Mr. Bell’s frontal attacks on the essentials of the church reflects his hatred (or at least blatant indifference or unattended ambivalence) of his fellow man–diminished by his love of his own notions of the Bible–and anything related to True Truth. Perhaps Mr. Bell thinks he’s doing everyone with a twinge of guilt a favor by constructing a neon WELCOME sign above “the broad road” (Mt 7:13).

I admire that you report to love your fellow man. Would your love go so far as to simply turn your back on someone who might cling to false doctrine–and live a life of self- and other-destruction? How about one of your own children? Would you love them by helping them misinterpret the Bible because the truth might hurt their feelings (Proverbs 4:23)? Is no truth existent or worth defending any more, sir?

Post-modernism would have us believe that “doctrine divides”. In fact, history proves just the opposite: doctrine is the only thing that unites. The Bible (for what it’s worth to those who may well believe it’s an outdated document) is very clear about the importance of doctrine: http://www.4simpsons.com/doctrine_counts.htm Not because God is insecure about having it His way; but because God loves us enough to give us every chance NOT to destroy ourselves. But, given the chance to turn our back on God, we always will (Jeremiah 17:9).

Mr. Bell is a “divider of disproportionate proportion” because he uses a very public pulpit to feed the culture’s widespread skepticism, Biblical ignorance, misguided notions of exclusivity, pluralism, and disdain for authority… among other things.

Tired of “black and white”, we’ve decided to color all things gray… And it’s having the promised impact on our culture, “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.” (Friedrich Nietzsche).

In my opinion, Mr. Bell is simply fueling the fires of hell he doesn’t believe in. God’s love doesn’t need defending, and neither does its opposite.

I am also one who has escaped the clutches of an institution that is far too confident in its understanding of how the world works. I am a former evangelical pastor who, 15 years ago, stopped attending church altogether, not because of an all too common scandal, but because I couldn’t stand to be around Christians anymore. The bumper sticker, “Jesus is cool, but his followers give me the creeps” sums up my opinion of so many well-intentioned, yet overconfident believers.

I did not come here to argue, but merely express a different opinion. I actually stumbled upon this site after watching the youtube video of Rob Bell squirming on the television news show (the link was also provided in someone’s earlier post in this thread).

I would like to express my opinion with a question: Why does Rob Bell’s book scare Christians so much? What are you afraid will happen? I’ve learned that fear is not an easy emotion for Christians to express, so let me ask it a different way: Why does Bell’s message make you so angry?

I am highly educated (and still believe in hell by the way), but I’ve learned that the more I know, the less I know. As my love of others increases, the less life seems to fit into neat little boxes to check off my “Good vs. Evil” list.

Take your shots and quote scripture at me. Tell me how “the blood” will never lose its power and on and on. I’ve known the same verses since my childhood. I guess I just wish we all would sometimes just admit that we don’t know as much as we think we do about how this crazy thing called life works.

Thanks for listening.

The fact that it is not mentioned as the final state of unbelievers does not mean it did not exist. Heaven as the final state of the believer is not mentioned either. God in Christ puts on lights that were previously off or at best dimmed.

Hi, just to say that while it cannot definitively be asserted that animals dying for human coverings and Cain’s sacrifice was unacceptable because it was not blood, we can fairly make this inference from how these issues develop in the rest of Scripture.

Certainly, as we read the OT it becomes increasingly clear that, as the Hebrews writer affirms, without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

There were 5 principal offerings in Israel and only those where blood was shed made atonement. The meal/grain offering did not (typically it spoke of the life of Christ as that but not his death; death was necessary for atonement Cf Jn 6).

is bell a universalist? you could interpret the implicit, subversive undercurrents in some of his questions as such. does he explicitly make such claims? i don’t think so. does how we think about Christ’s claims to be the Way to the Father God bear importance? hugely, as bell would agree. does bell go too far at times in order to make his point or provoke questioning? i think so. does this disqualify his ministry or make him a heretic? now that’s a question (one that is being answered, very much so, above). what is the relationship of the Kingdom and politics, and how does that affect the conversation of where we place bell (and whether we need to place, or pigeon hole, or name him, at all) in attempts to be discerning and faithful to the holiness of God and His word?

