With all due respect, I believe that the scriptures do invite us to confront a brother in love and in private if we have something against them [Matthew 18]. Whether one sees Mclaren, Pagitt, or Bell as heretical or promoting positions and understandings that appear “unbiblical” is another matter. How we handle those concerns needs to be done in a way the exudes the grace and love of Jesus, as there is a whole host of people watching how we, who claim to be followers of Jesus, conduct ourselves with one another.

I had the opportunity to be there, and was really impressed with the humility that Mark moved forward in. He definitely didn’t “blast” anyone for the sake of it. He took the appropriate steps to address the questions and answers with the smoothest and easiest ways possible (not always a trend of his).
Honestly, I was surprised at his humility. Good words. I’m a Bell fan of sorts, too. He brought up some stuff I hadn’t thought about yet – and it’s not as hardcore as Doug or Brian.

p.s. here’s the link to the audio.

feed://www.sebts.edu/chapel/chapelPodcast.xml

I am saddened by all of this. I listen to Driscoll and Bell’s podcasts. I don’t always agree with them but they speak truth. When will we stop fighting and see that we are all apart of the same body? Some are feet while some are noses….

sad…

Honestly, if we’re not prepared at some point in time to call someone a heretic, to say that they’re preaching another Gospel, then I really don’t think you and Paul would be on the same team.

I was at the Convergent Conference. Mark Driscoll’s tone was somber, humble, yet also sober as he delivered the news. And hey, he’s right.

Remember though, he knows personally McLaren, Padgitt, and others (though not Bell). He knew he was going on a limb.

But with theology, there has to be precision. I mean, have you seen or heard something by Bell, not to strong on the gospel. And without the gospel, you have nothing but religion. I think we all are past religion, right?

Bell is following David Bosch’s interpretation of Jesus, which was driven by his own conclusion. He wanted Jesus a certain way, so he interpreted him that way. Bell’s focus on (anti-Christian) rabbinical jewish interpretation sounds cool and impressive, but it defeats his own argument.

We should take Driscoll’s advice and beware. Unity can never be acheived at the expense of God Himself. Theology matters because God matters. Theos-God, logos, word; theology-word about or study of God.

Unfortunately, Bell does not speak the truth about God, he only muddies the truth about God. Driscoll, on the other hand, aside from his harshness, is clear about God. Let’s listen to Driscoll here.

Rob Bell promotes New Age Spirituality. Look at the web site and teachings of Ken Wilber. Bell teaches Wilbers ideas in his book and in the footnotes recomends his readers to spend three months reading one of Wilbers books. There is a new form of musical songs out right now called smashed songs. What they do is “smash” two diffrent songs together to make one new song. Rob Bells “Christianity” is Christian PLUS New Age smashed together. If you didn’t know, New Agers are now called New Spirituality and the teach that God is “in” everything and “in” everyone. That we just need to realize “who” we really are. That we are all connected, we are all one. Does this sound familiar to anyone who has read Rob Bells books? This is what Bell teaches and it is NOT what the Bible teaches. Our oneness is only with fellow believers and the reason for our oneness is Jesus Christ. We have nothing in common with a unbeliever . They are darkend in there understanding, they are dead in there sin, and they are slaves to there flesh in this condition. True believers however are in the light, are alive in Jesus Christ, and are set free from the law of sin and death. We came to this position by having FAITH in the one true Jesus Christ as the only salvation, The only truth, the only “way” to peace with God. Rob Bell does not teach this. He “affirms” it, he does not reject it, but then he adds to it. He says keep all those old ideas but focus on these new ideas that we are “painting”. It is like adding goats blood to Jesus blood. He contaminates it all. Beware people there is a delusion and many are falling into it. How bold of Bell (or how sneeky of our enemy) to put falling people on the covers of his first book….Things that make you go Hmmmm………

Wow, really great conversation…Thanks everyone. I do think Rob Bell is a Christ-follower…It’s obvious to me that he points people to the cross.

I do think his Virgin Birth reference was not the best, yet he never denies the virgin birth-actually he affirms it.

I do wish Driscoll would have had a one-on-one…Just not sure we can start name-calling folks at conferences unless we are 100% clear on one theology.

At the same thing I do love Dricscoll passion for the Christ, the church and theology. I just hope he walks in humility and grace.

Christy,

While agree with many of your assumptions…I do think there is a balance in this. Here is the deal-How many people now think Rob Bell preaches heresy because of Mark Driscoll comments? Many of these folks jumped on the Driscoll bandwagon without coming to their own concisions, no prayer, no study, just a simple yes, because Driscoll said I believe it. I saw so many anti-Rob Bell blog post the same day Driscoll spoke. Hmm, is that really a good thing???

I would have preferred if Driscoll clarified his statement. If your going to bring up names and suggest heresy-clarify it. Do you think they are heretics? Do you think they are not Christ-followers, are they leading people away from the cross etc. It’s as if he Mark brought up a bunch of junk and then he did not take the time to really be crystal clear.

I do like how Piper is handling his issues with NT Wright. In a book format. That is really detailed and I think can be fruitful. We can digest the info and allow truth ti unfold.

Also, I would have really appreciated Mark’s comments if maybe it came from a community perspective. What if Mark, Piper & Keller each took the stage and presented their disagreements and concerns?

I think the danger here is lumping Bell in with Pagit and Mclaren. Bell is not apart of Emergent Village. And Mark has not met Rob. I think from a minister-to-minister perspective…Before you cause pain and controversy, at least make a phone call to clarify and even to let Rob Bell know what to expect. This to me is simple Christianity, thinking about others before yourself, etc.

Mark also hates public accountability-this is why he hates bloggers who live with their moms-funny, maybe, immature-yes! How can you say statements like that when you are about to discuss a very serious subject. Driscoll can’t have it both ways. He creates a ton of controversy and he must also accept it.

I’m not saying their is one right way to do this-my biggest concern is the tone that is being set and I fear in the future we will now have a lot more name calling that can divide the church. Sure it may be necessary at time, but we better do our very best to use wisdom.

Chris,
First I would like to ask you if you know anything about the New Age (or “New
Spirituality”)? Which authors have you read or speakers have you listened to?
Second, have you looked at Ken Wilber’s web site (http://www.kenwilber.com)?
Have you asked yourself why on earth would a Christian promote him? Third, I don’t
see how you can agree that some people are mixing up the gospel with other stuff
and diluting the authenticity of the gospel and having read Mr. Bell’s books, seen his
videos, and been to his conferences – how you cannot see that Mr. Bell is doing
exactly this.
You don’t believe that Mr. Bell teaches anything New Age. Well, what’s New
Age? How would you define their beliefs? The foremost thing you need to understand
is that the New Age is not just about crystals, vegetarianism, transcendental meditation,
or any other stigma that it has been labeled with. It is a “spirituality” with a false christ.
It uses familiar terms (sometimes “Christian” terms) with different underlying meanings
to make it’s message acceptable to a broad audience (including Christians). Have you
ever witnessed to someone trapped in a cult (Jehovah’s Witness, Mormon, etc.)? If
you have, then you will understand the communication difficulties one can have when
talking to a person that uses the same words but with drastically different meanings
as you do.
Following are several examples of how New Age spiritualists will change words
that have stigmas attached to them so that their message is more acceptable. First,
if the teaching that we are part of God and the earth (we are all one) is unacceptable,
then say we are all connected and were intended to move as one, in rhythm with each
other and the earth. Second, if “enlightened” or “higher self” is unacceptable, then
say, “who we really are” or “fully human” or “self realization” or “who God intended us
to be”. In New Age spirituality, people simply need to realize that they are a part of
God. Once this occurs, then they can live a “positive” or enlightened life.
I encourage you once again to visit Ken Wilber’s web site and hear what he has
to say about himself. You will quickly see that he is a New Age spiritualist. Why
would Rob Bell point anyone towards someone with obvious New Age beliefs? Why
would he endorse someone who teaches against the gospel of Christ?

As for John 4, I don’t understand why you pick one small thing and shine a light on
that one tiny area. I haven’t heard the “Everything is Spiritual Tour” so I don’t know all
that Mr. Bell has said. I agree that God is not about location and temples. We are to
worship Him in spirit and in truth. I have no idea why you even brought this up. What
does this have to do with Mr. Bell being influenced by New Age teachers and then
proclaiming that teaching to Christian audiences?
If you have never heard or read Mr. Bell teach that God is in everything and everyone,
that we simply need to realize who we really are, that we are all connected – all one -
then read the following excerpt from Velvet Elvis (page 21):

“Over time when you purposefully try to live the way of Jesus, you start noticing some-
thing deeper going on. You begin realizing the reason this is the best way to live is
that it is rooted in profound truths about how the world is. You find yourself living more
and more in tune with ultimate reality. You are more and more in sync with how the
universe is at its deepest levels.

