Southwood Presbyterian Church

Lynn McClurg | March 29 2011 at 11:25 am

Pastor, your comments are right on.  I only have two things to add. Whenever looking at somone’s use of scripture remember that context is king. We must use the entire counsel of God’s Word and let the scriptures interpret themselves. Secondly, we are to show ourselves students of the Word. 2Tim 2:15. “Be diligent to presnet yourselves approved unto God as a workman who is not ashamed, handling accurately the Word of Truth.”  Handling the Word of God accurately is not just for the pastor, but for all Christians. Then you will be equipped to discern false doctrine when it appears. As pastor has mentioned, using critical thinking skills is a necessary part of the process.

JHu | March 29 2011 at 11:34 am

Whereas I do not disagree with Jean, yet for my own sanity I wanted to put my own opinions to paper concerning what one of my friends has charmingly titled the “Rob Bellodrama”

Though some have labeled Bell a Universalist for his claims of the possibility of postmortem regeneration, he has denied such labels and I think he is completely truthful in his claim. I would imagine that even proffering such possibilities as postmortem salvation in his own mind that does not mean that it has to happen that way every time, but that the simple conjecture that it can happen fits his premise.  Though I do wonder that his teaching is not any more extra-biblical than the Roman Catholic teaching of purgatory.

I wonder why there is seemingly so much more reaction to Bell’s current publication when several years ago he published a book that allowed for the denial of the virgin birth. Perhaps my ears were not so acutely tuned to the war cries of evangelicals as they take up arms. For those who are unfamiliar the following is a short passage from his work “Velvet Elvis”:

“What if tomorrow someone digs up definitive proof that Jesus had a real, earthly,  biological father named Larry, and archeologists find Larry’s tomb and do DNA samples and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the virgin birth was really just a bit of mythologizing the Gospel writers threw in to appeal to the followers of the Mithra and Dionysian religious cults that were hugely popular at the time of Jesus, whose gods had virgin births? But what if, as you study the origin of the word ‘virgin’ you discover that the word ‘virgin’ in the gospel of Matthew   actually comes from the book of Isaiah, and then you find out that in the Hebrew language at that time, the word ‘virgin’ could mean several things. And what if you discover that in the first century being ‘born of a virgin’ also referred to a child whose mother became pregnant the first time she had intercourse? What if that spring were seriously questioned? Could a person keep on jumping? Could a person still love God? Could you still be a Christian? Is the way of Jesus still the best possible way to live? Or does the whole thing fall apart?…If the whole faith falls apart when we reexamine and rethink one spring, then it wasn’t that strong in the first place, was it?”

He makes sure to assure readers that he does hold to the doctrine of the virgin birth of Christ, yet allows for others to deny it and still hold on to the gospel. The problem here is the same as can be found in his newest controversy and that is the authority of the scriptures and his seeming predilection to prefer an isogetical approach to posit palatable messages to the polloi rather than taking an exegetical approach allowing for the context of a passage to inform its meaning and letting scripture interpret scripture. To deny any one part of the Word is to allow for the whole of it to be called into question and then there is no ultimate authority, no basis for our knowledge of Christ, no singular and absolute path to salvation. We do not stop and saying all truth is God’s truth but if we hold to Christ and his Word we must be willing to boldly claim the only truth is God’s truth.

Here than I pose a more practical concern of how the Bible responds to such teachings as are presented by Bell. On the one hand Paul could beautifully extract the very best of the Greek philosophers and turn them on the Greeks to make is apologetic stand at the Areopagus. Yet when faced with people “in the church” such Paul and as the Judaizers” or the Nicolations mentioned in Revelation there we find no kid gloves in sight. Biblically what is our response? We need not lash out at the world nor even be surprised when the take the truth and twist it to their desires – we need only hold fast to the gospel we first learned and not be held captive by the hollow and empty philosophies of man.

GM | March 29 2011 at 4:27 pm

Thank you Pastor Jean for your insight into this as I know that there are many (including myself) who have great concerns about Rob Bell’s teaching.

It is my understanding that this is really nothing new from Rob and the other prominent members of the so-called “emergent church”.  On most of the more difficult doctrines (or ones that would be deemed unpopular) Rob is very good at not answering the question(s) or instead of answering he just poses more questions.  Kevin DeYoung does a great job of pointing this out in his book review which you have linked.
 
Since becoming a member of Southwood, I have learned so much about my own sin and particularly my tendency to be self-righteous and judgmental and I do not want to do that in this case as well; however, I do believe that we are called to defend the truth and to be careful who we trust.  In my opinion, I believe that what Rob is teaching is false teaching and he will lead many astray.
 
