument, “How are they to hear without someone preaching?” [Romans 10:14] Bell says that he wholeheartedly agrees with that argument from the Apostle Paul, but then he dumps the entire argument overboard and suggests that this cannot be God’s plan. He completely avoids Paul’s conclusion that “faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” [Romans 10:17] He rejects the idea that a person must come to a personal knowledge of Christ in this life in order to be saved. “What if the missionary gets a flat tire?” he asks.

But this is how Rob Bell deals with the Bible. He argues that the gates that never shut in the New Jerusalem [Revelation 21:25] mean that the opportunity for salvation is never closed, but he just avoids dealing with the preceding chapter, which includes this clear statement of God’s justice: “And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.” [Revelation 20:15] The eternally open gates of the New Jerusalem come only after that judgment.

Like so many others, Bell wants to separate the message of Jesus from other voices even in the New Testament, particularly the voice of the Apostle Paul. Here we face the inescapable question of biblical authority. We will either affirm that every word of the Bible is true, trustworthy, and authoritative, or we will create our own Bible according to our own preferences. Put bluntly, if Jesus and Paul are not telling the same story, we have no idea what the true story is.

Bell clearly prefers inclusivism, the belief that Christ is saving humanity through means other than the Gospel, including other religions. But he mixes up his story along the way, appearing to argue for outright universalism on some pages, but backing off of a full affirmation. He rejects the belief that conscious faith in Christ is necessary for salvation, but he never clearly lands on a specific account of what he does believe.

Tellingly, Bell attempts to reduce all of the Bible and the entirety of the Gospel to story, and he believes it is his right and duty to determine which story is better than another — which version of Christianity is going to be compelling and attractive to unbelievers. He has, after all, set that as his aim — to replace the received story with something he sees as better.

The first problem with this is obvious. We have no right to determine which “story” of the Gospel we prefer or think is most compelling. We must deal with the Gospel that we received from Christ and the Apostles, the faith once for all delivered to the church. Suggesting that some other story is better or more attractive than that story is an audacity of breathtaking proportions. The church is bound to the story revealed in the Bible — and in all of the Bible … every word of it.

But there is a second problem, and it is one we might think would have been learned by now. Liberalism just does not work. Bell wants to argue that the love of God is so powerful that “God gets what God wants.” So, God desires the salvation of all, he argues, so all will eventually be saved — some even after death, even long after death. But he cannot maintain that account for long because of his absolute affirmation of human autonomy. Even God cannot or will not prevent someone from going to hell who is determined to go there. So, if Bell is taken on his own terms, even he does not believe that “God gets what God wants.”

Similarly, Bell’s argument is centered in his affirmation of God’s loving character, but he alienates love from justice and holiness. This is the traditional liberal line. Love is divorced from holiness and becomes mere sentimentality. Bell wants to rescue God from any teaching that his wrath is poured out upon sin and sinners, certainly in any eternally conscious sense. But Bell also wants God to vindicate the victims of murder, rape, child abuse, and similar evil. He seems not to recognize that he has undercut his own story, leaving God unable or unwilling to bring true justice.

In truth, any human effort to offer the world a story superior to the comprehensive story of the Bible fails on all fronts. It is an abdication of biblical authority, a denial of biblical truth, and a false Gospel. It misleads sinners and fails to save. It also fails in its central aim — to convince sinners to think better of God. The real Gospel is the Gospel that saves — the Gospel that must be heard and believed if sinners are to be saved.

But this is where Rob Bell’s book goes most off-course. He describes the Gospel in these words:

It begins in the sure and certain truth that we are loved. That in spite of whatever has gone horribly wrong deep in our hearts and has spread to every corner of the world, in spite of our sins, failures, rebellion, and hard hearts, in spite of what has been done to us or what we’ve done, God has made peace with us.

Missing from his Gospel is any clear reference to Christ, any adequate understanding of our sin, any affirmation of the holiness of God and his pledge to punish sin, any reference to the shed blood of Christ, his death on the cross, his substitutionary atonement, and his resurrection, and, so tellingly, any reference to faith as the sinners response to the Good News of the Gospel. There is no genuine Gospel here. This is just a reissue of the powerless message of theological liberalism.

H. Richard Niebuhr famously once distilled liberal theology into this sentence: “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross.”

Yes, we have read this book before. With Love Wins, Rob Bell moves solidly within the world of Protestant Liberalism. His message is a liberalism arriving late on the scene. Tragically, his message will confuse many believers as well as countless unbelievers.

We dare not retreat from all that the Bible says about hell. We must never confuse the Gospel, nor offer suggestions that there may be any way of salvation outside of conscious faith in Jesus Christ. We must never believe that we can do a public relations job on the Gospel or on the character of God. We must never be unclear and subversively suggestive about what the Bible teaches.

In the opening pages of Love Wins, Rob Bell assures his readers that “nothing in this book hasn’t been taught, suggested, or celebrated by many before me.” That is true enough. But the tragedy is that those who did teach, suggest, or celebrate such things were those with whom no friend of the Gospel should want company. In this new book, Rob Bell takes his stand with those who have tried to rescue Christianity from itself. This is a massive tragedy by any measure.

The problem begins even with the book’s title. The message of the Gospel is not merely that love wins — it is that Jesus saves.

Rob Bell Gets A Much Needed Spanking

I recently posted my commentary on the storm that erupted over Rob Bell's new book "Love Wins". Though Bell has broadcast his heretical views for more than five years now, he has been so vague and hazy about it, that many commentators have given him the benefit of the doubt. But in his latest video, and book, Bell really started to strut around without his sheepsuit on - so much so that it did not escape the notice of many respected Christian leaders who have since pronounced anathema over Bell.