Jesus’ intention was, and is, to call people to live in tune with reality.”

Here Mr. Bell is not talking about following or obeying Jesus. He is talking about
SOMETHING DEEPER. He is talking about realizing truths about how the world is
and that we are to live in tune with the ultimate reality. He later states that the ultimate
reality he is talking about is God. Mr. Bell thus creates a connection between the
universe and God himself. He, in essence, is stating that God is part of the universe
and the universe is a part of God. To use his own words, he states that God is in tune
(or in sync) with the universe. They are playing the same song. They are headed the
same direction. The universe, or how the universe is at its deepest levels or how the
world is, is not God. God is Spirit and is separate from His creation which He created,
don’t you see? This type of spiritual teaching is a very subtle distortion of the truth.
Then Mr. Bell says what Jesus’ intention was – to call people to live in tune with
reality? To live in tune with the universe at its deepest levels? To live in tune with how
the world is? By living the “way of Jesus”? NO! Jesus came to seek and to save people
who are lost. Who are those people? All of us. Why? Because all have sinned and fall
short of the glory of a Holy God. He offered not a way of life to live, rather He offered His
very life as a free gift of grace, not by the law or works, but a free gift to be accepted by
faith in Him as God. Jesus intention was to give His life so that we, a fallen people in
need of redemption, might have eternal life with Him.

Mr. Bell offers works (“living Jesus’ way”) as a means of being connected to God.
Where is the faith in that? Where is the required belief that the true gospel commands?
Why would Jesus need to die as a sacrifice for the sins of humanity if we just need to live
like He lived? Mr. Bell’s “living Jesus’ way” requires no faith, rather it puts us into a
situation where our relationship to God is based solely upon our works. This is not the
gospel. This is another gospel and I am telling you that this is the New Age gospel and
it is anti-Jesus. You may ask, “How the hell can it be anti-Jesus when Mr. Bell preaches
Jesus, Jesus, Jesus… Live like Jesus.” Because he is teaching people to stay in their
spiritually dead state and do these works of service (which are good and noble things to
do) for the sake of the world and humanity. Anyone can do these things. How would a
Christian be any different from a Mormon? Or a Hindu? Or a Muslim? The devout in all
religions do good things. They all appear to imitate the “way of Jesus” without having any
knowledge of or relationship with the risen Lord. It would be right for us to think carefully
about the words of our Savior, “There is only One who is good.” (Mt. 19:17a). We are all
in need of a Savior. Not a single one of us can be saved by living like Jesus did (doing
good works for the people around us).

Check this out!
http://www.kenwilber.com/home/landing/index.html Ken Wilber is a new ager. These guys – Doug Pagett, Ken Wilber, BrianMclaren,Marcus Borg,
and Rob Bell do not teach Historical Christianity,
they teach some other thing.

“Mr. Bell offers works (”living Jesus’ way”) as a means of being connected to God.
Where is the faith in that? Where is the required belief that the true gospel commands?
Why would Jesus need to die as a sacrifice for the sins of humanity if we just need to live
like He lived? Mr. Bell’s “living Jesus’ way” requires no faith, rather it puts us into a
situation where our relationship to God is based solely upon our works. This is not the
gospel. This is another gospel and I am telling you that this is the New Age gospel and
it is anti-Jesus. You may ask, “How the hell can it be anti-Jesus when Mr. Bell preaches
Jesus, Jesus, Jesus… Live like Jesus.”
-Diane

So once we have asked for forgiveness of our sins and been saved by the grace of Jesus, what are we supposed to do then? I thought that faith without action was dead. I think that I want to bring Jesus to a broken world by imitating him (that means doing what he did). I ate a homegrown meal yesterday that did not have to travel over 1,500 miles to get to my plate. You might say, “great for you self righteous one”. But while I am doing this God is truly laughing and probably crying that his creation focus so much of their attention on criticizing others and arguing doctrine. I can imagine Jesus rolling his eyes at the right hand of the Father when he sees his people become the modern day Pharisees. “Don’t they get it, I thought I died on the cross to help them understand all of this”. I have a new topic for discussion… Christ Transcending Culture: What are you afraid of?

I think Driscol needs to grow up!!

Hello everyone. I have read many of the posts here this morning and find both hope and something less than hope. It seems that we are all holding tightly to our own orthodox view of what the Bible says. Which is awesome. The conversation here is a million times better than the conversations I find myself confronted with in secular society. Having said that, just because our conversation is on the right subject, it doesn’t mean that we are conducting this conversation correctly. I guess for me, I’m more concerned about living out my orthodoxy (i.e. orthopraxy) than holding onto an orthodoxy that I can’t follow. If your view of the Bible is to save others… then save others. If your view of the Bible is to love others… then love others. If you believe that Jesus loves you perfectly (with all your faults), then love others (with all their faults). Instead, what I see (on this website and on others) is Christians saying they believe the Bible says this or that… but their words betray them. They preach love with hate speech. They preach salvation by marketing fear. Is baptism a choice I make because I want to be closer to my God or is it because I don’t want to burn. If you believe that God is mean… then don’t upset Him… convert now and save yourself. But if you believe that God is good… then welcome to the group… convert now and save yourself. For me, Christ represents love… not damnation. Reconciliation and restoration… not fear and separation (we’re “in”, they’re “out”).

In response to the last post from (I can’t believe you people)… I feel your disgust and frustration. But we have all found ourselves in this place at one time or another. The challenge is if we can find a way to bring people together and trust God to reveal Himself to us. As we struggle and wrestle with the text in the Bible, let us not become to prideful in thinking that our version is the last version, but rather recognize that God’s absolute truths are so good and right that its difficult for sinful man to comprehend it all… instead we are simply called to trust it. And by that, I mean Love God with all our strength, mind, heart and soul and love our neighbor as ourselves. I’m not sure calling anyone who is sharing their journey is considered loving.

PS: I have never heard Rob Bell say that he knows everything. If Rob admits to anything, it is this: We should be asking better questions instead of pretending to have it all nailed down and figured out and compartmentalized because God is bigger and better than we can possibly imagine. So, for those who believe they have cornered the market on understanding every truth of the Bible… that there is only one way to interpret it… that they alone have figured it out… I would question that.

John 14:6-7 says, Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”

To me, I understand it to read that those who want to know God and be in relationship with Him must humble themselves and posture their hearts with love. Only with love in one’s heart can one truly enter relationship with anyone or anything. For me, only when I love (as Christ loved) do I find myself in relationship with my God (i.e. do I enter the Kingdom of God).

True repentance is a by-product of God’s mercy and grace. I repent not because I am fearful… but because Christ loves me so much, I am humbled by His sacrifice that I want to follow him. But when I repent out of fear… I allow the evil one to twist and pervert what I should willing want to do… to choose to follow my God of my own free will which is a gift I truly cherish. My God is not a master of puppets… instead He gives us the freedom to choose our paths in life… to trust Him or to trust ourselves. For me, I’m not interested in trusting my understanding of God’s truths… I’d rather just follow Christ’s example, life and teachings.

Diane,

I recently started attending Mars Hill. While I was amazed at how large it was (strictly by number of attenders) I never felt like I was one in a million people attending.

You say Rob teaches about living as Christ did as a way of salvation. Not through the Blood of Jesus Christ. Rob recently did a teaching on this. Our SERVICE is directly related to CHRIST. In Deuteronomy 26:12, “When you have finished setting aside a tenth of all your produce in the third year, the year of the tithe, you shall give it to the Levite, the alien, the fatherless and the widow, so that they may eat in your towns and be satisfied. ” Living as Christ did meant, helping the oppressed. In this particular sermon, Rob reminded people, you cannot just say the prayer and go through the motions. Since we have been born again, God requires us to service as well. It’s in the acts that God requires us to do that others may benefit from him. The required belief that the true gospel commands is this is God’s LAW. You cannot have faith without service to God. Deuteronomy 26:5, “You will declare before the Lord your GOD, My father was a wandering Aramean ….” God’s intention on this was so that we would never forget where we came from. If we forget, we will not be thankful for all God has given us. If we’re not thankful to God, we will quit giving to Him.

I will say this. I have learned more in the few months that I have been attending Mars Hill with Rob as the pastor than I have in the 27 years I’ve been going to church. Maybe my own interpretation was that Jesus was this person no one could touch. how wrong was I! Jesus did everything the religious leaders of that time wouldn’t THINK of doing. For fear it would displease God. They were more concerned about the PROCESS than the REASON God has specific laws.

Well said, Romy. I whole heartedly agree with you. Rob sparks that desire and inspiration to read more about Jesus and to WANT to read the bible. Not because it’s the Christian thing to do … but because you want to understand him more.