would i suggest the book to a new or non bible-believing christian? most likely not. what is the value of discussion in the public forum, such as blog posts and comments in response? i am not sure. as previously mentioned, these are important and beautiful things to talk about (ie the revealed mystery of Christ, His glorious, literal atonement, the new thing God is doing in our lives as a result). but it does seem that in many of the comments above there is an awful lot of political hi-fiving and self-celabtratory back-patting that should not be mistaken for the outworking of the Kingdom communally, and of our faith personally. supporting a man in his ministry, if one sees God’s Spirit at work in and through it, is a beautiful thing.

i hope my words are not saltless. forgive if they be. may we continue to pursue speaking in all truth and in all grace, as our wondrous Savior has and does and forevermore shall.

let us remember 2 corinthians 3:6 -

He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

lastly, while there is no great ending to this response of mine, and while i wonder whether or not my sending it will bear any fruit, and while such a discussion would be the better were we to share one another’s presence over a lunch, i believe an appropriate ending is found in reference to the story of Acts 5, especially verses 33-39.

thank you, again, for hearing.

Although you and I take issue on a few points here, I have to tell you, this was an absolutely brilliantly-written blog. I had the unfortunate experience of reading some of this ridiculous nonsense while I was waiting on a patient to show up (a lady had left it on the table, and I’d heard about it), and I could barely believe what I’d read. The contradictions reminded me of the rantings of Adolf Hitler vis a vis “Mein Kampf” and what was even more amazing to me was that this “pastor” was being touted as a minister of Christian theology. Where was his Divinity or Religious Studies degree from, anyway? Did you see the interview of him on Martin Bashir’s show? He could barely maintain his cool as Bashir calmly tried to keep him on task and focused. Anyway, my friend Tina sent me a link to this article you’ve written on my Facebook page, and although I’m a traditional Irish Catholic, lol, I really wanted to let you know what a PLEASURE it was to read such an intelligently-written, well-researched and refreshingly-poignant article from someone as young as yourself. You give me hope that Christians can one day tout the moniker of sanity once again and spread the word of God without sounding like one of Koresh’s stooges. Thank you for this, I’ll be reading your work henceforth.

An epic debate is taking place.

Let’s arrange it: Rob Bell vs. Albert Mohler, D.A. Carson, Russell Moore, John Piper and Timothy Keller.

Truth must be pursued and glorified.

Further, even if we were to ignore the historical facts, the word choice suggests otherwise. Instead of any other word used to speak about sin-offering or guilt-offering, both which require a shedding of blood, Moses uses the word which is associated with “meal-offering” (minha) of grain. This does not have to specifically mean blood offering as in the case of 1 Sam. 2:17, but is used of an offering in general. In fact, it’s interesting that most of the time this specific word is used, it’s commonly referred to as “grain” or “vegetable-offering.” The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary cites that it is “especially of a bloodless offering.” Another great article to read is Bruce K. Waltke’s which is found the Westminster Theological Journal 48 (1986), p. 366.

Something also to consider I think is the fact that the Scripture’s emphasis I believe is on the fact that Cain brought to the LORD “an” offering. Whereas Abel brought to the LORD the “firstborn of his flock and of their fat portions.” In other words it’s very much tied to the heart. It was as James Cosentino points out, offered in faith.

Forgive me if that came off as harsh or ungracious. Often times text doesn’t quite communicate the tone. But I was greatly encouraged to look into Scripture and to interact with the text deeply. Thanks for the stimulation brother =)

Other than that, I also agree with Dr. Moore’s affirmation. We should never diminish that, and I think that is the very point of his article, not whether about Cain and Abel’s sacrifice and it’s nature. Great thoughts Dr. Moore!

Where from scripture do you get that the clothing of Adam and Eve was a sign of the blood sacrifice? IE are we reading something back into scripture that we believe to be true but the scripture doesn’t actually directly teach?

Would claiming that Cain’s offering is rejected because it was not blood be putting the emphasis on the work over the faith?

We should have maintained Hebrew and Greek as the only language the Bible could ever be read or taught in. Certainly we have zero need for modern paraphrases that seek to further bridge the gap.

Your logic also doesn’t ring true for me as someone that presents Christ on a regular basis to actual lost people. When offering a “step of faith” to someone with zero church experience they look at me like I have lobsters crawling out of my ears.

The point I was making that’s not addressed is “how is this any different” than what Warren and most of our churches are doing that care about lost people beyond lip-service? If the point is reaching people for Christ - and we’re approaching this like Paul - then we’d be eager to be as a Jew to the Jew - weak as the weak - I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. (1 Cor. 9:22)

In my experience that’s what Bell/Warren are driving at with this discussion. This is the point of most of CS Lewis’ writing and also pretty much how missions are accomplished. We must figure a way to help people understand the Gospel without getting hung up on a word.