Martin Bashir is a world famous interviewer in the secular media known for his exclusive interviews with people such as Michael Jackson and Princess Diana. Bell must have thought he would be safe from a theological mauling when he accepted Bashir's invitation onto his show. I don't know if Bashir is a Christian or not, but what follows is a face to face thrashing that Bell should have received a long time ago from many discerning Christian apologists. Martin Bashir was like a dog on a bone in this interview which provided yours truly with some much needed therapy . . .



It may well turn out that Bell has shot himself in both feet in his publicity stunts to promote "Love Wins". If anything positive comes out of this, let's hope that it includes Bell no longer pretending to be a Christian!

Rob Bell Takes Off His Sheep Suit - And John Piper Bids Him "Farewell"

If it walks like a universalist, and talks like a universalist, then it's probably Rob Bell:

LOVE WINS. - Available March 15th from Rob Bell on Vimeo.

Rob Bell is an enemy of the true biblical Gospel and if that is not apparent in this video then may I recommend a book called Romans written by a guy called Paul.

But if our unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God, what shall we say? That God is unrighteous to inflict wrath on us? I speak in a human way. By no means! For then how could God judge the world? (Romans 3:5-6)

And it might help if Bell took the time to read all the verses in John chapter three and not just verse sixteen.

Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God. (John 3:3 and for the record the word "cannot" is actually translated "no chance" in the original Greek)

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (John 3:17-18)

So the note concerning Ghandi, while perhaps inappropriate, is not based upon some guy who wants to assert his omniscience Rob! It's based upon an elementary understanding of the clear teaching of the Bible. You know - the Bible - that big old book that you spend most of your time perverting and confusing it's plain meaning! Ghandi, as a professing Hindu, is almost certainly in hell. This is not because I think so but because the Bible tells me so (the "almost certainly" disclaimer is in the genuine hope that Ghandi repented of his sin and put his trust in Jesus Christ prior to his death, in which case God would have saved him). And Rob, are you biblically incompetent or deliberately deceiving people? Which one is it? What do you do with verses like Romans 5:9 which directly refute what you assert in this video:

Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. (Romans 9:5)

When we deny an attribute of God, such as His wrath, we are breaking the second commandment (idolatry) by making a god in our own image. In this video, Bell just cannot conceal his utter disdain for the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement, and for those who defend it. I certainly didn't feel the love from "Mr Love Wins" in this video. Can you feel the love tonight?

This is the video that was the cause of the entire internet melting down a couple of weeks ago (in case you didn't notice). Partly because Bell is becoming more and more overt in his long established heretical views, and also in part because of John Piper's legendary tweet in response to this video which simply said "farewell Rob Bell". It is quite right that John Piper and the Gospel Coalition have put Bell outside of the camp, but I still have to ask the question why did it take so long? The contrast between the Gospel Piper preaches and the gospel Bell invented could not be more stark. Piper says "God is the Gospel" whereas Bell says that "you are the gospel". More than five years ago Bell wrote these words in his book Velvet Elvis in a sneaky affirmation of his universalism:

So this reality, this forgiveness, this reconciliation, is true for everybody. Paul insisted that when Jesus died on the cross he was reconciling ‘all things, in heaven and on earth, to God. This reality then isn’t something we make true about ourselves by doing something. It is already true. Our choice is to live in this new reality or cling to a reality of our own making.” (Velvet Elvis p146)

What is staggering is how much of a sacred cow Rob Bell has become, and the number of professing Christians (and also unbelievers - which is telling) who are willing to relentlessly defend Bell (hence melting down the entire internet in their flurry of protest). Guys, how hard is this? I know that in his latest video (shown above) Bell does his usual schtick of asking provocative questions and never answering them. I also know that Bell has made an art form out of pretending to be a Christian for many years now. He trades on the evangelical world's willingness to always give the benefit of the doubt to vague, obscure, and foggy theology. But Bell's obvious disdain and resentment for the historic orthodox Christian faith, coupled with his continual propensity to cloud crystal clear doctrines of first importance is despicable to say the least.

This has been the MO within the emergent movement from the very beginning. Have leaders like Rob Bell, Brian McLaren, Doug Pagitt, and Tony Jones grown more and more heretical over the last decade or has it been a planned gradual release of false teaching to an evangelical landscape as it gradually grows more tolerant. These guys are all non-Christian theological liberals who have held their views for a long time but had a vested interest in concealing much of their heresy until the modern evangelical climate was deemed ready to receive each incremental attack on the historic Christian faith. Tony Jones obviously didn't get that memo because by 2008 he had already run out of things to deny.

And now Bell is spending more and more time without his sheep suit on. If you meet Rob Bell, please share the Gospel with him. Like Ghandi, he also needs to repent of his sins and trust in Jesus Christ to save him from the wrath to come.

Rob Bell In The Sky With Diamonds

I think I've finally figured out the difference between Rob Bell and Bill Clinton - Bell definitely inhaled!



In naming todays post I decided to jump on the modern evangelical bandwagon of relevance. For those of you who don't know what relevance is it means professing Christians trying to be cool by doing something that stopped being cool several decades ago and I figured an old Beatles song from their psychedelic era was right in that ball park. I would contend that I have a better chance of guessing what Rob Bell has been smoking than what he is actually talking about here. I don't think he had anything to say about the actual resurrection - but then my head is still spinning and my memory is totally hazy man!