Mwalcher,

Nice thouhgts-let me say this-you don’t have to choose. Rob Bell is not anti-doctrine. Just because one begins to see things differently, does not mean he desires wishy-washy doctrine.

If you study church history there has always been men and women who decided to stand-up against issues, these folks were hated by many.

I think you have to take both “justice/mercy/love” and “pure doctrine” and combine them. Jesus is grace and truth.

Wow – after reading through all these comments, I feel quite naïve. I feel completely ignorant for perceiving I received so much benefit from listening to Rob Bell’s podcast of Mars Hill Church-Grand Rapids and viewing all those Nooma videos. And to think, I dropped $15 bucks or so to see him on the Gods Must Be Angry tour in the Emerald City. And then I am told he is a heretic. This is hard to deal with. Well anyhow – personally, I enjoyed many a Mars Hill podcast of Bell talking about how Jesus loved to “play” with the Pharisees particularly when they were touting their infinite wisdom of God and God’s law. And each time I heard Bell, I would delve more into the scriptures as this guy called Jesus really was pretty cool. And the times Bell reminded me that Jesus cleaned my/your/our slate with his blood and sacrifice – well that was pretty darn cool too. But to hear this is all heresy really troubles me. You know the first time I heard the word heresy – was in the movie “Beneath the Planet of the Apes”. I never liked the term or the attempted generation of fear the word could conjure up. It should be used judiciously – never just thrown out there to generate “press”. I truly believe both these men, Bell and Driscoll love Jesus dearly but I just do not see where Driscoll’s opinion is warranted. And like previously mentioned, Driscoll has enough clout where this reference will form opinions. Kinda sad. Gotta go – I think my mommy is calling me and wants me to stop blogging 

this is in response to driscoll and ken silva and both of Rob bells tours.

Below is an excerpt of Driscolls complaint with the teachings of rob bell

“Jesus is a pride fighter with a tattoo down His leg, a sword in His hand and the commitment to make someone bleed. That is a guy I can worship. I cannot worship the hippie, diaper, halo Christ because I cannot worship a guy I can beat up. I fear some are becoming more cultural than Christian, and without a big Jesus who has authority and hates sin as revealed in the Bible, we will have less and less Christians, and more and more confused, spiritually self-righteous blogger critics of Christianity.”

There is only two problems that i come across and they are very alarming to me.

1) He says that he will not worship a man that he can beat up

i have a problem because we as deprived human beings not only beat up Jesus but we whipped him and then when the man was down we jabbed sharp thorns all over his head. and then if that wasnt enough we hung him to a cross. and then since we could not kill him quick enough we jabbed a metal rod through his heart and it busted. Jesus in the end did not die because of a cross but because of a broken heart. And this King that had all the power in the world was beaten up by humans. Not only was he beaten by them but he let them willingly so that he could show the forgiveness and peace that would unite myself and jesus and anyone who calls his name.
2)the second complaint comes in revelation and while i agree that much of the time jesus is angry i believe that rev. 6 articulates more than clearly that jesus appeared to john as a lamb. a bloody beaten lamb. when everyone looked for a lion to save us we were given a lamb. a lamb who laid down and willingly died.

I am not saying i hate mark driscoll and that i am a bell fanatic but i do believe that if we preach hellfire and brimstone to everyone while neglecting peace we walk a thin red line. i think if we preach judgement all the time we walk that line to the point of falling off. I honestly dont believe that jesus wants my fear but he wants my heart.

i Know that people will be sent to hell. But i also am aware that Jesus said to believers…. come to me all you who are weary and burdened and i will give you rest. take my yolk opun you and learn from me for i am gentle and humble in heart. for my yolk is easy and my burden is light. in collossians paul says Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules: 21″Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”? 22These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings. 23Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence.

we have to ask is our fundamental goal as a follower of jesus. is it to practice piety so that our King will be happy with us because we are scared of hell.
or is it to snatch others from the fire and save them.

i agree that God hates sin and he hates to send people to hell but i believe also that when you come to christ there is no need to look over your shoulder to see if god was watching our evil actions. i believe this because i think that when people experience the love of god what they do stems from his love and acceptance not from his judgement. why would someone want to sin all the time when they know the implications of the love of jesus.

i honestly believe that in todays world we are really and truely straining out knats but swallowing camels. i believe that we are teaching morality and piety more than we are teaching christ crucified.

also what if rob bell was just another part of the body of believers. what if we truely took that passage to heart and said that Ken silva and Rob bell teach radically different messages but they are both used by god to represent a feeling of judgement for the lost and a onehundred percent safety for those that are saved. micah says Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams,
with ten thousand rivers of oil?
Shall I offer my firstborn for my transgression,
the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?

8 He has showed you, O man, what is good.
And what does the LORD require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God.
Does god really want to scare us into giving up the fruit of our bodies or does he want to comfort us by saying that we are to love the mercy that he has given .

Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual[a] act of worship. 2Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.

is the writer saying to be perfect because this is what is required of us or is he saying sacrifice yourself because of the sacrifice God gave through his mercy. is the sacrifice in response to the love and mercy or is it the response of hell.

i want to believe in a jesus that we can beat up because i want to believe in a jesus that gave himself up for us and saved my sin not for fear but for love.

i want to say that we need to stop biting and devouring preachers but show them love and maybe if we quit accusing and start showing productiveness maybe an false teachings will be worked out.

i hope God blesses Mark Driscoll
I hope God rains blessing on Ken Silva
I hope God rains blessing on Rob Bell

and i hope that if there is false teaching that Gods blessing will work it out for each.

What i brought home from the gods arent angry tour was that I have a King that loves me enough that he would show love to me through a person who is willing to loan a car. or who is willing to say to the suicidal that i am not embarrased of you. i brought home a message that God loves me enough that he forgot my sins and not just wiped them away.

Lot’s of great comments. I wonder how we can learn from all this?

Here is how I see:

1. Many folks would put bell in the “grace” camp. And many would put Driscoll in the “truth” camp. Don’t we need both? One without the other is useless.

I love both Rob and Mark. I’ve seen no evidence that Rob is a universalist . And I’m hoping that he does not go down that road. I do see Rob as one who believes the Kingdom is here to restore all things. So I wonder if we are getting a bit confused on various verbage or use of words?

Also, I think a lot of this goes back to defining what a heretic really is. Is Mother Teresa a heretic? What about the various divides in Baptist/Pentecostal doctrine, or how mainline liturgy is used in modern day church.

This debate has really caused me to think through how I would define heresy. Is Rob Bell pointing people to the cross? Does be believe that Jesus is the way? Does he really believe and clearly state that you can serve any God and that road will lead us all to heaven?

As for Mark: I just see Mark as very uncaring and at times he seems to promote his agenda-no matter the collateral damage. Which scares me. I wish Mark would “defend his faith” in a more loving humble, yet to still strong an authortive way. Anytime someone is always in the middle of controversy, that is scary in my book.

I know I’ve said this-but it really is my conviction. I can and do choose to love and respect both of these brothers in Christ. Yet I will watch out for those things that concern me, I will pray for both of them as God has given them influence and that is not an easy task.

I just refuse to choose sides…And I really do hope for the best.

Jesus chose sides.
Pat Gillen and Joseph Parker you have disernment.

Oh God! Jesus! Save us. We need your Spirit here. Grow us into your unity. Forgive us for being so quick to tear at each others faults. May we place our full trust in you and never in our own opinion. May we see the world as you see it!

I am a Bell-supporter. I’m not a blogger or a blog reader. I simply looked up the Bell v. Driscoll topic because I heard a rumor. But the conversation sucked me in.

I want so badly to defend Bell’s teaching. I believe with all that I am that Jesus’ work on the cross was just as much about teaching us how to love one another as it was to save us from our sins. Yet, I’m struggling to find the words.

I wonder if there is a gap in vocabulary here. Bell likes to repaint things… including the way we talk about things. Is there more than one way to proclaim the gospel? Is the gospel in the words of Paul more “true” than in the mouth of Peter? They didn’t say it exactly the same way… or else our New Testament would be quite a bit shorter. In fact, it seems that Paul found a lot of ways to explain it.
Think about the historical development of Christian thought. In the reformation period there were about 5 different break offs from the Roman Catholic church. So in about 1530 there were 6 Christian Traditions all claiming to be right. They even went so far as to eliminate each other from the grace of God [When Ulrich Zwingli died Luther said that Hell had gained a noble soul]. Now from those 6 traditions we now have hundreds of denominations that each think they have it right. So my question is… who’s right? Your tradition? How convinient. And these traditions started off with fundamental differences on things as important to the gospel as atonement.