“Mumbo Magumbo!”

The conversation that you will participate in on Thursday with Albert Mohler, Denny and Justin Taylor is a cause for celebration.

Congratulations on having the courage and fortitude to combat the BIGGEST HERESY OF THE 21ST CENTURY.

You men are courageous warriors for the Lord.

I am praying for you to defeat this evil theology of Rob Bell.

Make No Mistake - the outcome of your conversation on Thursday will shape the debates on the Gospel for the remainder of the 21st century. It is that big, it is that epic.

My cheeks are wet with tears as I type this. The grace of God is at stake. Push back the forces of Satan. Hell exists, hell is majestic. Yes, even majestic because it shows the POWER and JUSTICE of a HOLY God.

Do not lose the battle. The Lord’s grace and glory is at stake.

Godspeed, Russell Moore. My prayers and tears are with you and your brave team.

As with any confrontation of questionable doctrine, we must go directly to God in prayer, and search the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit’s discernment.

On another note, I just wanted to thank you Dr. Moore for ALL of the great posts. I have really enjoyed following every one of them since 2010 when you took the words out of my mouth about Glenn Beck’s prominence. You and a few others have inspired me to start my own blog in fact(http://thecaffeinecemetery.blogspot.com/). Hopefully you don’t mind that bit of “spam!” :)

In any case, I’m really looking forward to the messages God will give your readers through this blog in the future. Take care and God bless you!

Sola scriptura

I greatly appreciate this article, and resonate with your statement that this is nothing new. Indeed, it sounds just like New England liberalism with a little bit of a liberation grid attached to it.

That said, could you maybe qualify the statement about Cain and Abel’s sacrifice being about blood? I’ve never heard anyone interpret it that way before, and I’d like to hear your opinion on the matter. I’ve always taken it to be more of an issue of heart trajectory, rather than an animal vs. vegetable scenario. Cain was a farmer, and Abel was an animal herder, so they both gave out of what they had. I always thought it was a similar scenario to Mark 12:43-44, where Jesus says that the widow gave all she had as opposed to the others who “give out of their abundance.”

Any thoughts you could give, maybe in a follow-up blog, would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,
Luke Allison

Luke

Nothing makes sense to people that are perishing. Similar to why, when I live in the heart of Florida do I see oranges from California! Doesn’t make sense. But take that faith step, ask Jesus to change you, the ‘helper’ comes upon you and a person becomes a new babe in Christ. When you love Jesus you want to learn about your new best friend and little by little the songs make sense.
Look at this verse from a song-
“Well you wore out your welcome with random precision. Borne on the steel breeze. Come on you boy child you see’er of visions, come on you painter, you piper, you prisoner and Shine!” That is a quote from a very famous song in the 1970’s by the British band Pink Floyd. It played on every radio that played rock. Does that make sense? No. But words have meanings. But what does it all collectively mean? Nothing.

My point is non-Christian peoples listen to music all the time that doesn’t make sense. Hymns have a vocabulary all their own that we can learn almost unawares as we grow in wisdom and stature and in favor with God as did Noah. My other point is that the words of Christ and other writers of The Book don’t make sense to people that are perishing and headed for Hell.

While agree that Mr Bell is far off the mark concerning basic Christian tenents, I wonder why we, as Southern Baptists, encourage the doctrines of Billy Graham, who, in his younger days, specifically spoke of the eternal fires of hell, but after the mid to late 50s spoke of it only as punishment through eternal seperation from God?

I do agree that hell is a real place, but I also believe it is a place that Jesus spoke of as a place where the rich man was “tormented in this flame”. When I contacted the Billy Graham Association, their spokesman said that Mr. Graham could never settle that issue, and that I should speak to a local pastor about it. I can read what Jesus said, and don’t need someone trying to teach me that the fires are not real. If Mr. Graham cannot settle on that issue, I wonder why we, as Southern Baptists hold him in such a high esteem?

I consider Mr. Graham to be my brother in the Lord, and my attempt at contacting him personally through the Association was an attempt at being scriptural in my approach to him. My hope would be that he would, again, say what the Scriptures say, that hell is a place of torment “in flame”.

With Love In Christ,
Phillip Senn