The historical reality of Christ's bodily resurrection is way more thrilling than any emergent induced psychedelic trip.

There is enormous evidence for the resurrection. I’ll mention just five of them.

1. Jesus was seen by hundreds of witnesses. That is good enough in a court of law.
2. When Peter preached on the day of Pentecost he testified to the resurrection in Jerusalem. Thousands were there and no one questioned him.
3. The Bible has never been proven wrong on anything. We have a document more trustworthy than any other book ever written.
4. That Christianity has survived for 2000 years.
5. The change in the disciples behavior. What else could explain how these cowards who fled when Jesus was crucified had suddenly become bold and fearless witnesses ready to preach endlessly and die willingly in His Name. (Read from Foxes book of Martyr’s)

There is no reason to deny the resurrection other than a desire to keep on sinning in the hope that you will not have to face the resurrected Lord on the day of judgment.

But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. (1 Corinthians 15:20)

Christ’s resurrection guarantees the resurrection of His church.

For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. (1 Corinthians 15:21-22)

Adam’s one sin brought death on everyone. The ultimate statistic – one out of one people die. Adam’s sin brought the curse of death. In Christ’s resurrection shall all be made alive. Now – does this verse teach universalism that everyone will be saved? We know the Scripture cannot contradict itself and it clearly teaches that not everyone gets saved – that there are sheep and goats. So what is Paul saying here? It depends upon the link with the man. All who are in Adam – who are the descendants of Adam? We all are. All who are in Christ – who are the descendants of Christ? John 1:12 says "as many as believed in Him, to them He gave the power to become the sons of God."

The first all includes all who are in Adam by the common factor of . . . sin. The second all includes all who are in Christ by the common factor of . . . faith. All who are in Adam die. All who are in Christ live. Who are you in?

But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. (1 Corinthians 15:23-26)

Christ was raised bodily, glorified so that His human frame was perfectly suited for both heaven and earth. His body could be seen, and touched (Luke 24:39; John 20:27; 1 John 1:1). He ate food (Luke 24:42-43) and walked and talked as He had before the crucifixion. At this very moment, he sits on the Father's right hand in that same body—making intercession for the saints, including me.

More amazing than all of that, I will one day have a body like His: able to traverse heaven and earth, immortal, yet familiar in its physical form. In fact, it will be this very body, thoroughly healed of all its infirmities and imperfections. That amazes me and thrills me (Phil Johnson, online source).

Rob Bell may be interesting to those who don't care about Gospel truth and to those unregenerated by the resurrected Jesus. . . but to those redeemed, the reality and truth of Christ's bodily resurrection is absolutely thrilling and invigorating.

More Correspondance Concerning Rob Bell (Part 2)

My Rob Bell Exposed video on youtube is still causing quite a stir. If only the hordes of Rob Bell groupies were as zealous about defending the Gospel as they are about defending Rob Bell. I regularly get slanderous and hateful mail from emergents who are outraged that I would expose their heretical guru as a fraud to Christianity.

I thought it would be worthwhile to post some more correspondance today. This time it is with a youth pastor who is studying for his Masters in Divinity and Theology. As with my previous post I have inserted my responses in bold.

Dear Cameron

I am a Youth Pastor in XXXXX, Michigan. I am also in school to get my masters of Divinity and Theology. One of the kids in my Youth Group brought to my attention a video that you did on Rob Bell's video called Dust. After watching the video i was disappointed and disturbed for several reasons. First the main reason that i am disturbed is because you as being a fellow believer in the Lord, have stood up in front of the mass and torn down another brother in Christ.

Based on the gospel Rob Bell preaches I don't consider this tearing down a brother. If Rob Bell is born again (because I cannot judge his heart) it certainly doesn't come across based on the content of his message.

You stood before another gathering of believers and used it to preach an agenda. If you wanted to preach the message about Peter having faith in God and God alone to walk on water you could have done that without showing the video of Rob Bell. By using Rob Bell you have pushed your own agenda into a sermon.

The question is not whether anyone has an agenda, it is which one of us has the right agenda. Jesus gave us all an agenda otherwise known as the Great commission and it is the reason why I witness and preach. In fact it is what I use most of my spare time doing. If you are interested to see how I witness and preach you will find plenty of other videos on youtube of me doing that.

I know you claim that you are exposing humanism but that is not what you are doing.

How so? I think it's pretty straight forward, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to work it out. Rob Bell is explicitly teaching that God has faith in man which is a blatant contradiction of the doctrine of human depravity.

I found it odd that you talked about knowing the contextual place of the word that you are reading so you give the background to the verse, but you do not show the whole video. So you take a part of the video and only show that section and not the rest.

I only had 10 minutes all up from my senior pastor. I would have loved to show the whole video although even if I did then you'd probably complain about breach of copyright. I have had mail from members of Bell's church, some of which accuse me of breaching copyright and others accusing me for not showing the entire video. By showing a portion of the Dust video I did what was legal to do within copyright law which describes it as "citing a work for commentary". Many people and all of the youth had already seen the video in it's entirity anyway. But I did spend many hours checking my context and I remain convinced it was sound, and I did invite biblical criticism from others which is why I am happy to hear from you (though I'd prefer if you spent more time reasoning from the Scriptures).

From there you twist the words to meet an agenda that you already had planned.

Please explain to me how quoting someone qualifies as twisting their words????

You changed the point that Rob Bell was trying to make.