So who’s the heretic? What’s sound doctrine? What is bibilical when the 1.8 billion other Christians in the world don’t read the Bible the way you do? Are they all wrong and you’re right? Are you that bold?

Is there no sense of humility?

Before I go to bed I have to point out one more thing. Diane mentioned earlier that we are not one with the rest of humanity. While I think I understand where you are coming from I must add that we are all made in the image of the Almighty God and that we have all tasted the fruit of sin. I just wonder if that means that we are all one? We may not be of the world, but we were born into it, just like everyone else.

I realize this probably doesn’t begin to scratch the surface and does not precisely defend Bell. I suppose I’d rather hope that you might re-look at his work with an understanding that you might not be right.

ps – I’m not challenging your certainty in the truth of Jesus Christ. I’m challenging your certainty that you’ve got that truth perfectly figured out. Someone else’s opinion doesn’t stand to threaten that basic certainty– instead I think it stands to strengthen it.

Matt

Joseph, I so agree…and I think that is how I want to approach all this. Therefore, we need to be super careful o use the word heretic.

I also wonder how the apostles fleshed this out…With those who disagree with Bell/Driscoll etc… can they say “at least Christ is being preached?”

Paul, Look at it this way. Is God so limited and small that the only way he is allowed to come to earth is by being born of a virgin? Where did that rule come from? Did you know that all the pagan gods of Jesus’ time were also born of virgins?

Mark, I have studied Egyptian, Greek and Roman paganism and while I was aware that a few of the ancient “gods” were purported to be virgin born, I was not aware that “all” were. If my memory serves me right, there was a whole lot of copulating going on among the gods and goddesses.

So, again, I’m simply asking for a theory that preserves the deity of Jesus without a virgin birth.

Chris, it doesn’t help me to simply attribute “fear” to me. I’m trying to have a substantial theological discussion. Can you help with the question I asked? And is Jesus still ‘Jesus’ if He sinned? Is Jesus still ‘Jesus’ if he didn’t die on the cross, rise from the dead, or even exist? Please help me understand what you mean by #2.

Chris, I will look forward to that.

With all due respect, it appears to me that you are (so far) begging several questions:

1. I don’t understand what larger point Bell was trying to make in that particular passage. Can you help me?
2. I didn’t see it as an analogy. I read Bell saying that the virgin birth doesn’t matter. No analogy; just a didactic statement.
3. I am trying to understand how he would say that and still see Jesus as divine. No one has explained that to me yet. For instance, if Bell said that the resurrection didn’t matter, wouldn’t it be fair for me to ask how one remains an orthodox Christian with such a position? Is Bell unaware of 2000 years of Christological debate and the great Councils? If not, he shouldn’t be writing books that mess up less informed minds.

I’m an evangelical who wants to be have as open and gracious an orthodoxy as possible, but I need help understanding this and other things that Bell (and other emergent leaders) have said. I am not a heretic hunter, at all, but I have to wonder…

It sure seemed to me that VE was just a warmed-over, slightly more evangelical version of Borg’s THOC, which Bell cited in a positive way in his footnotes. Of course, Borg is totally apostate, yet McLaren hangs with him.

BTW, Bell also has had optional classes (from First Fruits of Zion) at MH that teaches that Christians need to abide by all of the Torah (a friend of mine taught the class).

I hope you can understand that it seems that Bell really doesn’t know what he believes or why, and why it is so difficult to try to understand “the totality” of his theology.” I agree with so much of what Bell says, but I also think a great communicator is dangerous when they are unclear on the concept.

What’s the point of being missional if one doesn’t know what one is missioning about? It sounds like, “I don’t know where I’m going, but please follow me anyhow…”

I have written elsewhere that Unitarian Universalism (in various forms) is the default ,anti-Puritan (I’m sure no Puritan fan), American civic religion. It sure looks like the Emergent movement is headed that direction. By jumping out of the idolatrous religious right frying pan, it appears the Emergents are jumping into the UU fire. There are other options.

Chris, please tell (and prove to) me I’m wrong. Seriously, few things would gladden my heart more.

Mark, I don’t think they Mary was married when he impregnated her. Unless, I am totally wrong.

Paul, In reply to number 2. You read it wrong. I just re-read it right now. Since pretty much every sentence ends with a question mark, I don’t think he is making absolute statements. I don’t know where you read Bell saying the virgin birth doesn’t matter. It simply doesn’t say that.

Joseph Parker,
“So, if Bell is promoting heretical teaching (see Diane’s comments above) as being good, why are we following someone who is guiding us toward heresy?

That has been asked over and over in various comments and not one Bell supporter has dared to answer it.”

I don’t think anyone has answered it…Because the majority doesn’t think he is teaching heresy. One pastor and a bunch of bloggers saying it, doesn’t make it true. Granted, that in no way means he *isn’t* a heretic.

I’m sure now that everyone here thinks I have a huge man crush on Rob Bell. The truth is I go to Driscolls church, and podcast Bell every week.

OMG BOTH SIDES.
I must be a heretic going to hell. Shucks.

So..I hate when people post a whole bunch in a row…But I am going to do it. (I guess twice in a row isn’t too bad)

Anyways, I personally have been struggling with god…or God a ton lately…Basically, my thing right now (probably just part of my ‘spiritual journey’) is…uh…is god, or God even real? You can read more about it here…http://mwalcher.wordpress.com/2007/12/11/doubts-i-doubt-most-people-get-them-like-this/

Basically, after thinking about this whole thread/topic/debate…It really encapsulates why atheists don’t believe in God.
One side (driscolls side, for lack of better terms) is claiming Bell is a heretic. But he never actually said it…So you have to have a certain ‘faith’ that Bell believes in universalism (because thats mostly peoples complaint about Bell). Again, Bell has never actually said he believes in universalism.

Atheists don’t believe in god (usually) because there is no hard evidence. They often laugh at Christians because they are living off of faith…Not very much tangible, hard proof.

Bells side is claiming its more about love and peace and things like that. Atheists believe that is totally possible without god…or God. I wonder if an atheist read this whole debate, and would think to themselves “Side A doesn’t have hard proof, Side B doesn’t have hard proof…So obviously they are both wrong”

Ugh, this made so much more sense in my head. Sorry.

Driscoll referenced Bell’s take on theology not being like a wall with many bricks, but like a trampoline that bends. Yet, Driscoll said he noticed that a trampoline actually has a frame, with a solid foundation on the earth.

The funniest thing to Driscoll’s comment is that he totally backs up Rob Bell’s point. People have the brick wall faith feel like they must come up with (in Driscoll’s case 4…see above) reasons to back up or protect their wall from crumbling. Where Bell’s point with the trampoline is that if one thing that we found to be truth was proven wrong, we could still go on with our faith.

Driscoll also backs up Bell’s idea that when you have a brick wall faith, you must continue finding ways to defend your wall (in this case again the Virgin Birth) instead of just going out and loving, caring, and serving while others follow suit because they find the joy and peace that we have in our lives from serving as Jesus taught us to do.

I am dissapointed. We are call to unity and our desire should be for peace. If you have not heard the actual teaching you have no standing in anything related to this teacher and should look at your own weakness.
I have heard most of Rob Bell teaching and will stand behind him 100% .
We need to suport God given talented people who can help us to see the wonder of Gods Love for us and how then we should live.
We need not quarel among each other.
God loves you and more amazing He loves me, that is enough for me. I hope we can live in peace.

I read this today, thought it was really interesting. It’s an article from ‘Christianity Today’ about Mark Driscoll.

“Still, Driscoll says receiving MacArthur’s criticism is “like a frat guy getting paddled. It doesn’t feel good, but I guess it means you’re in.” As a new Christian, Driscoll picked up hundreds of tapes to learn from MacArthur’s preaching. He regrets that MacArthur chose a public forum for criticism, when he would have gladly flown to Los Angeles to hear MacArthur’s advice.”

Driscoll regrets MacArthurs public criticism?

Sounds familiar.

Full article is here…http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/september/30.44.html

Since you want answers, I’m going to bring up more things to cause more thinking.

descendant: A person, animal, or plant whose descent can be traced to a particular individual or group.

Would anybody say that if you are a step-child that you are a descendant?

Paul strictly says that Jesus was a descendant of David. He goes as far as to say by human nature (twice!). By human nature, Joseph was a descendant of David, not Mary. Can this be true if Jesus was born of Mary, who was not a descendant of David?

So Joseph was a descendant of the line of David (the line of the kings) if Jesus’ blood was only from Mary.

I guess the apostle Paul totally 1) forgot that the one with the blood of David’s line and not Mary 2) didn’t know Jesus was born of a virgin and thus tied him to the line of David 3) knew he wasn’t born of a virgin 4) blatantly lied in the letter to the Romans.

if you want to check that all out, Matthew 1 has the lineage of Joseph’s family.

then:

Romans 1: 1Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God— 2the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, 4and who through the Spirit[a] of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God[b] by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.