You asked for resources on this and I am more than happy to provide some:

(http://theresurgence.com/2011/03/15/a-chronology-of-rob-bell-on-hell)

Above is a link to The Resurgence website with “A Chronology of Rob Bell on Hell”.  It contains links to many articles written about this as well as book reviews on Love Wins.  I would also note that it has a link to a video that Rob put out in relation to his book as a sort of trailer that somewhat states what he believes (by asking more questions of course!).  In addition, I would call your attention to the excellent article at the bottom by Mark Driscoll and Dr. Mohler’s 2-part post.

As you stated in your post, I hope that my comments are in the spirit of being charitable and helpful.

Anonymous | March 30 2011 at 9:16 am

Pastor Jean,

If you have never read anything by him, and you don’t know where he stands on anything, but you’ve mostly heard good things, why have you already decided that all future use of his material will need a healthy disclaimer? It appears to this blogophile that you are judging a man based on his lack of precision or clarity on a topic, and on how a few people feel about him, rather than on what you actually know he holds to be true (or false).

Surely, if Bell would warrant such disclaimer, you have an objective basis for that. What would that basis be?

Thanks for stirring the gray matter…

Anonymous | March 30 2011 at 9:39 am

Love Wins review off amazon.com…......

“I am not a student of the Bible, or a person with a deep understanding of theology. I’ve never heard of this book until it was mentioned in a column in USA Today. Like millions of others, I’m a lapsed Catholic struggling with all of the questions that Rob Bell puts forth in the beginning of this book. While I search for answers that make sense, and look for a faith where I can belong and be strong, and not be lost and afraid, almost every page of this book spoke to me. I found it a compelling read, eye-opening and heart-opening. Yes, a little “over written” in the dramatic, one-sentence paragraph style. But it worked. When I finished this book, for the first time in decades, I wanted to pray. For the first time in years, I wanted to open a Bible and give it a chance. For the first time in a long time, I went to church because I felt there might be a good reason to go. So the debate can rage among the hard-cores, but I suspect this book can touch millions of hearts like it touched mine. For that reason, I will be recommending it to many friends who struggle with the same question.”

The book and Rob Bell are not all bad I can promise you.  He’s pointing people to Jesus.  The gist of the book is trying to get people to live for Christ 24/7 instead of on Sunday’s from 8:30-12:00….....

Jean Larroux | March 30 2011 at 1:42 pm

ANONYMOUS ASKED, “Surely, if Bell would warrant such disclaimer, you have an objective basis for that. What would that basis be?”

Good question. Obviously my presupposition is that Rob Bell at the very least is a controversial guy. People just need to know that when you are using their material.

Secondly, he’s obviously flirting with this subject or he’s the most unjustly accused guy is Christendom today. I trust MANY of the writers who have read his stuff and take issue with it. I don’t have to personally touch a stove eye to know it’s hot if you catch my drift. I don’t think personal exposure at every level is a prerequisite to an opinion. I have opinions about lots of things that I never personally experienced—- slavery, WWII, Ole Miss’ black bear mascot…

srs | March 30 2011 at 3:45 pm

“...Ole Miss’ black bear mascot…”

please elaborate…lol

Anonymous | April 01 2011 at 12:42 pm

I guess my question to everyone with a concern for Rob Bell’s view on eternity is-If you feel so strongly that Rob Bell is wrong and you are right about the lost spending eternity in Hell, why are we as a people not running in the streets and proclaiming the Gospel? Why are we not weeping at night for the lost among us? Why are we not doing everything we can to convert everyone we know?
I’m not trying to be incendiary; it just seems to me that most people in our church believe what Rob Bell seems to be writing about. If we really believed in a literal, eternal, fiery Hell, we would be doing everything we could to be trying to get everyone we know (and don’t know) to follow Jesus. With just a smattering of exceptions, most of us live complacent lives that bear witness to the fact that we don’t believe it either.

HBC | April 02 2011 at 7:58 am

If we had been reading Bell with a critical eye from the beginning, we would have already seen how his views don’t measure up well to the Scriptures.  His view on eternity and hell isn’t the underlying issue.  Long ago he questioned the authority of the Scriptures.  If you start there, then you can make up any views you want to fit the caricature of God you want to create.

Glad you made these comments…we have needed it for a while.

