Monday, April 11, 2011

"Love Wins?" a Critique of Rob Bell's New Book

Many thanks to my friend Marcia Montenegro, author of the Christian Answers for the New Age (CANA) website, for writing a thoughtful critique of Rob Bell's controversial new book Love Wins.  Marcia's critique can be read in its entirety below.


 LOVE WINS? BY ROB BELL? 

Rob Bell’s latest book, Love Wins, reached number one status on Amazon and is making quite a splash due to its controversial questions and statements that seem to indicate Rob Bell is not on the same page on certain topics as other evangelical Christians. Bell promoted this book with a series of questions, hence the question marks in the title. The main issues are the matter of eternal separation from God, called the “second death” in Revelation (20:6, 14; 21:8), the issue of exclusivity of the Christian faith.

Although Rob Bell is ambiguous in some parts of the book, and many have claimed it is difficult to know where he stands, there are also rather clear statements indicating certain views that he favors. However, the book also preserves Bell’s reputation as the master of the oblique.

It is not the purpose of this evaluation to address all of Bell’s points or all the troubling statements in the book. Therefore, only the most crucial topics, in the view of this writer, will be covered.

 Straw Men 

There are so many straw men set-ups in this book that the reader may have to brush straw off the pages. Two examples will suffice. Bell does this when he is critiquing other Christians and the evangelical church in general. For example, Bell is discussing what the gospel is and states that “A gospel that has as its chief message avoiding hell or not sinning will never be the full story” (p. 135).

First of all, who says that this is the chief message of the gospel? Do all Christians state that this is the “chief message” of the gospel? Well, no, they don’t. Although hell can be a part of the message, the chief message is, according to the Bible, that Jesus atoned for man’s sins on the cross through his death, was buried, and bodily rose, appearing to many (see especially 1 Cor. 15:1-5). Before his death and resurrection, Jesus was proclaiming the gospel (Mark 1:15) and the message was to “repent and believe.” Believe in Jesus as the prophesied Messiah and the Son of God for eternal life (some verses on this are Luke 8:12; John 1:12, 3:15-18, 4:25-26, 5:24, 6:47, 8:24, 11:25-26).

Secondly, the “not sinning” here has no relevance to the gospel. The gospel is not about not sinning; it’s about being freed from the penalty and power of sin (and ultimately the presence of sin). Sanctification, which occurs as a believer grows in Christ, includes resisting sin through the power of the Holy Spirit, but not through the power of one’s own strength or abilities.

Another straw man is Bell’s portrait of the God he (Bell) thinks most Christians believe or communicate to others: an unstable, capricious God who is “loving one second and cruel the next” (p. 175), one who can “switch gears” and be “loving one moment, vicious the next” (p. 174) because of a belief in hell. This is apparently how Bell views a God in a world where hell exists, at least a hell where people spend eternity. The problem with this is twofold: 1) This is not the God that is revealed in the Bible, and 2) A reality of an eternal hell does not mean that God is like this. It is astonishing that a pastor with years of experience, and with a Masters of Divinity, does not seem to understand the attributes of God.

 God’s Love and Wrath on Sin 

Bell claims that “God’s very essence” is love (p. 177), and is “an endless giving circle of joy and creativity” (p. 179), the latter a description that gives this writer a flashback into the New Age! Bell also seems upset that God has any wrath at all, and he presents a distorted view of the Biblical picture of God’s wrath (pp. 182-184).

God is love, but His holiness and righteousness require His wrath on sin. Jesus himself said, “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:18). Writing in Romans 5:9 to those who have believed in Christ, Paul declares under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that believers have been saved from “the wrath of God” through Christ. Christians, before believing in Christ, were “by nature children of wrath” (Eph. 2:3; also see Rom. 3:5; Eph. 5:6; Col. 3:6; 1 Thess. 1:10). Salvation through Christ is contrasted with experiencing God’s wrath in 1 Thess. 5:9.

God is not loving one moment, then wrathful the next. His attributes, such as love, wrath on sin, righteousness, mercy, grace, patience, and justice, are always present and always in balance. God is not lopsided, with one attribute outweighing others, and God is not volatile, going from one attribute to another in a flash. Such are the fickle natures of pagan gods, not the true living God. Yet Bell seems offended that anyone would point out that God can be wrathful, even though this is what God Himself tells us.

 Bell loves a Mystery! 

The word “mystery” crops up several times toward the end of the book. Bell describes Jesus as a “mystery . . . hidden in God” (p. 150), a “mystery present in all creation” (p. 159), and a mystery hiding “in the naked and hungry and sick and lonely” in Matthew 25 (p. 160). Jesus is also a mystery that people “trip on” and “stumble upon” without knowing it is Jesus (p. 160). This raises the issue of Inclusivism, to be addressed later.

