Thursday, April 28, 2011

Thursday's Thought-A Thousand Words

Sorry I missed last week’s post. I spent Thursday night and most of Friday at a camp with a group from a local high school, and once I got back I had a very busy weekend.

A couple weeks ago, someone who reads my blog (and will remain anonymous throughout this post unless he or she decides to reveal him- or herself in the comments) sent me a message saying the blog was good, but it needs more pictures. While I am not opposed to putting more pictures on my blog, I am also stuck with a computer that will celebrate its fourth birthday next month, and which takes ages to load anything more than a Word document onto the internet. But the comment got me thinking.

What impact has the camera had on our society? On our understanding of beauty?

How much has having cameras easily accessible caused us to miss out on amazing moments in life because we were too focused on trying to get the best picture of the event rather than enjoying the event itself?

How much less creative does our language have to be now that we have the easy ability to “show, not tell” about everything in life?

If a picture is worth a thousand words, why did God not include any pictures in the Bible? And if words are important enough that God decided to use thousands of them rather than pictures, what impact should that have on the importance of words in our lives?

Would pictures more easily allow me to communicate to the world what is happening in my life?

Now, don’t misunderstand me. I think more pictures on here would certainly be beneficial, especially since I’m guessing most of the people reading this have never been to Asia. However, I also think that in our everyday life, our reliance on cameras and the instant and easy ability to capture a moment so we can relive it forever often costs us the chance of enjoying the original moment itself. I think words have a power to express the emotion and feeling behind an event that a picture in and of itself cannot do (have you ever seen a picture that adequately captured the beauty of the setting sun?)

I think it would be a fun (although time-consuming) exercise someday to watch something that would be a photographer's dream, but rather than bringing a camera, I want to bring a pen and paper to see if I truly have the creativity to come up with a thousand words to describe that picture. I haven’t done it yet. The idea still intimidates me. But I wonder what I’d see in that moment if I approached it with my mind, rather than my camera.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Thursday's Thought

This is one of those weeks where I sat down to write and felt like I simply had no great revelations to share with the world, nothing new, original, and exciting to bring to you from my own mind. So, I am reaching back into the vault and pulling up an old C.S. Lewis quote I was reminded of this week as I prepared for my youth group lesson. I hope it encourages you and challenges you in the way you approach your everyday life:

“It may be possible for each to think too much of his own potential glory hereafter; it is hardly possible for him to think too often or too deeply about that of his neighbour. The load, or weight, or burden of my neighbour’s glory should be laid daily on my back, a load so heavy that only humility can carry it, and the backs of the proud will be broken. It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations. It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics. There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilization—these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit—immortal horrors or everlasting splendours.”—C.S. Lewis, “The Weight of Glory”

Friday, April 8, 2011

Thursday's (Late) Thought-My Review of "Love Wins"

Hello, sorry for the late post this week. It has been a busy one. For this Thursday’s (late) Thought, I am posting an abridged review of Rob Bell’s new book Love Wins, which has been making waves in Christian circles around the world. It is abridged because I think if I wrote a full review of all my thoughts on the book, I could easily write 10+ pages. I don’t want to take the time to do that, and I’m pretty sure nobody would read it if I did.

For those of you who know nothing about the book, it is labeled as “A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived.” In it, Rob Bell, a pastor from Michigan attempts to (or at least says he’s going to attempt to) answer the question of the eternal fate of every person who has ever walked the earth. In doing so, he proposes many answers to questions about our eternal fate that fall outside the lines of what many in the Christian community would label as “orthodoxy.” If you’re interested in reading my thoughts on the book, here they are:

Bell opens the book in typical Rob Bell fashion—by asking lots of questions. He then goes on in chapter 2 to reexamine the biblical understanding of heaven. I enjoyed this chapter and felt that it was actually closer to the biblical understanding of heaven than the beliefs held by most Christians today (although I do have different beliefs than him in even this area). My biggest complaint about chapter 2 is that it felt like I was reading a condensed version of N.T. Wright’s book Surprised By Hope, a book that treats the same issue as this chapter in much more depth, and which Bell actually recommends for further reading at the end of Love Wins.

Chapter 3 and on is where a lot of people (including me) found our interpretation of the Bible to be vastly different than Rob Bell’s. In his study of hell, he redefines the classical definition and instead says he believes the word “hell” refers to states of oppression on earth and possibly a purgatory-like time after death for those who don’t believe in Christ during this life (yes, he does believe we will be given further chances to believe after we are dead). To develop this belief, he reinterprets the traditional understanding of many Bible passages that speak on these issues. He also recommends the idea (although leaving the possibility open that this is not the way it will work) that eventually everyone will trust in Christ (either in this life or at some point after death) and will join God’s kingdom on earth.

Needless to say, I had a lot of issues with this book.