I was actually totally focussed on Rob Bell's major point. My closing remarks were actually in response to Rob Bell's major point in the video - "that God has faith in us". This idea has no biblical basis. It is also actually a denial of God's omniscience (all knowing), and omnipresence (all seeing) because Hebrews 11:1 defines faith as "the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things unseen". You can only hope in things you don't know about and for things to be unseen would require God to not be omnipresent. It is a very big deal as it is a radical redefining of the character and nature of God. God does not have faith - He is the object of faith. The whole reformation was built upon this truth.

The point he is making is just like when the Bible talks about with we were to have faith the size of a mustard seed we could move a mountain. The point here and that Rob is making is that we know we can do this, if we had the faith, but we do not believe enough in ourselves to believe that God will do this for us.

Find me one verse in the Bible that says we should believe in ourselves. I can assure you that I can find many that say the opposite some of which were quoted in my presentation.

We do not want to look at our selves has holy vessels for God, so we doubt our own capability no matter what God can do. We believe God can do it, but we believe it can't be done through us. We lack faith that it is possible for these things and these works to be done through us.

But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me (2 Corinthians 12:9).

I do not agree with Rob Bell all the time, but I believe it is wrong for another pastor to tear down the work of another pastor. It is not for you to judge, or call Rob Bell a false preacher, by what you have said in your video makes it look like you feel Rob is a false preacher.

The key problem with your sentence here are the two words "I believe". This is not about what you believe but what the Scripture actually says. Romans 16:17 tells us to "mark" those who teach doctrine contrary to what we learn in Scripture. Ephesians 5:11 tells us to expose the works of darkness. Galatians 1:8-9 pronounces damnation on anyone who preaches any other gospel than the one preached in Scripture. So the question is not whether I should be doing this as a shepherd (and remember that shepherds are supposed to feed sheep and protect them from wolves), but whether I am telling the truth and handling Scripture correctly - both subjects that you never delved into.

Once again, the question is not whether I should call him a false teacher but whether he is a false teacher. I gave a biblical critique of the content of Rob Bell's teaching and it would be nice if you could extend me the same courtesy.

Christianity is divided enough, and no divided team ever works to its full potential.

It is false teachers that cause division - not those who expose them. "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them" (Romans 16:17).

What you preach holds an impact and that impact will be judged, and judged by God alone. It disappointed me greatly that preacher would take a shot at another Christian.

I wouldn't take a shot at another Christian. Rob Bell is a universalist. That's not Christianity last time I checked.

In Christ
(Name withheld)

Go Back To Part 1

More Correspondance Concerning Rob Bell (Part 1)

My Rob Bell Exposed video on youtube is still causing quite a stir. If only the hordes of Rob Bell groupies were as zealous about defending the Gospel as they are about defending Rob Bell. I regularly get slanderous and hateful mail from emergents who are outraged that I would expose their heretical guru as a fraud to Christianity. But sometimes I get polite e-mails from people expressing concern for my "Rob Bell Exposed" video which convey a genuine concern for truth. I am only too happy to respond to these mails. Today I am posting an example as I thought it might be helpful to the many readers who have expressed their frustration at unsuccessfully pleading with their church leaders to stop playing Rob Bell's videos (of which several are heretical). What follows is a recent letter I received. I have inserted my responses in bold type (for the record, my response was very well received).

Hey Cameron,

This is in reference to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wSAEezBc3s

I can understand where you are coming from in this video. But I think you misinterpreted Rob Bell.

I think when Rob talked about how Peter did not have faith in himself as opposed to not enough faith in God, he was really trying to say: It wasn't that Peter did not have faith that Jesus had the power, cause He obviously did since He was still floating. It was that Peter did not have faith that He could do what God wanted Him to do.

Rob Bell explicitly teaches at the end of the video that God has faith in man just like we should have faith in Him. I know why Bell didn't quote a Scripture to support this idea - because there isn't any. Furthermore faith is defined in Heb 11:1 as the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things unseen. Faith requires things both unseen and unknown. God is omniscient (all knowing) and omnipresent (all seeing). Faith cannot be a part of God's character and nature. He is the object of faith. The Gospel is all about faith ALONE in Christ ALONE. Bell redefines God in doing this - which is actually breaking the second commandment.

I think by comparing "faith in God" vs "faith in himself" he really meant to say "faith in the power of God" vs "faith in the power of God to do stuff in Him". He just worded it very poorly.

I actually listened to Bell's sermon "Covered in the Dust of Your Rabbi" which is a much expanded version of Dust. Bell makes himself even more clear in the sermon and I took great care to understand him rightly. Furthermore, when it comes to the Gospel, the Christian minister must take great care to be explicitly clear on fundamental truths. Bell is constantly foggy. God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33).

I identified with this because I used to struggle really bad with porn and masturbation. I didn't doubt that God was all-powerful, but I did doubt that I would escape my addiction. I thought "I'm human, there's no way I can live purely like God in this way." What I was missing is that, even though I'm human, I can live like God because of His grace, power and Holy Spirit. I'll never be God, but I can be Christ-like.

You are actually agreeing with me here and disagreeing with Bell. We must be born again (John 3). We need the heart of stone removed and replaced with a heart of flesh by the Holy Spirit so that we can walk in obedience by His power (Eze 36:25-27). We need to be a new creature in Christ (2 Cor 5:17). Bell says none of this here. He says that God believed in the disciples because He left the great Commission in their hands. Bell never mentioned the upper room and the necessary indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This was a MAJOR focus of my presentation and Bell said nothing about the role of the Holy Spirit in 10 plus minutes. That is just plain disgraceful distortion of conversion and the Gospel and the depravity of man.

