Bell Blurb #1

Yesterday I snagged the digital edition of Rob Bell's new book Love Wins A Book about Heaven, Hell and the Fate of Every Person You Ever Lived. I love buying books for less than half of what they used to cost. And Bell's a star, so there's also that I'm-a-famous-author-now premium you pay for books like his in print.

I plan to post about it here, responding chapter-by-chapter to what I'm reading.

Having read his first book, Velvet Elvis, I'll admit that my tastes don't really run in Bell's direction, but I was intrigued enough by advance publicity to read his latest.

The advance promotions stirred up a significant controversy among leading evangelicals. For example, John Piper upon hearing of the publisher's promotions tweeted "Farewell Rob Bell". Before any of the most critical leaders had had a chance read it, they were sure that Bell had finally put his cards on the table and come out of the closet as a universalist. Maybe. I'm two chapters in, and that's not clear yet.

What is clear is that this author know his audience, and it's not John Piper. Bell writes for two types of readers. First, he's writing for those who aren't of the Christian Faith. Those who have made a conscious or implicit decision about Christianity and its claims and found it wanting. These aren't drug addicts, pimps, or axe murders. These are people who we would describe as decent folk. People we'd be happy to have as neighbors, who have rejected Christianity because of what they believe it teaches, specifically about a loving God and the eternal fate of people.

I think this is his primary audience, but I think he has a second group in mind: younger evangelicals who have grown up in the church, but were never given the opportunity to ask the hard questions. Before they became adults, these people were wrapped in a gauzy certainty that kept the tough questions at bay. They could never ask provocative questions without enduring the pressure to conform to evangelical culture, which is something altogether different from evangelical faith.

The irony is striking. Their questions were silenced by the dogmatics that grew out of centuries-old Christians asking the very same questions.

And that's exactly how Bell begins his book, with tough questions. He's not afraid to ask them of himself and his reader. He starts the book with a story about Gandhi that leads him to the questions, "Gandhi's in Hell? Really? You know this for sure?"

The question was presented nakedly in the book's promotions, and was enough by itself to bring down charges of heresy and universalism on Bell's head. But it underscores a larger question the book poses: what does Jesus say about Heaven, Hell, and the fate of everyone who ever lived?

I wish I had his answer right now, but you read a book from front to back, so I honestly don't know yet where Rob Bell is going to take me.

In chapter one, he simply sets the table without serving the meal. That begins in chapter two. He's certainly whet my appetite though.

Comments

GodSide said…
From what I hear he doesn't ever "serve the meal..." prepare to leave hungry.

Have you watched any of the interviews? I posted about watching a couple interviews and discussing it in my seminary class this week. Check it out.
Smitch said…
Thanks for stopping by Kurt. I did read your post and watched the MSNBC clip you posted.
nicklas said…
OK... way late to weigh in, but I saw this while reading about Gumby (the twist-it clayish figure was cool enough to come up with some ways to torture a toy that I hadn't considered before him - but the show, IMHO, was lame - it only got my attention because it was the single cartoon-like show on Sunday mornings in the good ole' days).

At any rate... Kurt was right. He didn't serve the meal. Lot's of provocative questions, half-answers and avoidance of some hard texts (so what should we understand from "their worm will not die"). I would like to have seen him take a more orthodox approach to hard questions (by orthodox, I don't mean evangelical culture, but historical Christianity). His readers will walk away with a vague, less-than-satisfying explanation of the very issues he raises.

It reminded me of the way Erasmus defended free will. He tried to make everybody happy and tried to fit it all into a polite jar... he ended up saying nothing.

Popular posts from this blog

Preachers or Pushers?

Being White Isn't About PIgment

Why 1984 Was Exactly Like 1984.