2 Timothy 2: ’8Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from David.’

So if Mary was from the descent of David, why the the geneology in Matthew trace King David to Joseph and not Mary.

If Mary and Joseph were both from the same blood line, people would probably (even if it is quite far off in descent) use it to say that they wouldn’t worship of Jesus, because he was born from incest.

And how does Jesus get treated special in history as being ‘adopted’ into a family when Paul strictly says ‘by his human nature he was a descendant of David.’ Human nature represents, I would think DNA, blood, etc.

Then what about the Book of the Twelve that was written in the late first century along with all the other Gospels, but was called Gnostic by the (Catholic) church which compiled the Bible because it says:
1. AND in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God, unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Ioseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary.
2. Now Ioseph was a just and rational Mind, and he was skilled in all manner of work in wood and in stone. And Mary was a tender and discerning Soul, and she wrought veils for the temple. And they were both pure before God; and of them both was Iesu-Maria who is called the Christ.
3. And the angel came in unto her and said, Hail, Mary, thou that art highly favoured, for the Mother of God is with thee: blessed art thou among women and blessed be the fruit of thy womb.
4. And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favour with God and, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb and bring forth a child, and He shall be great and shalt be called a Son of the Highest.
5. And the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
6. Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her The Holy Spirit shall come upon Ioseph thy Spouse, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, O Mary, therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Christ, the Child of God, and his Name on earth shalt be called Iesu-Maria, for he shall save the people from their sins, whosoever shall repent and obey his Law.
7. Therefore ye shall eat no flesh, nor drink strong drink, for the child shall be consecrated unto God from its mother’s womb, and neither flesh nor strong drink shall he take, nor shall razor touch his head.
8. And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. For with God no thing shall be impossible. And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.
9. And in the same day the angel Gabriel appeared unto Ioseph in a dream and said unto him, Hail, Ioseph, thou that art highly favoured, for the Fatherhood of God is with thee. Blessed art thou among men and blessed be the fruit of thy loins.
10. And as Ioseph thought upon these words he was troubled, and the angel of the Lord said unto him, Fear not, Ioseph, thou Son of David, for thou hast found favour with God, and behold thou shalt beget a child, and thou shalt call his name Iesu-Maria for he shall save his people from their sins.
11. Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was written in the prophets saying, Behold a Maiden shall conceive and be with child and shall bring forth a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God Within Us.
12. Then Ioseph being raised from sleep did as the angel had bidden him, and went in unto Mary, his espoused bride, and she conceived in her womb the Holy One.

Let’s remember that Catholicism had the Bible for years in their grasp since religion came directly from them, so they had plenty of time to ‘doctor’ passages up that they didn’t want to fit. Secondly, the Catholic church has had all kinds of Paganism tied into it’s early days especially that of Mithra.

Mithra was born to a virgin on December 25th as told in the “Great Religions of the World.”

There were many hundreds of Mithraic temples in the Roman Empire, the greatest concentrations have been found in the
city of Rome itself.

Persian legends of Mithras says that He was born of the Sun God and a virgin mother, called “the Mother of God”, on December 25th. They saw him as a symbol of justice, truth, and loyalty. He was considered the saviour of humankind, and stories abound of His healing the sick, raising the dead, and performing miracles (making the blind see and the lame walk). Throughout His lifetime, He was seen as a protector of human souls, a mediator between “heaven” and “earth” and was even associated with a “holy trinity”.

Mithraism came into the ancient Roman world about 75 BCE., and ranked as a principal competitor of Christianity for 200 years.

Trinities were popular in pagan sects before Christianity was introduced to the world. Some of the more well known trinity gods included Mithra-Vohu Mana-Rashnu, Amen-Mut-Khonsu, and Osiris-Isis-Horus.

Among the pagan cultures that preceded Christianity, virgin birth stories abounded. The long list of pagan gods born of virgins includes: Romulus and Remus, Zoroaster, Buddha, Mithras, Chrishna, Osiris-Aion, Agdistis, Attis, Tammuz, Adonis, Korybas, Perseus, and Dionysus.

In-as-much as Mithraism was so popular in Rome, it is no wonder why the pagan Emperor Constantine, who believed in the sun god, Mithras, designated a certain day of the week to him, Sunday, which means, “the day of the sun.”

Chris, I want to apologize for not correctly remembering Bell’s analogical approach to the virgin birth in VE. You’re right–it was analogical reasoning and, I agree, not a good one.

Nice thoughts everyone,

I will try and post more tomorrow…

Paul,

No worries VB analogy mix-up, so much information these days.

I think we really have to remember that we are talking about men who are fallen and men who are trying their best to understand theology. And men who have been raised in various streams of understanding.

No matter what man or pastor or theologian you study, they all have it wrong. No one had 100% proper theology.

Yes, the VB is BIG. Very BIG. If Bell said “I don’t think Jesus was born via the VB, then I would cal him a heretic No doubt I would defend the Bible.

But he clearly states he beliefs the VB.

So…I think one has to look at the “overall” body of theology. And one has to look at the fruit of a man/womens life.

So, do I agree with everything Bell agree’s with? NO NO NO. But when I look at Rob life I see someone who is desperately trying to seek Christ and love the world. I know my reformed friends will tell me that is not good enough? We need to seek Christ and love the world through a “reformed” theological world view. I just hope in our pursuit of truth that we don’t start demanding things from one-another that Jesus would not demand.

Many or most in the Evangelical world consider Rob a brother. I know “mercy triumps over judgment” and the gospel is being preached.

I understand that I’m reducing this issue to simple terms. I can throw all the history, theology and cause further debates. But we all know we can’t all agree. This can be a never ending conversation.

I do know that 40,000 kids will die today because they lack food and clean water. When I was in Africa last month, I saw some projects that Mars Hill Bible Church sponsored. It’s hard not to respect that.

I know many will find “holes” in my post, and e will use some scriptures in Jude and other parts of the Bible to defend what we believe so we can feel right and prove others wrong.

I just don’t play that game. We will all stand before Jesus someday and give account. Until then I want to do my best to focused and doing the work of the gospel.

There are many opinions about the two genealogies listed for Jesus (Matthew and Luke). However, one of the most common is that the genealogy listed in Matthew is Joseph’s line of descent. This would strongly imply that the genealogy listed in Luke is really Mary’s genealogy (Jesus’ human genealogy) showing that Jesus had a lineage back to Adam and so was of human descent.

If that isn’t enough, there is Jesus’ own testimony in many verses where He is called the “Son of David”. Never once does He correct the people making the statement.

Is Jesus of the lineage of David? Certainly. (Luke 18:35-42).

Hey, Shane, this was so awesome that I had to just post it again in case anyone missed it. Hey, all you so-called Christians, before you mouth off about Jesus in public again be sure to read the following very slowly and very carefully.

Shane wrote:

“If God has spoken to you and told you that someone is a HERETIC that is one thing, and i would really like to hear about it. If God has spoken to you and told you that someone is TEACHING HERESY, then that is an entirely different issue again, and again i would be grateful to hear about it.
BUT IF YOU’RE JUST GOING TO DEBATE THE INTEGRITY OF PEOPLE YOU’VE NEVER MET THEN I THINK YOU SHOULD FIND SOMETHING BETTER TO DO WITH YOUR TIME. God did not die for our sins just so we could sit round and criticize others, and pat our theology on the back.”

Chris, I appreciate your considered remarks, particularly about the Virgin Birth.

Of course, I shared, I believe, a holistic concern about Bell and, in particular, VE.

One of my core concerns was his multiple positive references to Marcus Borg and Borg’s “The Heart of Christianity.”

Not only have I expressed concern that Bell may not know what he believes regarding core matters of the Christian faith, but the deeper problem in the Emerging movement (correct me if I’m wrong) that confusion is a good thing; that knowing what you think (even if you are open to substantial dialogue) about core theological issues is a sign of wooden phariseeism or something like that.

It’s like being a theological “know nothing” is to be our highest aspiration, as long as we communicate what we think we know about what we don’t know in a cool way. How is that different than Fosdick?

Am I wrong?

Not half,

I appreciate what you’ve shared, but I see it as seriously begging the questions…

(1) What faith is it that we are putting into action? What are we being missional about? Is Islamic/Jewish/Freemasonic/Unitarian benevolence fundamentally different than Christian charity? If so, in what ways?

(2) What action did Jesus speak of? If you try the following text (about freely giving) on for size, it sounds more like a John Wimber worldview than a Rauschenbusch worldview. No?

