Answering Rob Bell #3

I mentioned previously that Bell’s most egregious error lies in the field of hermaneutics, the interpretation of Scripture. If you have been following my installments, we have come to a perfect example with his treatment of the renewal/restoration of everything.

A fundamental tenet of honest interpretation is that one must not contradict or violate clearly taught principles when interpreting less clear passages. The words renewed, restored or reconciled as found in the passages Bell quotes for support (Matthew 19; Acts 3; Colossians 1) must be defined carefully. Each of these words in the original language, as in English, has the prefix meaning “again” or “back to,” as in “back to” the original state. Whether one believes in a literal Edenic new creation on this terrestrial ball, or some form of new which is not material but spiritual, it is not inherent in the language that all creatures who ever lived and all states of the earth will partake in the newness. Those things extant at the time of the renewal will be made new or restored to their original state. Nothing is implied about souls or states which previously existed. To claim they partake in the renewal is to go beyond the plain meaning of the words.

Likewise the words “everything” and “everybody” must be discriminated. Each of the passages Bell cites refers to the state of being in Christ or under Christ’s rule and authority. Therefore it is correct to say that “everybody” in Christ will enjoy the blessings of union with him throughout the ages. Sadly, the Bible is quite clear that there will be those not found in Christ, but who will nonetheless reluctantly acknowledge him: “Every knee shall bow…” says Paul in Philippians 2, giving no indication that every knee afterward unbends to find a welcome in heaven. Note also that Paul says this bowing of every knee is, “to the glory of God,” contrary to Bell’s assertion that “never-ending punishment doesn’t [glorify God]” (page 108.)

Continuing on this line of thinking, I find it significant that Bell does not consider the impact of Romans ninth chapter in Love Wins. No surprise; two things there soundly rebut his core argument. First, Paul asks, “What if God… has endured with much patience the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory – even us whom he has called?” (Romans 9:22-23) This seems to say that vessels chosen for destruction do in fact contribute to his glory. It also says that some are called, chosen while others are not.

This idea of election is carried from earlier in the chapter where Paul has asserted that God’s choice of Jacob over Esau was entirely unilateral, sovereign (verse 11.) This point is made by Paul to underscore his claim that, “not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel.” Elsewhere in Love Wins, Bell has declared that when Paul says all Israel shall be saved, Paul intends universal salvation. Quite the contrary, this is another biblical statement that only those in the family of faith, those in Christ will be saved. Paul echoes this again in verse twenty-seven quoting Isaiah: “Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved.” This is the opposite of what Bell tries to make out.

Several interesting questions are raised in what was just presented. What is glory and how does God get it: can bad things glorify God? What is God’s purpose in election? Why did God make us in the first place? Unlike Bell, who throughout Love Wins asks questions, then answers with more questions, I will attempt to answer the ones I ask in later installments. In the meantime, I recommend the book to anyone who enjoys a good debate. It presents an attractive answer to some hard questions that have been dancing around the church since Jesus died. I just think they are dancing to the wrong tune.