Jesus is described as a mystery in the Bible, but only in the sense that in the past he was not revealed but now has been revealed (Rom. 16:25-27; Col. 1:25-27, 2:2, 4:3; 1 Tim. 3:16). “Mystery” in the New Testament refers to information that God has now disclosed (other mysteries are that Gentiles and Jews can be one in Christ [Eph. 3], the mystery of the church as the body of Christ [Eph. 5:32], and the future bodily resurrection of believers [1 Cor. 15:51]). Although Bell admits that Jesus is a mystery “now being revealed” (p. 149), he continues to describe Jesus as a mystery and implies that Jesus exists in a mystical way in the universe.

Jesus is no longer a mystery. This does not mean we know everything there is to know or that we cannot learn more about Jesus. Since Jesus is God the Son, no finite mind can totally comprehend Him. However, as far as what God wants humanity to know, the mystery of Jesus has been divulged.

To keep talking about Jesus as a mystery may allow Bell to question things already clearly stated in God’s word, and may give Bell reason to raise doubts in people’s minds. After all, if Jesus is still such a mystery, then who can really be sure about anything concerning Jesus, heaven, hell, eternal life, etc.? However, this is not the case since Jesus has been revealed and the biblical message about Jesus is quite lucid.

 Heaven, Hell, Now, Later -- Whatever 

The issue of hell and eternal life is interwoven tightly with other facets of the book, so it’s difficult to untangle and lay out as one long visible string. Bell defines eternal life as something that starts now, not after death. It is true that God’s word speaks of one having eternal life now upon belief in Christ: for example, “This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (John 17:3; see also John 3:36, 5:24, 6:47, 10:28; 1 John 5:11, 13, 20), and that eternal life continues into the future. But Bell speaks of this eternal life as an equivalent of heaven on earth right now.

Bell announces that “Jesus lived and spoke as if the whole world was a thin place for him, with endless dimensions of the divine infinitesimally close, with every moment and every location simply another experience of the divine reality that is all around us, through us, under and above us, all the time” (p. 60). Bell offers no scripture to support this dramatic assertion. Of course, Jesus, being both God and man, was in constant communion with God the Father, but that has nothing to do with an alleged “divine reality.”

The term “thin place” has come into vogue through mystical spirituality that asserts certain places are somehow closer to God than other places. This is very reminiscent for me as a former New Ager of the so-called “sacred places” touted in the New Age, because in that view there are spaces more saturated with divine energy than others. However, God tells us that the earth is fallen and in bondage to death (Genesis 3), awaiting its redemption from corruption (Romans 8).

Likewise, hell is something that can be experienced now according to Bell. This is the theme of his third chapter where he uses the story of Lazarus (which he calls a parable, although many believe this is an actual account), and the parable of the prodigal son to illustrate that the older son is already in hell through his jealousy and small-mindedness, while the son has heaven when he returns and is forgiven by his father.

Bell seems to be reading meanings into the text that are not there, such as saying that the story of Lazarus is “an affirmation that there all kinds of hells,” such as “individual hells, communal, society-wide hells,” “hell now,” and “hell later” that Jesus is teaching us to take “seriously” (p. 79). There is no basis in the text for these statements. The actual point of this account is that the rich man was judged after death, was not with God, and could not be released from his torment, while Lazarus was with God (“paradise” and the “bosom of Abraham” is believed by some to represent being with God).

Bell claims that Ezekiel 16 promises that Sodom and Gomorrah will be restored in such a way that this indicates that “the story isn’t over for Sodom and Gomorrah.” Bell states that condemnation is not forever, but there is “destruction and restoration” (p. 84). He also uses Jesus’ statement in Matthew 10 that things will be “more bearable” for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for Capernaum to imply that everything will be alright one day for those who are punished.

However, Bell is misapplying these passages, which are not promises that anyone who is separated from God after death will one day be with God. In Ezekiel 16-17, God is rebuking Jerusalem for falling into pagan idolatry (which included sacrificing their children) and in Ezekiel 16:53, states that the “captivity of Sodom” will be restored. There is nothing positive being said about Sodom. Indeed, being compared to Sodom is the ultimate insult to Jerusalem.

Matthew Henry states that “The captivity of the wicked Jews, and their ruin, shall be as irrevocable as that of Sodom and Samaria.” Henry continues: “Sodom and Samaria were never brought back, nor ever returned to their former estate, and therefore let not Jerusalem expect it, that is, those who now remained there, whom God would deliver to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt.”

The passage in Matthew 10 is a statement to the effect that the punishment of Sodom and Gomorrah would be less severe than that for a city that disbelieves the gospel of Christ. In Matthew 11:23, 24, Jesus rebukes Capernaum for not repenting after seeing His miracles, and states that their punishment will be more severe than that for Sodom. This is a rebuke to Capernaum and other cities for disbelieving Christ, not a promise of something good for Sodom!