Matt. 10:8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. 9 Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts;

Chris, I hereby motion to rename this post “The Post That Just Won’t Go Away Post.” Twenty years from now when Driscoll and Bell have started a ministry together and Bell’s son is engaged to Driscoll’s daughter, and all is right in the universe, people will STILL be commenting on this…

HAS ANYONE CHECKED OUT KEN WILBERS WEB SITE !!!!!!!!

http://www.kenwilber.com/home/landing/index.html

Rob Bell teaches this New Agers stuff!!

WAKE UP FROM YOUR SLUMBER PEOPLE. HECK WHY DON’T WE READ ALL THE NEW AGERS BOOKS LIKE NEAL DONNALD WALSH’S BOOKS OR DEEPAK CHOPRA IF YOU LIKE ROB BELL YOU WILL LOVE THEIR BOOKS. BEING NICE AND DOING GOOD DEEDS FOR HUMANITY DOES NOT SAVE YOUR SOUL. I HEARD A POD CAST ON CATALYST WHERE ROB (WOLF) BELL TOLD GABE LYONS THAT BEING A CHRISTIAN JUST MEANS BEING A GOOD PERSON!!! ALSO ROB USES THE TERM ULTAMITE REALITY FOR GOD BECAUSE IT IS A NEW AGE (OR RATHER NEW SPIRITUALLITY AS THEY ARE CALLED NOW) TERM!!! AND DIVINE SPARK ALSO A NEW AGE TERM. WHAT THESE NEW BREED OF FALSE TEACHERS DO IS THEY AFFIRM ALL THE TRADITIONAL TEACHING BUT ADD ALL THE NEW AGE TEACHING. CHECK IT OUT, NO TRUE CHRISTIAN WOULD LIKE KEN WILBERS SPIRITUAL TEACHING MUCH LESS TURN AROUND AND TEACH IT THEMSELVES. STOP FOLLOWING ROB BELL!

Why is this not about Ken Wilber? Rob Bell is all about Ken Wilber. Rob Bell says to spend THREE MONTHS reading Ken Wilber’s book. Why would a Christian WANT to spend three months reading a book written by a New Age spiritualist??? I’m not playing any “cards”. This is not a game. Rob Bell is deceiving people with a New Age message. The New Age teaching that we are all one and God is in everything and in everyone. Rob Bell teaches pantheism. Pantheism is not Christianity. I’m glad you got a laugh about my all caps. I am frustrated at the lack of discernment Christians have. You are right – using New Age terms does not make a person a New Ager. But, teaching New Age concepts DOES make a person a New Ager and that IS what Rob Bell does. If a person who is trying to warn you about a danger that you can’t see can make you not want to be a Christian, you have a big problem with your faith. Your faith shouldn’t be about what you think about me – it should be about Jesus Christ. Are you even a Christian? What is a Christian to you? A Christian has the Holy Spirit who guides them and teaches them what is truth and what isn’t. Any person who claims to be a Christian but cannot see or understand when they are told that Rob Bell is teaching wrong things may not be a Christian at all. You know why you don’t like what I say? It’s because you are rebellious and you don’t like people who speak with authority. Why are you diverting the attention away from Ken Wilber??? Is it because even you can’t understand why Rob Bell would tell people to study Ken Wilber’s teachings? Yes, I said study. When you tell someone to spend three months in a book that would only take three weeks for a slow reader who is not very educated to read, you are implying that they study it thoroughly. Ken Wilber’s emergence theory is about humans evolving or emerging and the end result is realizing that all is one. We are God. Rob Bell AFFIRMS what traditional Christian doctrine has been but what he is doing is slowly and very carefully leading people into the New Spirituality. This New Spirituality is not new – it is just the same old New Age beliefs repackaged. That is what Ken Wilber teaches. He is happy to let you keep all your OLD beliefs – just make sure you join in the New Humanity and New Spirituality. If you want to believe the old stuff that’s fine. But, here is a new road to follow, the road where we are all one, we are nice like Jesus, and God is in everyone and in everything. Watch and you will see, every book and tour Rob Bell does in the future will reveal more and more of what people are trying to warn you about his teaching now. You are like the sheep biting the shepherd who is trying to protect you. I’m not a shepherd but I follow THE SHEPHERD who has warned me and protected me from this sneaky wolf named Rob. I’ll even give you more reasons not to want to listen to me since you are so eager to find reasons. I didn’t graduate high school. I can’t write or spell well at all. I have dyslexia. But, I am the oldest of six brothers and sisters and I am the mother of five children so it is a character trait of mine to feel a responsibility to care for and protect people. I have the MOMMA BEAR thing going on. I don’t like seeing wolves in sheep’s clothing stalking and harming the sheep. Trust The Shepherd and read the written word he has given you (the Bible) and then compare Rob Bell and Ken Wilber’s teaching to it…

Diane,

I’m assuming you are very fundamental in your thinking and understanding of theology. I’m sure you mean well and you are hping to glorify God but really, Rob is not some crazy “wolf.” Maybe you don’t agree with him-fine. I don’t agree with a lot of folks, but they still love Jesus and try to live out the faith. We can disagree and still “contend” for the gospel. For instance, many people beleive the gifts of the HS are no longer needed-what if they are wrong? Or vice versa.

All of us will preach a gospel that falls short. Some do go off the deep end and teach a false gospel. But Rob Bell is not near that camp.

Mwalcher,

This is why many are frustrated with Christians-we can be so narrow-minder and we can be ready to fight instead of love. And claim we are doing these things for the glory of God and to be faithful in scripture-but much of it is pride and wanting to be right.

I respect how carefully he went about this. It does seem to me though that he starts drifting form being careful near the end. Also, when he refers to “Slaves, Women, and Homosexuality” he actually tells things about the book that aren’t true. The books premise is to use Slaves and Women as evidence of things that God has been moving forward and Homosexuality as a static, transcendent law… but Driscoll claims the book lumps homosexuality in with the other two as things that God is moving Forward with – which is simply not true – the book painstakingly explains in every chapter why the commands about homosexuality don’t change and are transcendent. I won’t get into what he says about the evidence of the book “holding no ground what so ever…” and about 1 Timothy 3 saying that only men can be deacons (the word “wives” is just not in the greek… it’s “women”… just let the Bible speak for itself…)

So, do you guys think the New Spirituality is Biblical Christianity? Do you understand that the New Spirituality really CHANGES peoples lives? They have a paradigm shift in their thinking and they experience a new outlook on life and they are excited about life again (or for the first time). They are AWAKENED and they focus on being connected with others and connected with creation and saving the planet? Do you believe that Jesus came not to show us His Divinity but to show us the way to the Christ within all of us whereby we experience Joy and love God (or Ultimate reality) and others like we never have before? Do you believe we are all “one” and that We all as humans have a divine spark in us and this divine spark is God? Is this what most of you guys believe Christianity is who write and read this blog??

I believe any humble church leader would be quick to call us all to be followers of Christ. Not followers of Rob Bell, Mark Driscoll, Brian Mclaren, C.S. Lewis, Shane Claiborne or G.K. Chesterton. As I could go on and on with names of authors whose books I have read and enjoyed, it would be of no use. Ultimately, the wisdom of God transcends human understanding. IF we cannot read the Bible as infallible nor any other human writings, then it leaves us with prayer as our most direct connection with God: Precisely the point that Bell has made over and over, and most other authors that speak truth. All this to say that I mean only to stress the importance of being very careful to not commit oneself wholeheartedly to the teachings of any man. This is very dangerous. Although I believe that one can derive truth from a variety of sources, this does not mean that the sources are a consistently reliable source of truth. I have utmost respect for many of these authors, but I consider them a means to an end, the end being the truth of Jesus.

I play soccer with Rob Bell and attend his church. On an almost weekly basis, he stresses the importance of the Church as an entity outside of any building. He insists that the members of Mars Hill Community form groups that meet in the community (at houses mostly) and discover what it means to follow Christ.

A book is a collection of ideas; Not a claim to be the ultimate source of wisdom, truth or knowledge (although the Bible merits exception). If an author claims it to be, I would question this. God reveals new truths to all of us in a variety of beautiful, unpredictable, and unprecedented ways. Authors are no exception. Have we not all said one thing and then found it to be false, or prayed on thing only to find that we missed the point? We are all capable of heretical interpretations of truth and yet capable of finding truth amongst lies, beauty among brokenness. It is only through the guidance of Christ that we can constantly remain aware of that which is true. To judge an author’s character by a writing or collection or writings is a difficult and possibly meaningless task. Just as you can’t judge a book by its cover, you can’t judge an author by his book.

Let us continue to seek God and His truths through careful prayer and reflection, and seek His guidance as we sort through the myriad of thoughts and ideas out there.