Eventually, after being addicted for around 8-9 years, I finally realized that I COULD stop! And I have stopped through the power of Christ and the Holy Spirit!

Exactly - not because God believes in you but because you confessed your need for Him!

Now another thing: My friend saw the Everything is Spiritual movie, and this lead her to believe in God and ultimately become a Christian (believing Jesus is Lord, lived, died and rose in the flesh. She also has repented of her sins). So Rob Bell's message was influential in her life. Even if Rob Bell did give a false message in this video, that does not mean he is not Christian, all his messages are wrong or that he is not your brother.

Rob Bell is actually a universalist so this story surprises me. If your friend repented of her sins - she never heard that from Rob Bell. He never preaches it which makes sense for a universalist. Bell articulates his universalist views in both Velvet Elvis and his third book. If your friend became a Christian all glory to God - it was inspite of Rob Bell's heretical gospel, not because of it. I document many of Bell's heresies on my blog and please also check out this scholarly review of Velvet Elvis which outlines much of Bell's heresies and false teaching: http://www.sohmer.net/Velvet_Elvis.pdf

Now if he is your brother, and you slander his name and all his teaching the way you do, this is bad! It's one thing to watch his
movie, sit down with some friends and discuss something amiss amongst yourselves. It's another to try to discredit his whole reputation based on this one mistake. Did not Paul make mistakes in speaking too harshly?

If he preaches a false gospel then he is not a brother. Paul pronounces damnation on all who preach false gospels (Gal 1:8-9) and instructs us to "Mark them" (Romans 16:17) and expose the works of darkness (Eph 5:11). So you have to decide if I am telling the truth not whether I should be exposing him.

I would say that if you really had a problem with his message, that you sit down with Rob face to face and confront him about it. Maybe you'll show him he is wrong, or maybe he will say "oh! yeah! I think I wasn't clear on what i was trying to say in that sentence" This is how the church should be rebuked and built up. When we publicly oppose one another behind each other's back without confronting one another first, we tear down each other.

How do you know I didn't try to speak with Rob Bell about this? I can show you my correspondence with them if you like and their cut and paste response that most people get who try to approach them about this. Think about it - it is publicly marketed material that warrants a public response. So it wasn't a Matthew 18 situation anyway. Plus this was a biblical critique of the content of Bell's teaching - not slanderous character assassination. Find one personal comment I made against his motivation or personal conduct? I would contend that Bell's Bullhorn Guy video is a damaging caricature of the many faithful open air preachers out there who suffer enough ridicule as it is. Who is taking Bell to task over that. Bell didn't approach any open air preachers before marketing that video - and he still won't talk to the many who have tried to air their grievances.


Say someone becomes a genuine Christian through a message by Rob Bell. Then they hear from you that Rob Bell is a sham. What if they say "oh, so all the stuff I learned about God from Rob is false? He's just a liar?" This could turn them away, when they infact might have had an accurate description of God that came from Rob.

Find me one orthodox Gospel presentation by Rob Bell in audio/video/written form. I have been challenging people from his church to present one for the last two years. Nothing has been forthcoming. Here is Bell's attempt to "tweet" the Gospel:

I would say that history is headed somewhere. The thousands of little ways in which you are tempted to believe that hope might actually be a legitimate response to the insanity of the world actually can be trusted. And the Christian story is that a tomb is empty, and a movement has actually begun that has been present in a sense all along in creation. And all those times when your cynicism was at odds with an impulse within you that said that this little thing might be about something bigger—those tiny little slivers may in fact be connected to something really, really big.

Now please tell me how someone can come to saving knowledge of Jesus Christ by virtue of that? Please tell me you can recognize that that is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Shepherd's feed the sheep and protect them from wolves. My video was fulfilling a shepherd's duty.

Also, if Rob Bell says Jesus is Lord and Jesus lived, died and rose in the flesh by the power of God, would you say he has the Holy Spirit? Another thing to think about.

Rob Bell says many things that sound orthodox but then redefines their meaning. You would be shocked to read what Bell says about the Trinity in Velvet Elvis. Rob Bell's Jesus is not necessarily the only way! Please read the book review I linked earlier and/or my blog (search for "Rob Bell") to biblically consider my contentions.
Sincerely
Cameron

Let me know your thoughts on this!

(Name witheld)

Go On To Part 2

My Inbox Runneth Over With Hate Mail From Rob Bell Groupies

There are definitely better things to talk about than a guru in the emergent church. But Rob Bell seems to be casting a long shadow of influence and I regularly get asked to write about him and his teaching. This series of posts has been an attempt to satisfy that curiosity. I said that Friday's post would be the last in the current series but I have been inundated with a tsunami of hate mail in response to my "Rob Bell Exposed" video on youtube. I thought it might be worthwhile to post one more time on this sad subject so that you, the reader, can at least get a taste of what is "the emergent conversation". Today, I have posted a sampling of these nastygrams by the defenders of Rob Bell. But, first of all, I thought I should give some background as to why I have such a strong interest in bringing to light Bell's false teachings.

Several years ago (before I moved to Denmark) I was an elder in a large church (by Australian standards). It had a large and vibrant youth culture and there was a real buzz going around about these cool new DVD's that everyone was watching called Nooma's.

