1 – 3. On pages 12-13, Bell recalls three moments in Jesus’ ministry: The encounter with the Roman centurion in Luke 7, the story Jesus tells about two people who go to the temple and pray in Luke 18, and the man hanging next to Jesus on the cross in Luke 23. In the first encounter, Jesus is impressed by the faith of the centurion who expresses belief that Jesus can heal his sick servant. In the second example, Jesus says the “justified” man is the one who begs for God’s mercy while he stands at a distance from the temple. And the man hanging next to Jesus on the cross asked, “Remember me when you come into your kingdom,” and Jesus assures him that they’ll be together in paradise.
Remarkably (and irresponsibly), Bell wants us to think about these stories, and then he asks his readers the wrong question: “So is it what you say that saves you?” (page 13) These men are not to be praised for what they “said”! Their “statements” were clearly a reflection of a genuine faith. What the Roman centurion was “saying” is that the authority of Jesus is so great, he need not even come to the centurion’s house to heal his servant, because his words from a distance would be enough, and he was not worthy to have Jesus under his roof. The man begging for God’s mercy from a distance at the temple was not merely “saying” something…but was justified because of his humility before God (see Luke 18:14). Finally, what exactly did the man hanging next to Jesus on the cross “say”? Rebuking the other criminal for “hurling abuse at Jesus,” the man said, “Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong…Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!” Then Jesus said to him, “Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise” (Luke 23:40-43). So, this man defended Jesus and proclaimed his innocence, he confessed his own guilt and the just punishment he was receiving, he acknowledges the Lordship of Jesus by proclaiming that Jesus will be entering His kingdom, and he asks to be remembered because he wants to be with Jesus!
He did not just say something. Indeed, none of these men did.
4 – 5. Bell says, “In John 3 Jesus tells a man named Nicodemus that if he wants to see the ‘kingdom of God’ he must be ‘born again.’ And in Luke 20, when Jesus is asked about the afterlife, he refers in his response to ‘those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come.’ Bell then asks, “So is it about being born again or being considered worthy?”
Bell’s conjunction is wrong, because the answer is YES – it is about being “born again” AND it is about “being considered worthy”! He treats passages like this (in a number of places), so that Scripture is used to undermine Scripture; therefore, the reader is left with believing neither claim. In the above examples, it is about being born again and we are considered worthy because of God’s redeeming work. Jesus Christ is worthy and that is why we must be saved through Him. “For you have died and your life hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory” (Col. 3:3-4).
6. In his retelling of the story of Zacchaeus, Bell is just as careless as he was in the examples given above (2-4). In Luke 19, Zacchaeus tells Jesus, “Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount. Jesus responds, “Today salvation has come to this house.” Bell asks, “So is it what we say we’re going to do [that brings salvation]?” Once again, it is fallacious to frame the question that way. Clearly, Jesus viewed Zacchaeus’ response as more than a mere statement to do good works. Jesus saw something more in Zacchaeus. He saw faith. Just what God requires…
7 – 9. On pages 14-15, Rob Bell uses more 3 more Scripture passages to undermine the erroneous Christian Particularism (as he sees it):
In Matthew 6, Jesus is teaching his disciples how to pray, and he says that if they forgive others, then God will forgive them, and if they don’t forgive others, then God won’t forgiven them.
Then in Matthew 7 Jesus explains, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom, but only those who do the will of my Father.
And then in Matthew 10 he teaches that “those who stand firm till the end will be saved.”
So do we have to forgive others, do the will of the Father, or “stand firm” to be accepted by God?
Once again, the "or" is unfortunate, for all of these mentioned by Jesus (forgiving others, doing the will of the Father, and standing firm until the end) are the necessary result of being transformed believers. Regarding Matthew 6, there are a number of possible interpretations of this difficult passage (see http://bible.org/article/issue-forgiveness-sermon-mount), so I think it is a bit provocative of Bell to just "toss it out there" for the purpose of creating confusion for his readers, so they'll be inclined (in light of all these passages) to throw their hands up in the air and say, "we must just have it wrong." Nevertheless, I'll press on.