I think the most foundational thing that led Bell to these less-than-orthodox conclusions is a flawed understanding of the character and nature of God and of sin. In the entire book, the word “holy” only occurs twice, never when Bell is listing the attributes of God. Once, it is in a verse that he is quoting, and once it is presented as a part of a theory of the atonement which he is arguing against. God’s justice is also relegated to a secondary role in the book. Although the word "justice" is mentioned a few times (8 to be exact) in the book, the vast majority of these references are to social justice rather than to the justice of God which forces Him to punish sin and the sinners who commit sin. In fact, the times when Bell does mention God’s punishment of sin, he strongly implies (twice) that it would be unjust of God to make people suffer “infinitely for the finite sins they committed in the few years they spent on earth” (p. 102, cf. p. 2). Apparently, Bell judges our sins by the finite span of time during which we commit them rather than by the infinite God against whom we commit said sins. All of this is to say that Bell’s understanding of the character and nature of God and the severity of our sin are incredibly flawed, and these clearly lead to his flawed conclusions about the fate of every person who ever lived.

This understanding of our sin and the character and nature of God is further clarified when Bell argues against the idea that Jesus died to save us from God. He says, “Let’s be very clear, then: we do not need to be rescued from God. God is the one who rescues us from death, sin, and destruction. God is the rescuer” (p. 181). I wholeheartedly agree that God, through Jesus, is our rescuer. I strongly disagree with the rest of this statement. The Bible is clear that God is holy and just and our sin is an attack against that holiness and justice. We deserve wrath. And the New Testament clearly says (four times, to be exact) that Jesus became our propitiation—our wrath-bearing sacrifice—when He was on the cross. The wrath of God was poured out on Him. He saved us from God. The other problem with Bell’s statement here is that if God needs to save us from death, sin, and destruction rather than from Himself, that would mean that these three things have a power over God that requires Him to change His actions due to them. It would mean that, although God eventually defeated them, they were—at least for a time—greater than God.

Another thing that struck me about the book is that for “A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived,” there are a lot of key Bible passages about heaven, hell, and the fate of every person who ever lived that Bell completely leaves out of his discussion. Among these are Hebrews 9:27, which says: “it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment…”; Matthew 12:31, where Jesus discusses the unforgiveable sin; and Revelation 20:15, which says: “And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.” All of these would appear to argue against Bell’s conclusions, and all of them are conspicuously absent from the entire length of the work.

At one point in the book, Bell even goes so far as to slander the character of God. He references the passage in 1 Tim. 2 when Paul says, “God wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.” He then says that if not all people get saved, then God is “not totally great. Sort of great. A little great.” (p. 98). This is bad enough in and of itself, but then he goes further. “So will those who have said no to God’s love in this life continue to say no in the next? Love demands freedom, and freedom provides that possibility. People take that option now, and we can assume it will be taken in the future” (p. 113). So, not only does Bell believe that God is only “a little great” if not all people get saved, but he also believes it is a distinct possibility that not all people will be saved. He not only proposes, but actually leaves open the option that God is “not totally great. Sort of great. A little great.” Wow!

In what was possibly the most frustrating part of the book, Bell provides nothing but questions where he has promised answers (is that anything new for him?). In the “Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived,” he reaches the conclusion: “Will everybody be saved, or will some perish apart from God forever because of their choices? Those are questions, or more accurately, those are tensions we are free to leave fully intact. We don’t need to resolve them or answer them because we can’t, and so we simply respect them, creating space for the freedom that love requires” (p. 114). The book promising answers about the fate of everyone who has ever lived ultimately concludes that we can’t know what the fate of everyone will be.

In his chapter titled “Does God Get What God Wants?” Bell concludes that we ultimately cannot answer the question of whether God gets what God wants (specifically in reference to human salvation), although we can know for certain that we get what we want (p. 116). He apparently has either never read Psalm 115:3 or he has forgotten all about it.

Ultimately, what Bell concludes in this book is not only wrong, but also dangerous. I am not saying this to come across as someone who takes pleasure at the thought that there will be people spending eternity in hell (I don’t), but rather as someone who thinks it is necessary to present a lost and dying world with the truth about what the Bible says about, well, heaven, hell, and the fate of every person who ever lived. If we take Bell’s teaching to heart, it not only distorts the face of the gospel beyond recognition to the people we see on a daily basis, it also fundamentally alters the character of God, and undermines any and all necessity for missions at every level. Really—if everyone is going to get a second chance after they die to believe in Jesus, why tell them about Him now? Why not just make redemptive art and care for the environment and wait for Jesus to return? (Not that there’s anything wrong with doing those things, they’re just not the gospel)

I could go on for many more pages with problems I saw in this book and major disagreements I have with Bell about what he says in it, but for the sake of time, space, and readability, I will limit the rest of what I have to say to a few positive comments I have on the book.

Despite the many problems I have with the answers he gives to them, the questions Rob Bell attempts to answer in Love Wins are important questions that many in our society, even inside of churches, are struggling with. The call to think on these questions is important, and I think many of us will find as we think about them and study them Biblically that although Bell’s answers to these questions are often not sufficient for us to rely upon, for many of us our current understanding of many of the answers to these questions is flawed as well. Although I don’t recommend this book as the resource for you to check for your answers, I do want to challenge you to study the issues of heaven, hell, and the fate of every person who ever lived so that when asked about it, you can give an informed, Biblical answer.

Thursday, April 7, 2011

Thursday's Thought Delay

Hey,

it's been a busy day, and I've got a lot of homework to do tonight. This week's post will come, but it will be delayed until some point this weekend. I have not forgotten about it.

Eric