I can remember sitting in a friend's apartment and being shown one for the first time. It was called "Luggage" and it seemed quite neutral and didn't leave an impression on me one way or the other . . . except it had a killer punch right at the end with a graphic car smash just as I was waiting for the credits to roll. I thought the crash was pretty cool and a sobering reminder to the brevity of life, but other than that I thought little about it.

But several weeks later I sat in on a youth meeting where another one of these "Noomas" was shown called "Dust". I can remember being creeped out by the dialogue as Rob bell dazzled everyone with his seeming knowledge of Jewish culture and rabbinical tradition, but I could not put my finger on what was wrong. But then the false teaching came oozing out. First of all by attributing Peter's sinking in the water to a loss of faith in himself. And then climaxing with Bell's assertion that God has faith in man - the reformation upside down if you like.

I started asking questions about Bell and the emergent movement but people seemed to be either disinterested in my questions or uncorncerned that the cornerstone Christian teaching of "by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ ALONE" was being assaulted. I soon found out about another Nooma video called "Bullhorn Guy". In this one Bell makes an ugly caricature of open-air preachers and then slams them for preaching about sin, hell, judgment, repentance, mortality, and quoting Bible verses (yes things that are all true). What was his biblical basis? There was none! Instead he appealed to pragmatism (it doesn't work) and his own actor in the video who is unsocial, uncool, completely ignored, and shouts at people through a bullhorn. My blood was starting to boil.

To make matters worse the Dust video was in my home church's disciplship packs and youth were regularly quoting Bell's mantras like believe in yourself and God has faith in you. In an ego-centric, therapeutic culture that is in hot pursuit of higher self esteem I knew that this was the last teaching they needed to embrace if they were to live Christ centered lives based on dying to self, coming to him in repentant faith, and daily taking up their cross. As an elder I sensed a responsibility to respond to these goings on. I started to study Bell's teachings in more depth, listening to his sermons, and reading his book Velvet Elvis (in the hope that my concerns were unfounded). What I found was even more disturbing as I uncovered a long list of aberrant and often heretical teaching (heavily discussed in previous posts).

Eventually, I had the opportunity to make a ten minute apologetic presentation on something that seems right but isn't. I chose to critiqe Bell's video Dust. Many of you have already seen it, but for those that haven't - here it is . . .



I never could have imagined the massive response to this message when it was posted on youtube. It was unabashed plaudits mixed with hostile outrage - and little in between. It took well over a year for the hornets nest to settle down. But I have recently been inundated with a rash of venomous comments by "Rob Bell supporters" some of whom claim to attend his "church". It may well be that this video is circulating through congregants at the fellowship where Bell pastors. Please pray that it may cause some people to flee Bell's false teaching and find refuge in a sound biblical church. A lot of the comments give me great cause for concern for those who try to live by Bell's creed of "Love Wins" . . .

A Christian pastor bashing a Christian pastor? May God Curse you and your children for ages to come.

In the New Testament times, the way to know if someone was teaching a false doctrine was to know that person (or know someone who knew that person), and then decide if they're preaching falsely. Also, if they were corrected after preaching falsely and repented, then they were forgiven... Internet did not exist back then.... You have never met Rob Bell, and probably don't know anyone who has (I'm guessing?). I'm assuming you have never talked to him or asked him about his views, or have ever tried to show him that his views may be wrong. You're judging him based on what you have seen, not who he is.... You don't know him. You're spreading gossip about someone you don't know. You're causing disunity and are being a stumbling block for new believers. How dare you say God isn't using Rob Bell? Are you God?

Maybe they should write about you that you are the next Billy Graham...
I don't see a point in putting a video and waving to the world as a Christian against another Christian that someone else is wrong.. We don't always agree with each other but we do need to respect each other.. and what you do isn't fair.
Not nice.. really.. not very Christian.

who preaches a sermon against another pastor... ever? Show me where that's Biblical
why would you splice a video mid section and act like that is all he said? Watch his whole video start to finish and if you still feel that Rob Bell is in any way taking away from the message of Jesus than you must not have any regard for the Holy Spirit. Rob Bell has an unparalleled understanding of the Word, clearly unlike this cocky skeptic

Do you really believe God's means of getting us to be in love would stop at someone like Rob Bell? God will use any means necessary, he made the israelites wonder the desert for 40 years, he made zacariah dumb, he raised people from the dead, SO REALLY IT IS NOT IN THE BIBLE?, what i meant fully is that he will use anything towards his good purpose, which potentially is any means!!! Who are you to decide whether Rob bell is wrong? For all you know God could be using him more that he is using you

we cant make theologies that arent in the Bible, or rather that God doesnt want us to make, Like th pharisees did in Jesus' time, I dont think he wants us to go back there again. What im saying is that we really dont fully understand how God works, and to say someone that could potentially be guided God is a heretic is wrong and very dumb.

This video does exactly what every cult/sect has done: they take one or two statements that someone says and they come up with an enormous argument to discredit that person (in the case of cults, they take one verse from the Bible and base their theology on that one verse). Clearly no one is perfect. I think Jesus would definitely be against holding a meeting just to discredit someone... The preacher in this video probably has never met Rob Bell

Well what do you live for? it seems you spend much of your energy posting videos against another person that you probably never even met or had a deep conversation with about his heart and belief.

I wouldn't be focusing on Rob Bell. I would be focusing on spreading the word of God. Never, ever call people out. Jesus and God does that.... Be very very careful sir.

God didn't give the Holy Spirit to animals. He has faith in us. If you don't think God has faith in you to follow him then you are deceived. Yes, we need the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit was the deciding factor for God's faith could then God give the Holy Spirit to any creature on the earth and people would be saved? H11:1 deals with what faith is to US.