Bell asserts that “at the center of Christian tradition” have been a “number” of those who have claimed that hell is not forever and one day, “all will be reconciled to God” (p. 109). He also declares that this issue is one we can’t answer and can’t resolve, so it has to be left open (p. 115). Both of these claims are untrue. First of all, although there have been Christians and people in the church who have denied that hell is eternal, this view has never been at “the center of Christian tradition.” It has been outside it.

Secondly, it is not true that this issue cannot be resolved. The biblical evidence for eternal separation from God is firm; those who play word games with the Hebrew and Greek words translated as “hell,” “eternal,” and “forever” hit one wall every time: if the Greek translated as “eternal” to describe hell really means a temporary time, then what does it mean when God uses the same word for eternal life through Christ? The Greek word used in Matthew 18:8 for “eternal fire” is used in Hebrews 5:9 for “eternal salvation,” and for “eternal punishment” and “eternal life” in Matthew 25:46 and 25:41, as well as for “eternal life” in John 3:15, 16. Yet Bell insists that this phrase can mean “a period of pruning” (p. 91).

By minimizing hell, Bell minimizes heaven. If eternal separation from God is translated as temporary, then how are we to view eternal life with God? Is that also temporary? Why does the word mean temporary for separation from God but becomes “eternal” for life with God?

 Inclusivism 

Bell discusses the rock that gave water in the wilderness when Moses struck it and how Paul in 1 Cor. 10:4 writes that the rock is Christ (pp. 142-143). Because the Hebrews did not know at the time that this rock was Christ, Bell concludes that today people can encounter Christ through other forms or mediums and not realize it.

This conclusion by Bell is invalid for several reasons. Jesus was not literally the rock that Moses struck. Rather, the rock is used as a metaphor for Jesus to New Testament believers, and the message is to warn them against idolatry and immorality and other sins that snared the people with Moses (1 Cor. 10:6-11). This passage was written to rebuke the believers at Corinth who were immorally behaving when celebrating the Lord’s Supper, and remains a warning to believers today as a reminder of the serious nature of the Lord’s Supper and what it represents.

Bell expands on this rock topic to claim that other rocks are out there today, and people may drink from them and not know that it is Christ. Revealingly, the chapter is titled “There Are Rocks Everywhere.”

The gospel (or Jesus, it’s difficult to say), Bell proposes, is a “mystery” present in “all creation” (in a mystical sense) and people stumble on it, not knowing it is Christ (pp. 157-159); and “Sometimes people use his [Christ’s] name; other times they don’t” (p. 158). Since “none of us have cornered the market on Jesus” (p. 158, another straw man!), then Jesus can be known in many ways, without the person knowing the historical Jesus or knowing about his death or resurrection. Bell misuses several Scriptures to support this stance.

Bell writes that Jesus “will always transcend whatever cages and labels are created to contain and name him, especially the one called ‘Christianity,’” (p. 150), but Bell offers no basis for this claim. What about God’s word as the basis for labeling Jesus as the Son of God, the Second Person of the Trinity, the Savior, the Redeemer, the founder and head of the church, the author of our salvation, the Good Shepherd, the Vine, the Door, and many others?

Continuing, Bell declares that Jesus is “supracultural” and “is present within all cultures, and yet outside of all cultures” (p. 151), again without offering evidence. It is true that Jesus does not belong to any particular culture, outside of having been Jewish in his incarnation on earth, but Bell makes these avowals to bolster a concept called Inclusivism (also see pp. 154-157), which is the view that salvation can be applied to those who have not believed specifically in Jesus.

One source explains Inclusivism as the view “that even though the work of Christ is the only means of salvation, it does not follow that explicit knowledge of Christ is necessary in order for one to be saved. In contrast to pluralism, Inclusivism agrees with exclusivism in affirming the particularity of salvation in Jesus Christ. But unlike exclusivism, Inclusivism holds that an implicit faith response to general revelation can be salvific.”

Inclusivism is not universalism, which is the position that all people are saved, or go to heaven, based on God’s love and acceptance, despite sin. "Christian Inclusivism" acknowledges that the saving work of Christ is necessary for salvation, but salvation can be applied to those who may not know Christ, or may come by knowing Christ through other religions. Inclusivism encompasses many forms and perspectives, but it does not necessarily exclude the concept of hell or even eternal separation from God.

Bell seems to embrace "Christian Inclusivism" along with the idea that although there is a hell, it is temporary. Therefore, Bell does not deny the atoning work of Jesus nor does he deny the existence of hell. This has made it tricky for some to decipher Bell’s beliefs.