Regarding the perseverance implied in the Matthew 10 passage, Jesus is not suggesting that those who persevere (“stand firm until the end”) will earn for themselves salvation; rather, the authentic Christian life will produce the fruit of a persevering life. So “standing firm” is the mark of a true believer. One should not be confused by Jesus’ language that such persons “will be saved,” for he is merely referring to the (ultimate) salvation that Christ-followers find at the end of a persevered life. There are a number of other passages that confirm this interpretation (see John 10:28-29; Romans 8:38-39).
10 – 11. Bell “tosses out” another difficult passage to compound his point:
But then in 1 Corinthians 7 it’s written: “How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife? And then Paul writes in his first letter to Timothy that women “will be saved through childbearing” (chap. 2).
So it is who you’re married to [to be accepted by God], or whether you give birth to children.
In the context of this 1 Corinthians passage, Paul is discussing the issue of a “mixed” marriage relationship, in which one spouse is a follower of Christ and the other spouse is not. The faithful life to Christ of the believing spouse might influence the unbelieving spouse to become a follower as well. This is the proper interpretation of this passage. Bell’s implicit teaching is grossly misleading by asking, “So is acceptance by God about who you’re married to?” The 1 Timothy 2 passage, likewise, has a number of interpretations, none of which include his inference.
12. When Rob Bell recounts Paul’s conversion experience as he shares it in Acts 22, Bell states:
Paul is asked a question. Paul then asks a question in response to the question he’s just been asked. He’s then told it’s Jesus and he should go into the city and he’ll know what to do. So is it what questions you’re asked? Or is it what questions you ask in return?
Same song. Different verse. In Acts 9, the full account of Paul’s conversion is recorded by Luke, and he documents that Paul was baptized. So clearly Paul’s conversion experience was about more than questions. Furthermore, Paul’s immensely faithful life to Christ (leading to his martyrdom three decades later) also reveals there was something going on behind the questions…
13. Bell mentions the passage in Romans 11:26, which states that “all Israel will be saved” and then he asks, “So is it the tribe, or family, or ethnic group you’re born into?” The passage appears to be a future promise that the nation of Israel will be restored into covenant relationship with the Lord, at a time in which they will no longer reject Jesus as their Messiah. This seems to be the proper interpretation, because in the preceding verse Paul states that this will happen when “the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.” Therefore, this passage is eschatological and should not lead one to ask, “So is it the tribe, or family, or ethnic group you’re born into?”
14 – 17. Bell then undermines the notion of belief when giving examples of the “belief” of the evil spirit in Luke 4, the demon-possessed man in Matthew 8, and the demons in Mark 1. In all of these occurrences in Jesus’ ministry, the evil spirits know and believe that Jesus is the “Holy One of God” (see Luke 4:34, Matthew 8:29, and Mark 1:24). Bell then compounds his point by pointing out James 2:19, which states, “You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.” Bell is confusing “belief” (as a reflection of knowledge) and “belief” (as a reflection of faith). What I mean is that Bell is attempting to undermine the notion of belief as a reflection of faith by using examples of belief as a reflection of knowledge. Whenever orthodox Christians speak of “belief,” they are referring to the type of belief that is synonymous (or reflects) faith. However, Rob Bell is giving us examples of demonic spirits who have a sound doctrine of God, but have obviously not put their faith in Him. Indeed, they hate God. Bell has conflated the uses of “belief” to make his point…
18. And for another example similar to the ones given, Bell states:
And then in Luke 7, a woman who has lived a “sinful life” crashes a dinner Jesus is at and pours perfume on his feet after wetting his feet with her tears and drying them with her hair. Jesus then tells her that her “sins have been forgiven.”
So washing Jesus’ feet with your tears gets your sins forgiven?
You can probably say it with me by now. Jesus clearly saw this as a reflection of her faith and repentance. The action reflects her heart.
No comments:
Post a Comment