All you have to do from your argument to undermine Jesus's words is ask if he was implying something that he wasn't and then manipulate that point, which you did. You care about the truth of the gospel? When was the last time you raised someone from the dead? Healed someone from cancer or saw someone's limbs grow back? (with Jesus's power of course

There are countless other comments but I'll exercise mercy and stop right there. We've all heard enough of the "emergent conversation" and it's time for me to talk about something else on my next post.

John Piper Vs Rob Bell - Which Gospel Are You Trusting

Click Here To Read Rob Bell Takes Off His Sheep Suit for my latest post concerning the scandal surrounding Rob Bell's "Love Wins" video and John Piper's renunciation of Rob Bell.

I guess it is a fair question to ask why Rob Bell has featured on my last four posts. After all, there are far better things to talk about. But I am continually asked for information regarding Rob Bell by concerned church goers who are continually bombarded by his teaching during church services and youth meetings. As a final installment I thought it might be appropriate to contrast the gospel according to Rob Bell with the Gospel according to John Piper. Bell says "you are the gospel". Piper says "God is the Gospel". What a great contrast. They cannot both be right no matter how much postmodern spin doctoring you try to do. Which Gospel are you trusting because one leads to eternal life and the other is a road to eternal damnation . . .



Clicke Here to see James White's critique of Bell's video.

My Plea To Pastors About Rob Bell (Part 3)

I am persevering on this subject today for three major reasons:

1. Rob Bell is exerting a lot of influence on young undiscerning church goers. I was initially dragged into examining the teaching of Rob Bell due to the use of his teaching in my home fellowship and the disturbing understanding of the Gospel that began to "emerge" among many of the impressionable young. The deeper I dug the darker it got (wait until you read the quotes I've got posted today).

2. Though there are worse teachers out there, I get asked the most questions about Rob Bell. Also, Rob tends to be a very gifted communicator who is very adept at cloaking the heretical aspects of his teaching.

3. The reproach he brings on doctrines that people like the reformers were willing to lay down their lives for.

If you think my charges against Rob Bell's teaching are unfounded or over the top then listen to Rob Bell in his own words (with thanks to the guys at "A Thousand Tongues" website for compiling this list).

Rob Bell On Scripture:

“The Bible is a collection of stories that teach us about what it looks like when God is at work through actual people. The Bible has the authority it does only because it contains stories about people interacting with the God who has all authority” (Velvet Elvis p65).

“…it wasn’t until the 300s that what we know as the sixty-six books of the Bible were actually agreed upon as the ‘Bible’. This is part of the problem with continually insisting that one of the absolutes of the Christian faith must be a belief that “Scripture alone” is our guide. It sounds nice, but it is not true. In reaction to abuses by the church, a group of believers during a time called the Reformation claimed that we only need the authority of the Bible. But the problem is that we got the Bible from the church voting on what the Bible even is. So when I affirm the Bible as God’s word, in the same breath I have to affirm that when those people voted, God was somehow present, guiding them to do what they did. When people say that all we need is the Bible, it is simply not true. In affirming the Bible as inspired, I also have to affirm the Spirit who I believe was inspiring those people to choose those books.” (Velvet Elvis p68)

[The Bible is a] “human product…rather than the product of divine fiat” (Emergent Mystique, Christianity Today)

Rob Bell On Heaven and Hell:

”When people use the word hell, what do they mean? They mean a place, an event, a situation absent of how God desires things to be. Famine, debt, oppression, loneliness, despair, death, slaughter–they are all hell on earth. Jesus’ desire for his followers is that they live in such a way that they bring heaven to earth. What’s disturbing is when people talk more about hell after this life than they do about Hell here and now. As a Christian, I want to do what I can to resist hell coming to earth.” (Velvet Elvis p148)

“Heaven is full of forgiven people. Hell is full of forgiven people. Heaven is full of people God loves, whom Jesus died for. Hell is full of forgiven people God loves, whom Jesus died for. The difference is how we choose to live, which story we choose to live in, which version of reality we trust. Ours or God’s.” (Velvet Elvis p146)

Rob Bell On The Fall:

“I can’t find one place in the teachings of Jesus, or the Bible for that matter, where we are to identify ourselves first and foremost as sinners. Now this doesn’t mean we don’t sin; that’s obvious. In the book of James it’s written like this: ‘We all stumble in many ways.’ Once again, the greatest truth of the story of Adam and Eve isn’t that it happened, but that it happens.” (Velvet Elvis p139)

Rob Bell On The Exclusivity of Christ:

“I don’t follow Jesus because I think Christianity is the best religion. I follow Jesus because he leads me into ultimate reality. He teaches me to live in tune with how reality is. When Jesus said, ‘No one comes to the Father except through me’, he was saying that his way, his words, his life is our connection to how things truly are at the deepest levels of existence. For Jesus then, the point of religion is to help us connect with ultimate reality, God.” (Velvet Elvis p83)

Rob Bell On the Nature of the Atonement:

“So this reality, this forgiveness, this reconciliation, is true for everybody. Paul insisted that when Jesus died on the cross he was reconciling ‘all things, in heaven and on earth, to God. This reality then isn’t something we make true about ourselves by doing something. It is already true. Our choice is to live in this new reality or cling to a reality of our own making.” (Velvet Elvis p146)

Rob Bell On the Virgin Birth:

“What if tomorrow someone digs up definitive proof that Jesus had a real, earthly, biological father named Larry, and archeologists find Larry’s tomb and do DNA samples and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the virgin birth was really just a bit of mythologizing the Gospel writers threw in to appeal to the followers of the Mithra and Dionysian religious cults that were hugely popular at the time of Jesus, whose gods had virgin births?

