I have read Rob Bell’s book, Love Wins, and I know this overview/response may not be popular. I only approach the issue as a person who has committed himself to the “faith once for all delivered to the saints,” and as a pastor whose heart is for the Bride of Christ, the Church, and for non-believers who the Bible refers to as lost and in need of being found by the One and Only Savior of the world, Jesus. So, here goes:
The issue at heart in reviewing any book that is concerned with biblical issues, especially one as important as the gospel, is ultimately what has God said, not what the author (in this case, Rob Bell) or any one of us says or hopes will be true about the topic. Because I am responding to a book that is seeking to frame the gospel of Jesus in a new (old) way, I want to be clear:
The ultimate hope of the Gospel is that God triumphs over death, hell, the grave, Satan, rebellious people, and all evil through the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. It’s not simply that “love wins,” but God wins.
According to God’s Word, His righteous wrath will snuff out all evil and its remnants, and a new heaven and a new earth, populated by a redeemed humanity, will go on eternally worshiping and singing the praises of the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ. This is why Jesus commanded that John write down what was revealed to him as found in the book of Revelation. It is not, as many seem to believe, an end-times map. It is a picture of hope that God is ultimately and finally going to vindicate the faith of all who believe in and hope in His Son.
It is not sexy or vogue to talk about condemnation or punishment, and we love to focus upon John 3:16. Equally true, however, are the verses that follow, especially 3:18-21. People who reject the Light do so because they prefer the darkness. Those who choose darkness have been and will be condemned for rejecting the very Savior and God who entered into history and died for their sins.
We do not like to think of God as vengeful or angry, and we cannot even fathom how these concepts fit with His love, but Romans 1:18-32 is very clear about why God’s wrath is being poured out: we have rejected God’s revelation of Himself in creation for gods of our own making. In rejecting God we do not simply reject His love, but we reject all of who God is and what He has done on our behalf, from creation through redemption.
In his book, Bell makes a grave error by staking his entire case upon this one truth: “God is love.” He builds the ideas of an entire book upon this single attribute of God. He essentially states that for God’s love to win, all people, including those in Hell, will eventually respond positively to His love and enter into the new heaven and earth. For the record, there is absolutely no biblical support for post-mortem salvation, and Bell plays fast and loose with the Scriptures he uses to support his beliefs. To do so, he must ignore some of the other attributes of God. I provide three examples to show the fallacy of his argument:
God is holy (Leviticus 19:2; 1 Peter 1:16) – This essentially means that God is perfect in every way–love, justice, mercy, grace, etc. God cannot be partly loving, just, merciful, gracious, or righteous. He is all of these, and He demands perfection. He cannot simply let sin go unpunished. Note: closely connected with His holiness is the truth that He is righteous, which guarantees that His standard is always upheld.
God is just (2 Thessalonians 1:5-10) – God cannot let injustice stand, and acts of sin are the very essence of injustice. Sin affects everyone. This set of verses describes those who do not know God and who refuse to obey the gospel (Repent of sin, believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus) as heading for punishment and “everlasting destruction.”
God is gracious (Psalm 103:8, 13; Romans 3) – God’s grace is freely given, and it is completely unearned and undeserved by humans. However, grace does not nullify God’s other attributes (see Romans 3). God’s grace is received by faith (Romans 5:1-10; Ephesians 2:8-10). Peace with God does not simply come because God loves us. It comes “through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have access by faith into this grace in which we now stand” (Romans 5:1-2).
Some theological systems focus upon God’s sovereignty at the expense of His other attributes while denying man has any true free will. Therefore, God comes across as cold and distant, condemning some and saving others, simply because He can. Other theological systems do a poor job of focusing on God’s love and man’s freedom, thus God comes across as being at man’s beckon call and salvation is contingent solely upon the choice of people. For these people, salvation is not secure, because people are fickle and final salvation ultimately depends upon you and not God. Either way that you look at it, you cannot divorce any one attribute of God from the others. He is at all times loving, holy, just, merciful, gracious, kind. We cannot have a god of our own making because it pleases us or fits neatly within our system.
Another major mistake in the book is that Rob considers all people to be the children of God. This is categorically not true. While we are called His offspring by Paul in Acts 17, this is more akin to a Creator/creation relationship. Otherwise, why would Paul later state the need to be adopted into the family of God, if we are already children of God (Romans 8:12-17)? (Note: The book of Romans was written to believers in the church of Rome. It was not written simply to everyone–believer and unbeliever alike) John 1:1-9 makes it clear that God’s children are those who have been given the right to become His children, not because they were already children, but because they “did receive Him…[and] believed in His name.”
Bell also does a poor job with the meaning of the Greek word translated at various times as “eternal,” “eternity,” or “everlasting.” He essentially says it is better meant as a “long period of time.” However, if Hell is not for eternity, then what hope do we have of “eternal life” actually being forever and not being simply a “long period of time?” He does not explain why it means a “long period of time” for Hell and a literal eternity for the new heaven and new earth. This is just one of the examples where I found that Bell uses ideas only that are convenient for his presentation of Christian universalism.