Anonymous | April 02 2011 at 12:43 pm

To HBC, here is the theology of Mars Hill (where Rob Bell is the pastor).  I don’t see anything we wouldn’t adhere to at Southwood…...

http://marshill.org/believe/

We believe God inspired the authors of Scripture by his Spirit to speak to all generations of believers, including us today. God calls us to immerse ourselves in this authoritative narrative communally and individually to faithfully interpret and live out that story today as we are led by the Spirit of God.

In the beginning God created all things good. He was and always will be in a communal relationship with himself-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. God created us to be relational as well and marked us with an identity as his image bearers and a missional calling to serve, care for, and cultivate the earth. God created humans in his image to live in fellowship with him, one another, our inner self, and creation. The enemy tempted the first humans, and darkness and evil entered the story through human sin and are now a part of the world. This devastating event resulted in our relationships with God, others, ourselves, and creation being fractured and in desperate need of redeeming.

We believe God did not abandon his creation to destruction and decay; rather he promised to restore this broken world. As part of this purpose, God chose a people, Abraham and his descendants, to represent him in the world. God promised to bless them as a nation so that through them all nations would be blessed. In time they became enslaved in Egypt and cried out to God because of their oppression. God heard their cry, liberated them from their oppressor, and brought them to Sinai where he gave them an identity and a mission as his treasured possession, a kingdom of priests, a holy people. Throughout the story of Israel, God refused to give up on his people despite their frequent acts of unfaithfulness to him.
God brought his people into the Promised Land. Their state of blessing from God was intimately bound to their calling to embody the living God to other nations. They made movement toward this missional calling, yet they disobeyed and allowed foreign gods into the land, overlooked the poor, and mistreated the foreigner. The prophetic voices that emerge from the Scriptures held the calling of Israel to the mirror of how they treated the oppressed and marginalized. Through the prophets, God’s heart for the poor was made known, and we believe that God cares deeply for the marginalized and oppressed among us today.

In Israel’s disobedience, they became indifferent and in turn irrelevant to the purposes to which God had called them. For a time, they were sent into exile; yet a hopeful remnant was always looking ahead with longing and hope to a renewed reign of God, where peace and justice would prevail.
We believe these longings found their fulfillment in Jesus the Messiah, conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of a virgin, mysteriously God having become flesh. Jesus came to preach good news to the poor, to bind up the brokenhearted and set captives free, proclaiming a new arrival of the kingdom of God, bringing about a new exodus, and restoring our fractured world. He and his message were rejected by many as he confronted the oppressive nature of the religious elite and the empire of Rome. Yet his path of suffering, crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection has brought hope to all creation. 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. God is now reconciling us to each other, ourselves, and creation. The Spirit of God affirms as children of God all those who trust Jesus. The Spirit empowers us with gifts, convicts, guides, comforts, counsels, and leads us into truth through a communal life of worship and a missional expression of our faith. The church is rooted and grounded in Christ, practicing spiritual disciplines and celebrating baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The church is a global and local expression of living out the way of Jesus through love, peace, sacrifice, and healing as we embody the resurrected Christ, who lives in and through us, to a broken and hurting world.

We believe the day is coming when Jesus will return to judge the world, bringing an end to injustice and restoring all things to God’s original intent. God will reclaim this world and rule forever. The earth’s groaning will cease and God will dwell with us here in a restored creation. On that day we will beat swords into tools for cultivating the earth, the wolf will lie down with the lamb, there will be no more death, and God will wipe away all our tears. Our relationships with God, others, ourselves, and creation will be whole. All will flourish as God intends. This is what we long for. This is what we hope for. And we are giving our lives to living out that future reality now.

Anonymous | April 03 2011 at 6:44 pm

Is there any reflection we might need to do as Mr. Bell’s tapes and teachings have been employed in the youth ministry in past years?

JHu | April 04 2011 at 7:42 am

To Anon:
Q: Is there any reflection we might need to do as Mr. Bell’s tapes and teachings have been employed in the youth ministry in past years?
We needn’t fear any past usage of Bell especially in the Youth department as Ken has a most discerning eye to know the good from the bad and a relationship with his students deep enough to teach them to do the same, which is simply what I believe Jean has been calling for in this conversation.

To Anon:

Comment: To HBC, here is the theology of Mars Hill (where Rob Bell is the pastor).  I don’t see anything we wouldn’t adhere to at Southwood…...