 Panentheism 

Intimations of a mystical energy or force pop up in the book. The first is the term “divine reality” (pp. 60-61). By itself, this is insufficient cause for scrutiny. However, later in the book, when Bell labels Christ a “mystery” and seems to use the term in an almost impersonal sense to refer to Christ himself, it becomes more problematic (p. 150, pp. 157-160).

Prefacing some words on Jesus, Bell writes about “an energy in the world, a spark, an electricity that everything is plugged into” which is “Spirit” to the mystics, and “Obi-Wan called it ‘the Force’” (p. 144). Bell continues on this theme, asserting that “this energy, spark, and electricity pulses through all creation” (p. 145). Although Bell states the Bible does not explain it this way in the “creation poem,” as he calls it, he does not deny this energy as real, and seems to link it to the Word of God as the “energy that gives life to everything,” and then links that to being in Jesus as “a divine life-giving energy” (pp. 145-146).

Jesus is “the sacred power present in every dimension of creation” (p. 158), the “mystery present in all of creation” (pp. 157, 159), “the mystery hidden in the fabric of creation,” and the “joy that fills the entire universe” (p. 181). Really? These descriptions make Jesus a part of creation. However, the universe was created from nothing by God and is distinct from the Trinitarian God. The world is also fallen, and a holy God is not in any way an element of a corrupted creation.

Pantheism is the view that God is all, and is present in creation with no existence outside it. Panentheism, a related philosophy, is the belief that God is contained in creation but also transcends it. Bell refers to Christ as a person and historical figure, and nothing indicates he is a pantheist. However, it appears he is either adopting some panentheistic views, or at least is using the language of panentheism.

Panentheism works with Bell’s inclusivism. If Jesus is a “mystery present in all of creation” and cultures, a “stunning, dangerous, compelling, subversive, dynamic reality,” (p. 152) that people can stumble on or drink from without knowing it, then it would certainly seem narrow and harsh (Bell uses stronger terms) to claim salvation comes only through knowing and trusting the historical Jesus of the Bible, which is exactly what Bell is proposing.

 A Challenge 

There are some good points Bell makes in this book although they are overshadowed by the disturbing ones. However, raising these issues challenges Christians to re-evaluate how they support their own views based on God’s word. One good thing that can result from this book would be for Christians to dig into God’s word to see what God really does say on these topics. Those reading this book should also check every passage or chapter that Bell refers to (he refers to quite a few) and read it for themselves, in context.


Love Wins at one point was number 1 on Amazon, and when I checked it was at number 3. As this evaluation is written, it is now at 15. This is an accomplishment and says a lot about the number of copies that are selling. Because of the stir created by this book, Christians will look to pastors, teachers, and others in the church, especially those dealing with young adults and teens (the usual targets for Bell), for responses to Bell’s attacks on the truths of God’s word. Resources are given below this article.
“The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son. And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.” (1 John 5:10-12)

 FURTHER RESOURCES: 







 Response to Inclusivism 


 Books on Hell 


Hell Under Fire, edited by Christopher W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson

Four Views on Hell, Contributors John Walvoord, William Crockett, Zachary Hayes, and Clark Pinnock

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Rob Bell Answers His Critics....But Don't Be Fooled

Megachurch pastor Rob Bell, a prominent leader in the Emergent Church Movement, has recently released a YouTube video in which he makes what sounds almost like a creedal statement, presumably as a rebuttal to all who are rightly calling his new book "Love Wins" the heresy that it is.  But please don't be fooled by Bell's persuasive, sing-songy honeyed words: no matter what he proclaims in this video, Rob Bell affirms a Universalist heresy known as "Universal Reconciliation/Christian Universalism" throughout his newly released book.  Here is the video, which we've also transcribed, and then below that we've given our response to Bell's statement:





The RobBellion Creed
"My name is Rob and I live in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and I'm a Christian.
And I believe in Jesus, and
I believe Jesus is the way, and
I believe in heaven, and
I believe in hell, and
I believe the Bible is God's word, and
I'm not a universalist, because I believe God's love is so great God lets you decide.
I believe in the communion of the saints,
I believe the church is the fullness,
I believe in the new heaven and a new earth,
I believe in healing,
I believe in miracles,
I believe in salvation,
I believe in the power of prayer,
I believe that God is alive and working,
I believe there's been a resurrection and that there's a whole new creation bursting forth right here in the midst of this one, and
I also believe it's best to only discuss books you've actually read."

 Sola Sisters Response 

So let me get this straight: Rob Bell writes an ENTIRE book laying out his case for Universalism, and then when people start calling him on it, he stands up and gives this I-am-not-a-universalist creed with a straight face. And just listen to the people whooping and hollering in the background (Yeah, you tell 'em Rob! They can't slander you like that!) Uh, what? Have I fallen down the rabbit hole, and ended up in Wonderland where nothing is as it appears, and words are plastic-y playthings that only mean what the speaker wants them to mean?