Another issue is Bell’s postmodern tendency to reject absolute claims in favor of posing questions. Instead of dealing with truth, Bell claims that we are being arrogant to state that those without Christ are separated from Him forever. Thus, his opening salvo on Ghandi. Bell asks if we can be sure that Ghandi is in hell. While I don’t know what happened in the moments preceding his death, I can state, upon the truth of Scripture, that Ghandi, or anyone else, who has not accepted the gift of salvation graciously offered by the great God and Savior, Jesus, is in Hell for rejecting the love and truth of God. This may not be popular, but it is the only consistent way to view the truth claims of Jesus and the biblical authors. Will we be surprised by who is in heaven, sure, but not for the reason Bell states. The surprise will be those who are in heaven that we did not know believed the gospel and those who won’t be in heaven because they claimed to believe but they never had true faith (1 John 2:18-19).
In his interviews Bell has done a disservice to everyone by claiming “I believe Jesus is the only way to God” and “I am not a universalist.” He can only do so because he completely redefines the meaning of both. Rob should simply come out and be intellectually honest. You cannot say, “My book was simply exploring the possibility that everyone will be saved.” Why write the book open-ended like that if you don’t believe what you’ve written? This is harmful and only gives a false sense of hope. How ridiculous would it be for me to write a book saying, “We should explore the possibility that child abuse is actually a biblical principle,” then for me to say, “I don’t believe that it is, I was simply asking the question.”
I wanted to scream “ANSWER THE QUESTIONS STRAIGHT UP, ROB!” at the book (and later, the tv).
We have bought into a pathetically weak Savior who is simply my “Homeboy” Jesus, and we have stripped the gospel of its power when we refuse to accept that our sin is revolting to God. His absolute holiness demands that it must be dealt with. His absolute love demands that He make a way for us. Both truths can stand. What cannot stand is to pretend like sin isn’t such a big deal. Jesus died for our sins, and He rose again to provide victory for those in bondage to sin (1 Corinthians 15). That is a big deal. We cannot escape that reality.
From this, Rob says that penal, substitutionary atonement (that Jesus absorbed God’s wrath in our place as a sacrifice for sin) is not an idea that should be carried over in the 21st century. He says that it is akin to saying that Jesus died to save us from God. He hates this idea, but it is the truth of Scripture. God poured out His wrath, meant for us, upon Himself through the sending and death of His Son. He saves us from Himself by saving us from ourselves through our rebellious shaking of our fists at Him–if we humbly receive His grace.
Rob thinks we need to move beyond the biblical revelation and find a way to communicate the cross that is not offensive to modern ears. Jesus on the cross is a good example to be followed. True, but it is so much more. It was a sacrifice for us!
Sacrifices are bloody, disturbing, and unquestionably disgusting. Isaiah prophesied that the Suffering Servant would be one from whom men hid their faces (Is. 53). Modern people need to be shocked into the reality that the world is not a good place with bad tendencies and people who only make bad decisions but are basically good. That is the fallacy of the Western world. The world was created perfect and is being destroyed by sin and its effects, because we are rebellious, sin-filled people. The sacrifice of Jesus, broken, bloodied, and horrific, upon the cross should shock our sensibilities and force us to come face-to-face with the terrible wrath of God.
While we should show grace and mercy to people who sin, we should do so while demanding what Jesus called the gospel of God, “Repent and believe the good news.” We have lost repentance and brokenness for sin. We don’t see sin as such a big deal. We encourage people in their sin and don’t demand holiness, all in the name of not being judgmental. It is not judgment or hypocrisy to hold people accountable to the standard of Scripture. It is just as hypocritical to call oneself a believer and then live as though sin doesn’t matter, refusing to repent, as it is to say that cheating on your taxes is evil in the sight of God while cheating on your taxes. Both are egregious acts of hypocrisy and sin.
I hate that any human being will suffer eternally in hell, and any Christian who thinks otherwise does not understand the fullness of God’s revelation. To feel differently is to refuse to believe the truth of 2 Peter 3:8-9 that God’s desire is that all will come to repentance. God is patient, and no one who desires salvation is going to be rejected (Hebrews 11:6). On this point Rob and I can agree: Love wins, and God will not force us to love Him, because that would not be love. Love is a choice to be made. However, a good, righteous, holy, and just love wins. We must define love as it relates to the entirety of God’s Word.
This is why I can understand Rob’s hope. However, if God’s Word is true, and Rob’s hope is false, then the gospel of Christ is at stake. Hope in Rob’s ideas about salvation will disappoint, but hope in God’s promises will not put us to shame (Romans 5:5). I believe that Rob’s idea is dangerous and will lead people to focus on a gospel that just is not found anywhere in the Bible.
There is no incentive to preach the Good News or become a Christ-follower or live for God in the here and now if I can take my lumps and still make it to heaven. What’s a few thousand years in hell when I can still get to be with God in the new heaven and earth at some point while living however I want in this life?
The gospel is both radically inclusive (whoever believes) and exclusive at the same time. We cannot simply choose to believe in the inclusivity of the gospel and ignore the exclusive claims of God’s Word. I am afraid that Rob has chosen the path of postmodern uncertainty instead of staking his claims of the gospel on the unchanging word of God. Or, as Paul stated, “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ, for it is the power of God to save all who believe” (Romans 1:16). No one is forced to believe the gospel, but for those who do believe, they will be saved. This is our only hope!
Nicely done, Joey. Thanks for lending your voice to this discussion.