Grace and Peace.
-Andrew

I must say that I am curiously surprised by the frequent criticism of Rob Bell and his teachings. Some people accuse him of being a heretic because of things they think he is implying by his teaching. So let me throw out an honest challenge to those of you who believe that Rob Bell is teaching wrongly about essential fundamental points of the faith:

First, make a list of every point you think he believes or teaches that is fundamental to the faith and which you believe is wrong. (I imagine many will have trouble with even this basic step!)

Second, go to the website of Mars Hill Church in Grand Rapids and look at the church’s doctrinal statement. It is listed as a gospel narrative, I think. See whether it supports your ideas of what Rob Bell allegedly incorrectly teaches or believes. Since that church was started by him and he is still the current pastor, don’t you think it fair to assume that the church’s dcontrinal statement is consistent with his beliefs.

I challenge anyone to find an unorthodox belief in that doctrinal statement. I have read it closely and have found none.

So, unless you are willing to do what I just said, I think you should be very careful before criticising Bell or what you “think” he believes.

Peace of Christ to all!

Wow, no replies to this in four weeks. ‘Tis a shame Craig. The statement is awesome.

I forgot I wrote this along time ago. More for you all to chew on….

This is the NEW AGE gospel of Rob Bell
Read this excerpt from an article entitled “The Evangelical Attraction To Mysticism” By Alan Morrison. ( You can read the whole article at: http://www.bereanbeacon.org/EvangelicalAttraction.html

I. A BASIC INTRODUCTION TO MYSTICISM
1. DEFINING MYSTICISM
It has been well-said that mysticism ‘begins with a mist and always ends in schism’! There is more than a degree of truth in that witty aphorism. Chambers’ Dictionary defines ‘mysticism’ as ‘the habit or tendency of religious thought and feeling of those who seek direct [with the accent on this word 'direct'] communion with God or the divine’,2 while a mystic is defined as ‘one who seeks or attains direct intercourse with God in elevated religious feeling or ecstasy’.3

Evelyn Underhill’s defines Mysticism as ‘the art of union with Reality. The mystic is a person who has attained that union in a greater or less degree, or who aims at it and believes in such attainment.’
Aldous Huxley wrote: The technique of mysticism may result in the direct intuition of, and union with, an ultimate spiritual reality that is perceived as simultaneously beyond the self and in some way within it.’
Professor Ferguson, Dean of the Open University and an ardent advocate of mysticism, lists five generalised points which one can identify in any manifestation of mysticism:
‘First, mystics believe that there is an Ultimate Being, a dimension of existence beyond that experienced through the senses…[which] is often, though not invariably, conceived in personal terms and called God… Second, mystics claim that the Ultimate can in some sense be known or apprehended… Third, the soul perceives the Ultimate through inward sense… Fourthly, it would be widely held by mystics that there is an element in the soul akin to the Ultimate, a divine spark…a holy spirit within. In this way, to find God is to find one’s true self… Fifth, mysticism has as its zenith the experience of union with the Ultimate… The mystic seeks to pass out of all that is merely phenomenal, out of all lower forms of reality, to become Being itself’.4

We can see from this description of mysticism, first, that God is reduced to a pantheistic ‘dimension of existence’ beyond the normal senses, although this is sometimes called ‘God’ for convenience; second, that there is an element of this divinity, a divine spark, a ‘holy spirit within’ all people (a foundational error); third, that it is possible to tap into this ‘inwardly’ so that one is absorbed into it, and can even become that ‘Ultimate Being’ oneself; fourth, the relegation of this present life to a ‘lower form of reality’, something ‘merely phenomenal’. Finally, there is the idolatrous and even blasphemous assertion that ‘to find God is to find one’s true self’.
There is very much more we could say, as there are as many definitions as there are people to make them. What we find is that the operation of mysticism, wherever it occurs, involves the utilisation of certain practices in order to bring about an altered state of consciousness so that a person can not only personally experience the Divine presence — however that may be perceived — but actually become unified with the Divine Essence, usually in a stupendous ecstatic experience.
And so we find that what mysticism is all about — as it has manifested throughout the world over the centuries, whether it is Eastern mysticism or so called Christian mysticism — can be reduced to two heads: 1) The seeking out of a direct experience of God, without any mediator; 2) The setting up of the individual’s subjective experience as the sole arbiter of religious truth.
And the manifestation of these twin-tenets of mysticism in the Christian scene has been diverse: ranging from one extreme in the passive navel-gazing of the Quietists, to the opposite extreme in the enthusiastic fanaticism of the Holy Spirit Movements which have dogged orthodoxy throughout the Gospel Age. (The so-called ‘Toronto Blessing’, for example, is a classic manifestation of manipulated mysticism, as we shall come to appreciate).
These twin-tenets of mysticism have always played a vital part in the religions of the world. Some world religions are primarily mystical, e.g., Hinduism and Buddhism. Whereas other religions are primarily formalist but have their mystical wings, such as the Sufism of Islam and the Kabbalism of post-AD.70 Judaism. How Roman Catholicism came to be involved in mysticism is a complex story, with a number of seemingly disparate influences.

Now read Rob Bells book (Velvet Elvis page 021) Rob Bell is saying that when you live the way of Jesus you notice something DEEPER going on. Bell says, that living the way of Jesus is the best way to live because it is rooted in profound truths about how the WORLD is. You find yourself living in tune with reality. You are more and more in sync with how the UNIVERSE is at its deepest levels. Bell then says, Jesus’ intention was and is to call people to live in tune with reality. Bell then says that God is the ultimate reality. What Rob Bell is doing here is equating God with the world, with the universe. Rob Bell is saying that God is the universe. Rob Bell goes on to say that Jesus is not the exclusive way to God, He is just the “best” way to the “DEPTH” of reality. Rob Bells god is a pantheistic god. His god is not God at all, and his jesus is some other jesus who resides in every single human being as a Divine spark ( see Bells new book Sex God pg. 019) Rob Bell says, …..”something of God has been placed in them. We reflect what God is like and who God is. A DIVINE SPARK resides in every single human being.” Rob Bell is a false teacher teaching anti Christ, humanistic, new age teaching. It looks like truth, it smells like truth, but it is a counterfeit. THIS is the truth, Ephesians 2:8-10 For it is by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship,created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

Diane,

Not sure how to respond. It’s more of the same. Not trying to be a jerk. But you take so much out of context. If Jesus told you Rob was OK, would you also try and prove Jesus wrong. Life is too short to stress about this for months on end.

Do us all a favor and relax. Or at least bring new information. I wonder how you will feel when you and Rob hang in heaven-forever.

Diane, I might suggest that you ask God for humility. There have been many people on this post who are not attempting to reconcile wrong theology with the Bible as you might suggest, but who have been humbly able to accept the fact that we might not be able to explain everything, especially when it comes to quickly condemning another person that we have not met. Your choice in that case has been to accuse those people of believing it, an odd manifestation of regress argument. Chris’ last response to you was simply: “Relax, we’re all on the same side here”. He said nothing of God being the universe or other such nonsense; you jumped to some incredibly illogical conclusions about him that frankly made me laugh.

Chris is the associate pastor at my church. He does not believe there is another way to heaven outside of Jesus, he does not believe all religions pray to the same God, etc. You see what has happened here, right? You worked yourself up over this and ascribed these ideas to Chris and others when they never made those claims at all; humility, Diane, allows you to listen to others respectfully because you are aware that you don’t have it all figured out. Christ called out the Pharisees because their inability to converse and treat others with love goes against His entire teaching.

Rob Bell does not believe in other ways to get to God. To quote from the core beliefs of his church (from their website): “Jesus is our only hope for bringing peace and reconciliation between God and humans. Through Jesus we have been forgiven and brought into right relationship with God.” It’s a dangerous thing to claim he teaches something else Diane: that is called gossip, even if “evidence” of his heresy comes from another source (or anything that is not from Rob Bell himself).

I’d also like to say something about reading a “non-Christian” work and claiming that study of it is inherently heretical. I’m assuming you don’t find Paul heretical, seeing as how you quote his books often on your blog, correct? What, then, do we make of the fact that he quotes pagan authors when speaking to the Areopagus in Acts 17:22-34? Paul quotes both Epimenides and Aratus in this passage, neither of whom are Christ-followers. Wait a minute, that means Paul has been reading pagan authors? Surely not! No Christian should be studying such nonsense, right? Yet he is not only reading it, but he actually quotes it as truth in our New Testament? He does. He is applying a new truth to the original, secular works. The point, Diane, is that one can read ANY non-Christian literature without becoming a secularist or mystic, or whatever word you might choose. To assume that simply reading a book is the same thing as inherently agreeing with whatever the author might say is called circular logic, and it is a silly claim. Any English or debate teacher would tell you that circular arguments are not a valid form of intellectual discussion. I am interested to know your take on Paul’s speech in Acts 17?