As persuasive of a speaker as Rob Bell is, I emphatically and categorically reject Bell's attempt to frame himself as orthodox by making the above statement. As we've written here before, we fully expected Rob Bell to affirm all of the things he does on this video because he already affirms them in his book "Love Wins." (And yes, I did actually read the book.....and so according to Rob Bell's own statement, I am therefore allowed to have an opinion!) In all seriousness, the problem here is that - like any classic cult member - Bell is rejecting the biblical definitions of all those things he is affirming. Rob Bell has conjured up his own redefined versions of these Christian beliefs he is supposedly affirming.  A few examples:

....a false "Jesus" as "the mechanism" who makes entry for all into heaven (Bell's version, p. 154 "Love Wins") as compared to

.....the historical person of Jesus (and the Jesus of the Bible) who makes atonement only for those who come to the Cross through repentance and faith in this life (God's version)

and,

.....Hell, as a period of "pruning" in which God is continuing to woo each person who is there until they end up in heaven (Bell's version, p. 91 "Love Wins") as compared to

......Hell as an eternal punishment for those who have broken God's moral laws, and who are paying the penalty of their sins with their own lives (God's version).

The Bible has spoken clearly and authoritatively about all of these Christian concepts that Bell has "affirmed." To be in rebellion to God's Word is to also be in rebellion to Jesus himself, who in Scripture is known as "the Word." God would not have supernaturally written and preserved the inerrant Word of God for us if He didn't desire for us to fully and deeply know him, and also know what He requires of us.

I exhort my brothers and sisters in Christ to reject this wolf in sheep's clothing who attempts to use Christian terminology to assert orthodoxy, but who has revealed in his book "Love Wins" an arrogant disdain for the revealed Word of God. Make no mistake: the emergent church movement is a Christian cult, and in my view, the fastest growing one in existence today. Beware, beware, beware.
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires." (2 Timothy 4:3)

 Additional Resources 









Thursday, April 7, 2011

The Problems With "WWJD?" - A Thoughtful Look at a Christian Movement

Pastor Robert W. Glenn of Redeemer Bible Church in Minnetonka, MN has written a thoughtful critique of the very popular Christian movement WWJD?  WWJD? is a movement that began in the 1990s among evangelical Christians as an exhortation to Christians that they should act and live in a manner that demonstrates the love of Christ. Obviously, the desire among those who started this movement was for the Lord's name to be glorified by Christians heeding this exhortation to live mindfully and biblically in a lost and spiritually dark world. The movement manifested itself in all manner of items that bore the letters "WWJD?" (t-shirts, coffee mugs, plagues, bumper stickers, bracelets, etc.). So what on earth could be wrong with that? Well, I'm glad you asked. Pastor Robert Glenn's article below lays out a number of very thoughtful reasons why this movement is not just a harmless fad.

 The Problems With "WWJD?" - A Thoughtful Look at a Christian Movement 

The fad may be over, but that doesn't mean the spirit of WWJD? isn't still alive and kicking. It is. And although it may sound pretty harmless, even helpful, I would suggest that the WWJD? mentality is more sinister than it may at first appear. Here are seven reasons:

1.  It can turn Christianity into moralism. Now you might think, “Wait a second! God himself tells us to imitate Jesus in passages like 1 John 2:6.  How, then, can asking, 'What would Jesus do?'  turn Christianity into moralism?” Answer: because the question doesn't assume our undeserved acceptance through the gospel. In other words, if it is not clear to me that my call to ask “What would Jesus do?” is only Christian in light of what Jesus has already done, then my default mode will be to see the imitation of Christ as the means to God’s acceptance rather than a response to the truth that I am already accepted solely on the basis of what Jesus has already done for me on the cross.

2.  It can feed our self-righteousness...because we measure and define ourselves and justify our existence by how well we imitate Jesus. This is self-righteousness – whatever you look to in life to justify your existence apart from Jesus' righteousness. So don’t turn self-righteousness into a caricature of itself, like how so many Pharisees are depicted in the movies and thereby get yourself off the hook. Self-righteousness is looking to anything other than Jesus’ righteousness as the justification for your existence. And by reducing the Christian faith to imitating Jesus, you will look to your practice of Christian morality to justify your existence rather than Jesus’ absolute moral perfection given to you as a gift of sheer grace. And when you do that, you move decidedly away from the Christian gospel.

3.  It can engender “Christian Bipolar.” If you embrace WWJD? as a summary of the gospel, then when you’ve had a “good” day, you’ll feel accepted by the Lord, and when you’ve had a “bad” day, you’ll feel rejected by him. Your sense of assurance will vary by the circumstances of your life, which makes for a very volatile relationship with God - something the heavenly father does not want for you.