You are absolutely right at face value Bell’s church states many of the same things we would. However, there are two primary problems. The first being that on the web we seldom have a chance to go deep enough to get to any real understanding so his discussion of the authority of Scripture doesn’t specify the form or extent of its inspiration i.e. dynamic, mechanic, organic, verbal, plenary. (I’ll let your pastor’s explain those terms to anyone who wants to go that deep they do a great job of it) His own hermeneutic (art and science of biblical interpretation) allows for the preference towards early rabbinical teaching as an abrogater of some passages. The site does the same thing in terms of the few salvific doctrines mentioned – the majority of the text is surrounding the missional purpose of the church in redemptive history rather than the salvific (imputed righteousness, dual nature of Christ.. The missional aspect is certainly not bad and Southwood would hold affirm such ideas, but that amount of time might be better spent going deeper. The second problem is that what is said on the church site and what is being said in Bell’s books doesn’t match and is being questioned by the likes of Piper, Driscoll, Taylor, and Mohler, these trusted theologians unified approach and questioning of Bell is reason enough to give pause and be wary the very reason Jean so wisely as done and so advises us.

Thoughts in general:

The biblical purpose of apologetics is three-fold – to assure our own faith, to defend from attacks from the world outside the church, and to defend against false teachings within. Likewise, all three areas are perfect for practicing grace and love. Neither the fear of hell nor the deconstruction of it serve as motivation for proper living – grace does. This is not made manifest by people shouting from street corners but by living Christ in everyday life. It brings joy to see a church like Southwood want to preach this grace and want to teach believers to search for depth in their relationship with God ( I have great hopes for the new Sunday school plan) I truly believe that the myriad of responses to this topic come from that earnest desire of much of your congregation wanting that depth.

Anonymous | April 11 2011 at 11:57 am

Dear JHU & Pastor Jean,

These two quotes appear to be inconsistent with each other, and I thought perhaps someone could clarify:

Jean: “...any further use of Rob Bell’s material at Southwood will come with a very healthy disclaimer.”

JHU: “We needn’t fear any past usage of Bell especially in the Youth department as Ken has a most discerning eye to know the good from the bad and a relationship with his students deep enough to teach them to do the same, which is simply what I believe Jean has been calling for in this conversation.”

Either Bell’s views are so questionable that he needs a healthy disclaimer from now on, or our teaching elders are so discerning that we can assume they know the good from the bad and no additional clarification is needed when they use Rob Bell’s materials at Southwood. I don’t believe both can be true.

I assume JHU and Pastor Jean are not one in the same, so there is no personal contradiction here. But do I infer too much to assume they are both in leadership positions? If that is true, and if Southwood has a passion for doctrinal clarity as deep as its passion for responsible growth, then consistency is humbly suggested here.

It would be helpful, indeed instructional, for our teaching elders to take an actual position on Rob Bell’s alleged errors, perchance to instruct the flock, rather than simply defer to other men’s opinions and hope no damage has been done.

All we are left with now is some vague statements that appear to be hedges: Bell’s problematic, but other men have taken strong positions, so there’s no need for one here, and besides I don’t know what he actually believes. Sure we’ve used Bell before, but probably no damage has been done. But the teaching elders who have used Bell are discerning, so no worries about that. Future use of Bell will require caveats, but we won’t go into why—other men already have.

I doubt our leaders would be willing to sound such an uncertain trumpet as regards our vision for 2020: “Growth is good, as other men have already attested, so there’s no need to expound on that here…, and our elders in the past have shown discernment on the matter, etc…, etc…”

Just my $0.02. =:>)

JHU | April 11 2011 at 12:24 pm

Anonymous - thank you for asking

First no we are not the same; and while I am a teaching elder I am not in any position at your church though I attend there often and have a love of Southwood.

For my part i think I was presuming that as your elders are discerning that they would naturally give a disclaimer whenever there is need (this issue or any other that could ever come up) though this is an assumption on my part and you are right to see some need for further explanation though I would reserve that right for Jean as he is in a position to provide clarity from an insider’s view and my comments carry no such weight as his.

You are also right to call for elders to take a stand on issues - it is quite the responsibility to teach God’s people and an unwillingness or prolonged hesitation can teach in itself. For my part yes I do disagree with the teaching’s in Bell’s books that challenge the doctrines of the Authority of Scripture, the Virgin Birth of Christ, and the literal existence of Hell. When I studied some of Bell, especially his Nooma video series, I found many good things , but these few teachings from a couple of his books are irreconcilable with scripture that being his allowing for the denial of the virgin birth in “Velvet Elvis”, His allowing for postmortem regeneration and/or a non-literal hell in “Love Wins” and their implications on the doctrine of the Authority of Scripture.