Rob Bell denies FAITH in Jesus as the only way to salvation (not that Jesus himself is not a way to salvation). I left out the word FAITH. I am sorry about that. I am also sorry about my attitude. I am not perfect in my attitude and emotions but that does not mean that what Rob Bell is teaching is biblical.

A person named Pat on November 29th posted on this blog explaining what Rob Bell teaches in his “The gods aren’t angry” tour. It’s called Christian Universalism. It is the belief that because of Jesus’ death on the cross (as a payment for all the sins of the world) that all people are saved. People don’t have to have faith in Jesus or even know of Jesus. Jesus saved everyone by what He did and reconciled all things to God.

My Husband keeps telling me to stick to one topic when I talk about Rob Bell. But that is so hard to do because he is spreading so many wrong teachings. I’ll stick to this one topic because it is an important one. People are saved through FAITH in Jesus. Yes, Jesus died for ALL but we must hear of Him and place our faith in Him to be saved. These are the places where Rob Bell teaches Christian Universalism in his book Velvet Elvis. For example, he says on page 21 – “Jesus at one point claimed to be ‘the way, the truth, and the life’”. He states about this verse that “Jesus was not making claims about one religion being better than all the other religions.” Do you see how Rob Bell shifts the topic to religion rather than the exclusivity about salvation that Christ was claiming in John 14:6? On page 146 he says, “This reality (forgiveness and reconciliation) isn’t something we make true about ourselves by doing something (having faith). It is already true. Our choice is to live in this new reality or cling to a reality of our own making.” What Rob Bell is teaching is that we are ALREADY saved we just need to realize it. Here are some scriptures that clearly show that the teaching that all men are already saved is false:

John 3:16-18
“For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. Whoever believes in Him is not condemned but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because He has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.”

Romans 1:16-17
I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew then for the Gentile. For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”

Acts 16:30-31
He then brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved – you and your household.”

Ephesians 2:8-9
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – not by works, so that no one can boast.

Do you see? Living Jesus’ way does not save a person. A person must have faith, they must believe in Jesus. Living the way of Jesus by doing good works does not save us. But, so that no man can boast, God has made it so that we aren’t saved by what we do or how we live. But rather, we are saved by our faith in God the Son, Jesus.

The Diabolical System Of Diaprax

Diaprax is a word coined by Dean Gotcher, founder of the Institute for Authority Research. Dean has traveled the United States and given over 1,000 live presentations to Christians explaining this wicked technique that is surreptitiously destroying our families, our government, and even our Christian churches.

After reading and digesting 600+ social psychology books, Mr. Gotcher joined the word dialectic and the word praxis to create the term DIAPRAX. Dialectic is a philosophical term that describes the use of dialogue to resolve conflict between opposing ideas or opinions. The word Praxis simply means “to practice.” Therefore, Diaprax is the practice of the dialectic.

These terms are derived from the ungodly 18th century philosophical model that is known as the Hegelian Dialectic. Named after the German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Hegel (although considerably refined since its inception in Hegel’s era), this world view has now completely enveloped the world.

In its simplest form, the Diaprax system is a process whereby the entire world will eventually dialog until they reach a consensus. The 3 part formula consists of 3 essential components: Thesis, Antithesis, and Synthesis. Simply put, a “thesis” is combined with the opposing view, the “anti-thesis,” and the result is called the “synthesis.”

In the Bible we see Satan cause the fall of man through the use of Diaprax (the practice of the dialectic). Eve tells the Serpent that God has commanded that of the tree in the midst of the garden, that they “shall not eat of” it. That is the thesis. Then Satan offers an opposing opinion (the antithesis) that flies in the face of the Word of God, telling Eve about the benefits of eating the forbidden fruit. Eve joins the two views and comes up with the synthesis – the fruit is “good food,” “pleasant to the eye” and will “make one wise.” Through Adam and Eve’s reasoning, God’s eternal truth was reasoned away, and the curse of death replaced the gift of eternal life.

No Christian can follow the Lord of the Bible, and partake of Diaprax. You cannot serve two masters, and the practicing of the Dialectic is an insidious process that now permeates all forms of society – including the “management” practices of the corporate Christian church.

In the same manner that Diaprax was used to “facilitate” the fall of man, it is today “facilitating” the complete destruction of our country. The American family has moved from Patriarchic (the Biblical model of the family) to the more Diaprax-oriented Matriarchic. The end result may be referred to as Heresyarchic. The synthesis of the Patriarchal and the Matriarchal is Heresy-archical. Satan tempted (diapraxed) Eve who compromised the fact based instructions of God the sake of relationship – the then nascent dialog with the Serpent.

Obviously, men are also susceptible to the same approach, for Adam willfully disobeyed God for the sake of the relationship with Eve – who had already eaten of the fruit. When reduced to a simple philosophical paradigm, God’s Word is absolute and is true. This is the Thesis.

As various doctrinal approaches to Christianity vie for pre-eminence, while posing as interpretive systems, they ultimately put forward the Antithesis. As Christians seek to maintain their relationships with churches, family, friends, government, etc. (see Mark 13:12) slowly erode (sacrifice) their previously firm stance on the pure fact of God’s word in order to preserve the relationship. Thus, each person is eventually processed and a Synthesis is reached.

Virtually all organizational structures are presently moving in the spirit of Diaprax. Every city council, county board of commissioners, courthouse, church board of Elders, and corporate enterprise is deeply enmeshed in the process.

In this fashion, previously Protestant organizations that were staunchly anti-Papist are now embracing the heresy of Rome. Previously conservative Christian groups are slowly allowing women to become pastors, homosexuals to be married in the church, and firm doctrines such as the Virgin birth to be liberally “spiritualized.” Bibles (such as the NIV) are being translated via a system known as “dynamic equivalency” which is built on the process of the Diaprax – a translational dialogue to consensus.

On the political front, the once great American Republic is Diapraxing itself into a totalitarian police state, and falling in line with the One-World United Nations government that the Scriptures declare will arise in the last days. After “dialoguing to consensus” on the subject of security versus personal freedom, the public has moved from the absolute guarantee of The Bill Of Rights (the thesis) and forfeited personal freedoms (the synthesis) because the compromise is necessary in order for the government to “protect” us – the threat to our security being the antithesis.

The consensus (the result of the social Diaprax) has concluded that “peace and safety” is more important than individual freedoms.

The process works in literally thousands of environments and is now running at full speed. Interestingly enough, the American Peoples Encyclopedia states that the Diaprax “can come to rest only at the apex of a hierarchial system.” Its early 20th century fruits were Communism and Fascism. This is the mechanism for the ultimate hierarchic system which the Bible tells us will be ruled by the globalist elite with their inevitable Antichrist (the synthesis) at the top of the political pyramid that is presently being constructed.

Sadly, most mainstream Christian churches are allowing the Diapraxing of their values as codified in the Ten Commandments – the Thesis. The Antithesis is Government sanctioned Abortion, Homosexuality, Pornography, Divorce, and many other non-Christian behaviors. Because the incorporated state-sanctioned churches are required by law to respond in a certain fashion to these sins in order to maintain their 501(c)(3) non-profit status, the churches have compromised the truth of God’s word in order to preserve the relationship with the government.

The inevitable Synthesis is a powerless church that has “become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit… .” (Revelation 18:3)

Once again, a simple example of the Diaprax process in the Christian church works like this: Homosexuality is a sin (God’s truth). This is the Thesis, the truth of God. Man reasons that Jesus loves everyone, therefore we should love everyone. This is the Antithesis. Thus, the Synthesis is that the church accepts (or simply tolerates) the sin because it loves the sinner.

For Christians, all SIN is the inevitable result of practicing Diaprax. The conscience deals in truth in absolute black and white – thou shalt not, right or wrong, yes or no. Man’s “ego” deals in the gray zone of feelings and emotions – the desires of man’s lustful heart – could be, should, wannabe, etc. So we compromise God’s truth with our reasoning, and we sin. Unless you have “the mind of Christ,” the end result for all humanity is a reprobate mind that has brought the organized Christian church and the freedom loving people of America to the point where they are now embracing the diabolical system of The Antichrist and his False Prophet – the Diaprax.

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.” – Isaiah 55:8

Doug Hudson & James Lloyd

Copyright © 2002 Christian Media Network

Let’s get back to the faith they had…….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNq8yMxSARQ

First of all I wanted to say thanks to all of you for taking time to read and comment.

That being said…I think we’ve reached a point where this conversation is no longer productive.

Therefore I’m going to close the comments on this post.

Once again…Thanks.