4.  It can breed feelings of insecurity and superiority. On the one hand, if your conscience is at all sensitive, you’ll come to realize that the idea of a good day or a bad day is a mirage; instead, you’ll have good minutes and bad minutes, which eventually will all turn into complete badness because you’ll always be able to find some way in which you did not love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength or your neighbor as yourself! And so you'll feel defeated and hopeless. On the other hand, if you're not so sensitive, and find that you are doing what Jesus did, you’ll tend to be very self-congratulatory and superior to people who just can’t seem to get with the program.

5.  It can enflame a sense of entitlement with God. Your "success" at doing what Jesus did can lead you to conclude that God owes you something: “What’s all this obedience for if God is still not going to give me a husband?”; “What’s the point of all my WWJD? if God doesn't rescue me from the financial trouble I’m in?” From here, you’ll find yourself very angry with God…and then you’ll rip your bracelet from your wrist and throw it in the garbage and say, “I’m done with ‘What would Jesus do?’! Now I’m gonna play a new game, ‘What would I do?'! And what I would do is have some fun for a change!"

6.  It can turn Christianity into a (sub-) culture: Wear this, do this, don’t do that…etc.  If you have the bracelet and wear the T-shirt, you are a Christian. And because we tend to identify Christians by what they say no to or what they wear or what magnet is on their car or whether or not they go to church regularly, we will stop preaching the gospel to an important group of people who desperately need it – people who think they're Christians because of what they wear, but in reality are not Christians at all!

7.  It can give people a false sense of assurance. “Since I prayed 'the prayer' and wear the WWJD? bracelet, then I must be a Christian. Who would wear something to call attention to his Christianity if he weren't really a Christian?" Answer: religious hypocrites.

Here's the problem: because WWJD? is a slogan, it tends to function as a distillation or reduction of Christianity, and as such, it does a very poor job.  If you were to sum up the Christian faith, it would not be, “What would Jesus do?” It would be: "What has Jesus done?" This, then, would drive our obedience and passion for being like Jesus. Considering what he's done for me, considering how much love he has shown me, how can I now do what I now know grieves and displeases him?  In other words, his love for me creates a proper sense of obligation – you feel compelled to live for someone who did so much for you.

Robert W Glenn
Redeemer Bible Church, Minnetonka, MN

www.solidfoodmedia.com
www.redeemerbiblechurch.com
http://redmeatforthesoul.wordpress.com/

photo credit: DylanHartmann.com via photopin cc

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

A Book That Connects The Dots


I grew up in a very liberal church that was known for its generosity, its large food bank, and its many social programs to help the community. Our church was in a beautiful old building that was on the historic register. Our church was also one of the few buildings left standing after Sherman's famous march through Atlanta, and had long been rumored to have served as a makeshift hospital during the civil war. When our church undertook the task of renovating this building, blood stains were discovered in the hardwoods beneath the carpet that was pulled up, giving credence to this legend, and adding to the mystique and historic charm of this lovely building.

But - was the gospel ever preached? After all, that is the primary function of a church, to speak life-giving truth to the lost and to disciple the saved.

I honestly can't say that I ever heard the gospel: that there was a sovereign creator God who had made me, and who owned me, and against whom I had sinned by breaking his moral laws. That I had no righteousness of my own with which to approach this holy God. That I was doomed and damned without supernatural intervention of some sort. But, that God, being rich in mercy and loving-kindness, had intervened, and had made a way for sinful man to be made right with him. That he sent his Son, who lived a perfect life, never sinning in thought, word or deed, and who, because of this, was able to offer up his life as a ransom for many. I broke God's laws, and Jesus paid my fine in his life's blood so that I could be released from the rightful condemnation of the law.

Now obviously, having never heard the gospel, it stands to reason that I could not possibly have been saved. Seems so simple when you look at it like that, but what a profound deception that was! You see, because our family was faithful in church-going and participating in its many charities and food drives, we all simply assumed that we knew what the gospel was....and thus, assumed that we were all bound for heaven. My goodness, that's frightening just to contemplate. If any of us in our family had died during those church-going years, we most certainly would have been like those who ended up outside the gates of heaven pleading for entry - and astounded at being denied!
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' (Matthew 7:21-23)
I think if anyone in my family at that time had been asked to articulate what the gospel was, we might have been able to get a few points right - after all, some of that jargon was floating around us - we were in a church after all, not a coven! There were Bibles around (though we never studied them) and we sang beautiful old hymns that often set forth the message of salvation in just a few short verses (but these rich doctrines were never discussed or examined).

Rather, I think we would have said something along the lines of, you've got to do your best, be a good person, be moral, and help others. I look back now and think, how could we have thought this was the gospel? And yet, we did.