Anonymous | April 13 2011 at 9:42 am

Thank you, JHU, for your response. As a member of the flock here at Southwood, I am not privy to the private thoughts and discreet actions of the Session, so as easy as it would be to judge, it is not my place to do so, especially under the cloak of anonymity. My observation was made to elicit a thoughtful response, and you have given one. I appreciate that very much.

I do hope that elders in residence, and not just visiting ones, will eventually take a clearer stand, but trust in the meantime that they have thoughtful, godly reasons for their timing and for the delicacy of their approach to this controversy.

Thanks again.

Tom Fluker | April 13 2011 at 11:54 am

FYI.  John MacArthur’s BLOG is addressing Rob Bell and his theology in a series of posts.  He is unequivocal about where he feels Rob Bell’s theology (hence Rob Bell) stands. 

http://www.gty.org/Blog/B110412

ac98 | April 24 2011 at 12:18 am

Hello, I found this site and thought I’d love my review of “Love Wins” while I’m here which summarizes the real danger of this book, whether ROb Bell is actually a universalist or not.  Best wishes.

Satan got Eve to question what God had clearly said in the garden. She was emboldened to take what God had forbidden by the devil’s clever insinuation and paid for it.  It astounds me that in a book about heaven and hell that supposedly is teaching what the Bible says that Rob Bell would never even quote the clearest OT passages about the resurrection of the dead and the eternal damnation of sinners- Isaiah 66:22-24 and Daniel 12:2. And even more so, key NT passages like Luke 13:23-28, Mark 9:43-48, Romans 2:4-5, Romans 10:14-17, Luke 12:58-13:9, etc. These passages and others so perfectly refute the writer’s conjectures that if he merely quoted them without explaining them away he would then have nothing to write about.

The good news of the gospel is necessary because there is bad news, as Paul shows in Roman 1:18-3:20- our guilt before God and righteous condemnation of us on the day of judgment- if we’re not made new creatures and forgiven in Christ. The Bible says “Flee from the wrath to come” and to bring forth fruits meet (fit) for repentance (Matthew 3:7-10). That is the response we must make to God’s generous offer of mercy and grace through the death and resurrection of Christ.

When we consider that Jesus himself warned his hearers to turn from sin or be punished in hell forever; and that he left a responsibility for us to do so in the limited time of our lives in this world in Mark 9:43-48, Luke 12:58-13:9, then anyone who claims to speak for Jesus and denies that warning and that urgency must be treated as a false teacher/prophet. Jesus loves us more than anyone else, and to deny and leave out what he has clearly said is to oppose him.

What “Love Wins” does is give false comfort to those who have not turned from all sin and let Christ take his rightful hold on their lives (Psalm 2:10-12, Hebrews 5:9). The same type of false comfort the Serpent gave Eve in the garden.

“Love Wins” also doesn’t take into account that it is often more pleasurable SHORT-TERM to disobey God than to follow Christ. There is a pleasure to sin that is very uncomfortable to forsake to the point it can be called suffering to do so (See Hebrews 11:25, Romans 8:17). That goes against Bell’s premise that hell is what we create for ourselves by disobeying God. Truly obeying God can be unpleasant and only those who are totally convinced by Christ’s total faithfulness and the sureness of his promises will actually be his disciples and walk the narrow way that leads to life. That is when God really does get glory. We have the privilege that we can go straight to the Bible to see those promises, the truth about heaven and hell, and the entire counsel of God regarding salvation. May all who read this not be deceived by preachers who say what appeals to the itching ears of people.

BROCK | May 11 2011 at 3:13 pm

For Anon regarding using Rob Bell in Greenhouse, which is our High Life Sunday School.

You are correct we have indeed “used” Rob Bell in our teaching with the youth.  The media being used are his Nooma videos primarily from about three years ago and older. 

These videos are very thought provoking and allow us when teaching the students to help them learn how to discern.  Our students are going to be challenged like never before when they leave their parents and our care so we are quite intentional when teaching.

An example that is current, we are teaching them TULIP….why?  So that we can help them understand who is right and who is wrong in the Kingdom?  Not really.  I let them know that as an elder at Southwood and as a Pastor at Southwood, we state unequivocally that we hold these doctrines, but that as a member many may not so they need to know what their church believes. 

Essentially, Jean’s comment about a healthy caveat is exactly where your Session and your teachers at Greenhouse have rested for 20 years.  We stand on the Word of God, everything else gets a caveat