But what if, as you study the origin of the word “virgin” you discover that the word “virgin” in the gospel of Matthew actually comes from the book of Isaiah, and then you find out that in the Hebrew language at that time, the word “virgin” could mean several things. And what if you discover that in the first century being “born of a virgin” also referred to a child whose mother became pregnant the first time she had intercourse?” (Velvet Elvis p26)

Rob Bell On Faith:

“Who does Peter lose faith in? Not Jesus; he is doing fine. Peter loses faith in himself. Peter loses faith that he can do what his rabbi is doing. If the rabbi calls you to be his disciple, then he believes that you can actually be like him. As we read the stories of Jesus’ life with his talmidim, his disciples, what do we find frustrates him to no end? When his disciples lose faith in themselves….. Notice how many places in the accounts of Jesus’ life he gets frustrated with his disciples. Because they are incapable? No, because of how capable they are. He sees what they could be and could do, and when they fall short it provokes him to no end. It isn’t their failure that’s the problem, it’s their greatness. They don’t realize what they are capable of….God has an amazingly high view of people. God believes that people are capable of amazing things. I’ve been told I need to believe in Jesus. Which is a good thing. But what I’m learning is that Jesus believes in me….God has faith in me.” (Velvet Elvis p133-134)

For further reading I recommend Mark Sohmer's scholarly review of Rob Bell's book Velvet Elvis.

Go Back To Part 2
Go Back To Part 1

My Plea To Pastors About Rob Bell (Part 2)

Well it would seem that Ron Dawson, who I spoke about yesterday, is still confused about some things. He has made another lengthy response to yesterdays post (it's in the comments section). As a professing Christian, Ron still doesn't think that itsy bitsy issue of Rob Bell being a universalist is worth splitting hairs over. Ron, I will remind you again that Paul clearly said:

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:8-9)

Furthermore he stated:

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. (Romans 16:17)

Now Ron, please explain how universalism fails to qualify as another gospel?

In Rob Bell's own words:

So this reality, this forgiveness, this reconciliation, is true for everybody. Paul insisted that when Jesus died on the cross he was reconciling ‘all things, in heaven and on earth, to God. This reality then isn’t something we make true about ourselves by doing something. It is already true. Our choice is to live in this new reality or cling to a reality of our own making. (Velvet Elvis p146, emphasis mine)

If everybody is already reconciled to God why were we given the ministry of reconciliation? There are so many things you are confused about. You said that Rob Bell doesn't focus on repentance. Dude - he never talks about it . . . except for when he completely redefines the meaning to something about celebration. Find that meaning of repentance for me Ron? You yourself said that repentance is necessary in order to be saved. You also said that thousands of people are coming to Christ through Rob's teaching. Yet Rob never calls people to repentance. You continually refute yourself. This is just straight orthodoxy Ron. Jesus Himself warned in Luke 13 that "unless you repent you will perish". Sounds a little too much like a Bullhorn guy doesn't it? Paul made it clear that verbal communication of the Gospel message is God's means for bringing people to Christ:

How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!" (Romans 10:14-15)

Where does Paul say that "you are the gospel" or "how shall they see unless you live in the way of Jesus". No - it is verbal, how shall they hear! Yes, we should be salt and light in this evil world as an outward sign of the Spirit's inner work but don't confuse that with preaching the Gospel. This is all a very big deal which is why I am taking the time to try and reason with you about this. I am concerned for you Ron - really! I need to be provocative and jarring to your senses because they have been dulled to the point where you think Rob Bell and I preach the same gospel in different ways. Please wake up!

You also claim that Rob Bell's Bullhorn video is not a caricature. C'mon Ron! He's hired an actor to portray an open-air preacher in a very pathetic light. Yes, there are bad open air preachers out there, but I've never met an open air guy like this (and I've met a lot).



You're telling me that is not a caricature. A nerdy guy making gospel tracts during his work time? If you watch the whole video you see this guy is forgetful, doesn't talk to people around him, and is quite repulsive to everyone in his path. Notice also that all of Rob's criticisms are accusations of the open air preacher saying things that are true including calling people to repentance. You'll also hear that his whole basis for rejecting the validity of open air preaching is pragmatism ie nobody was listening. Pragmatism is not a grounds for rejecting open air preaching (think about Noah 120 years of preaching and noone repented), and even if pragmatism was a legitimate grounds, I can tell you countless stories of drawing hundreds of people to hear the gospel who would never enter a church building. I have seen the subjects of sin, righteousness, and judgment hold the undivided attention of sailors out for a night on the town.

And then Rob caps it all off by saying that he wants to talk to the bullhorn guys - well he doesn't. None of the bullhorn guys can seem to get in touch with him. So he cariciatures them, mocks them for preaching the truth, markets the video, won't respond to the questions of the people he ridicules, and makes money out of the whole thing, all the while making life harder for the those faithful laborers out there preaching in the public square.

It might be lengthy but I think this TV interview with two bullhorn guys will respond to all of Ron's objections and typcasting regarding open air preaching. Ron, please watch this through before writing another comment . . .



Ron, you said you are not a theologian. That is not true. Everyone is a theologian - the question is whether they're a good one or a bad one.

Go On To Part 3
Go Back To Part 1