When God finally opened my eyes, many years later, I remember being so shocked by the idea that I could have faithfully attended something which identified itself as a "church"......and which never preached the gospel.

A book I read early in my walk as a Christian helped me connect the dots on why I had never been saved ("Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God") and also, what exactly the gospel message was. This book was called Stranger on the Road to Emmaus, written by John Cross. I affectionately call this book "Systematic Theology For Dummies." It goes from Genesis to Revelation and very clearly lays out God's plan of salvation, and how he unfolded it, in somewhat of a remedial fashion. It's an amazing book, almost deceptive in its simplicity, and I highly recommend it to anyone trying to put the pieces together on who God is and what the gospel is. It would also be a great book to give to unbelievers. I really can't recommend this book enough. I still pick it up from time to time and read through sections of it, and it continues to amaze me.

There is also a children's version of this book called The Lamb which my own children love, and which very clearly puts forth God's plan of salvation in a way that is easy for a child to understand.

 Additional Resources 

"Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!"

Monday, April 4, 2011

"Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!"

Posted by Christine Pack

As we approach Easter, I'm going to take this opportunity to recommend a very special children's book entitled The Lamb, which our family absolutely loves. I found this book as a new Christian, and even though it is specifically written for children, it was very helpful even for me in that it presents the profound truths of the gospel message in a very straightforward way. (And may I also note that any children's book that presents the Old Testament sacrificial system in a way that is understandable to children has got to at least be worth the price of admission.) The Lamb is a hardbound book and is recommended for ages 4 and up. Included in the price is an accompanying CD that presents the same message as in the book. From the publisher's website:
"Starting in Creation, God's caring nature is highlighted. Then, the problem of sin and its consequence is introduced when Adam and Eve disobey God. As the story progresses, the children learn that instead of being punished for their sin, people could bring a lamb as their substitute. 
The kids are left in suspense, waiting for the climax (Easter Sunday), just as the people waited hundreds of years for the Saviour to come. 
Easter morning, all of the story comes together as the final two chapters of The Lamb are covered. Students are introduced to Jesus, and they begin to realize that he is the Lamb of God. As the final dramatic events of Jesus' death, burial and resurrection unfold, the kids see the salvation message become clear."
GoodSeed International, the company which publishes this book, also offers a "grown up"version of The Lamb which is titled The Stranger on the Road to Emmaus. I would also like to point out that the reading of these books does not require any knowledge of the Bible whatsoever on the part of the reader. For this reason, both of these books are wonderful tools for evangelizing anyone outside of the Christian faith tradition, as no prior understanding of Jesus, God, sin, hell, judgment, etc. is required.

I simply can't recommend these two books enough. I have given both many times as gifts to friends and family members.

Sample from The Lamb:






 Additional Resources 


Friday, April 1, 2011

Answers in Genesis Kicked Out of Homeschooling Conferences

Posted by Christine Pack


Answers in Genesis, an excellent ministry devoted to biblical truth, was recently kicked out of two homeschool conventions over the issue of young earth/old earth. This "uninviting" happened when Ken Ham, President of Answers in Genesis, wrote and talked about his concerns regarding another of the scheduled speakers at a homeschool conference at which Ken Ham had also been invited to speak. Apparently, this didn't sit well with the organizer of the homeschooling conventions, Brennan Dean (Great Homeschool Conventions). The speaker in question was Dr. Peter Enns, one of the co-founders of The Biologos Foundation. From the moment they burst onto the scene, Biologos has generated controversy due to their tendency to allegorize what ought not to be allegorized as well as their firm stance on evolution (in their view, a literal six day creation is scientifically untenable).

Dr. Enns will undoubtedly promote the beliefs of the Biologos Foundation while at these conventions, and Ken Ham, in good conscience, felt he could not speak at these conferences without alerting the homeschooling families to the dangers of the Biologos homeschool curriculum, which advance their liberal and allegorical views of Scripture. From Ken Ham's online article about this:
"Because Dr. Enns of BioLogos was speaking at Mr. Dean’s conventions to promote a Bible curriculum to homeschoolers, which we consider very dangerous to the spiritual upbringing of kids, we wanted to make sure that people knew what he believed.
Ken Ham did mention Peter Enns by name in one of his five talks at an earlier South Carolina convention in Greenville organized by Mr. Dean. Ken showed two video clips of Dr. Enns, done in the context of showing how some modern Christian speakers are compromising God’s Word in Genesis. Ken did say that Dr. Enns was also speaking at the conference and had connections to another convention speaker, Susan Wise Bauer. In another talk about a common Christian viewpoint that compromises Genesis, Ken briefly mentioned that one of the speakers at this convention took that view."
And also Dr. Peter Ennis from the Biologos website:
"In my last post I suggested that the Adam story could be viewed symbolically as a story of Israel’s beginnings, not as the story of humanity from ground zero. 
But some might ask, “Why go through all this trouble? Why not just take it literally? The Bible says Adam was the first man. That’s the end of it.” 
It’s not that simple, and if it were, people wouldn’t be talking it about it so much. First of all, reading the Adam story symbolically rather than as a literal description of history is not a whim, and it is certainly not driven by a desire to undermine the Bible. Rather, as we have seen, the Bible itself invites a symbolic reading by using cosmic battle imagery and by drawing parallels between Adam and Israel (to name two factors)."
As I have written before, allegory is a very slippery slope. I grew up faithfully attending a church that was very liberal, and taught much of the Bible as allegory. We loved our church and were involved in many activities: choir, Sunday school, youth group, food drives, retreats, etc., etc. But as I said, it was a very liberal church, and by that I mean, I can't say that I ever heard a clear gospel message in all the years that we attended.  The Bible was sort of viewed as the message given to us by God about how to live Godly lives, with Jesus of course as the primary example.  I remember hearing the story of Adam and Eve as a child in Sunday school, but being told, "Of course, this didn't literally happen since we know that the earth is millions of years old."  Obviously, we were told, God was speaking in metaphorical terms here.  "Adam" as a representative figure of mankind, and "Eve" as as representative figure for womankind.  But there was never a literal "Adam" and a literal "Eve!"

Along with this, we were taught that Jesus didn't really perform all the miracles accredited to him by the gospel accounts.  One class in particular stands out in my mind: a teacher earnestly laboring to help us see that Jesus couldn't have possibly fed 5,000 people with just one small meal.  What really happened, he explained to us, was that Jesus brought the little boy with the five loaves of bread and two fishes before the crowd, and the people, being moved by seeing such generosity of spirit in a child, were shamed into pulling out their own secret stashes and sharing.  As for myself, I'm convinced that this was how the teaching of Jesus-as-a-great-moral-example became so deeply entrenched in liberal circles. Liberal theologians have long bent the knee to the false "god" of science (the earth is millions of years old, miracles aren't possible, etc.), and in doing so, have had to find a way to explain the "miracles" of Jesus in human terms.  So they came up with, among other things, a generous little boy and "secret stashes."

This, of course, is only one example of the dangers of allegorizing Scripture. So in the interest of thinking this through, my question is this: once you start allegorizing Scripture, where do you stop? At the Virgin Birth? at the Miracles? at the Inerrancy of Scripture? at the Resurrection?

Brothers and sisters, political and cultural things are fine to mobilize over, but this issue of allegorizing the clear teaching of Scripture is at the very heart of today's spiritual battle. Calls and letters from homeschooling families might be a good thing here.

(Read the entire article from Ken Ham/Answers in Genesis here)


 Additional Resources 

Crosstalk Interview With Ken Ham






Ken Ham Gives Interview About Why He Was Kicked Out of TWO Homeschool Conferences

Posted by Christine Pack

Crosstalk America radio program had Ken Ham as their featured guest on today's program. Ken Ham is the CEO and founder of the evangelical ministry Answers in Genesis, a ministry that is devoted to protecting the doctrinal purity of the book of Genesis. He is also the director of the very excellent Creation Museum, located in Petersburg, Kentucky.

Ken Ham came on the show today to discuss why he was "un-invited" to speak at two large homeschool conventions at which he had been scheduled to speak, one near Cincinnati and the other near Philadelphia. Ken Ham explains that his dismissal came after he spoke out against the false teachings of another speaker, Dr. Peter Enns, one of the founders of an organization known as The BioLogos Foundation. Dr. Enns, who was a previous presenter and author of a homeschool curriculum that teaches spiritual error, was kicked out of Westminster Theological Seminary in 2005 for writing a book where he denied Scriptural Inerrancy (also known as Sola Scriptura, one of the fundamental Reformation principles).

This issue parallels a new book Ken Ham has coming out in mid-April titled Already Compromised. This book takes a look at the shocking state of Christian higher education.

The show can be listened to in its entirety here.

As a side note......I absolutely love the work they're doing over there at Answers in Genesis.  They have some of the best and brightest scientific minds of today on staff, and they are literally turning on its ear the argument that anyone who believes in Young Earth Creation simply can't be very well educated.  You can say a lot of things about the geologists, biologists, archaeologists, geophysicists, chemists, etc. who support the work being done at Answers in Genesis, but you certainly cannot say that they are not well educated.


 Additional Resources 

Answers in Genesis Kicked Out of TWO Homeschooling Conferences

Who Says The 'Begats' Are Boring?

The Creation Museum

Answers in Genesis

Grace To You Weighs in on Biologos

A List of Today's Scientists Who Support Six Day Creation