Is Rob Bell Even Relevant?
April 16, 2009 16 Comments
Out of the mouths of babes, the truth comes. Literally! Apparently, the “sons and ‘adopted’ sons” of Pastor John Chisham have caught on to the truth of Rob Bell early. According to Pastor Chisham, one of the sons…
said that Rob Bell was gay- which is his way of saying that he is stupid and makes no sense. I asked him what he means, and he explained that it seems that on these videos, Rob Bell talks a lot about nothing, that there is no organized thought, that it seems he tells stories and then tries to jam scriptures into the stories to make his point. Then, my son said, most of the time he does not even reference scripture, so it seems that he is changing what it says so he can make his point.
Truth triumphs yet again.
HT: Christian Research Network
First I thought he meant gay…my first impression says Bell is gay- just the way he looks and talks…but clever sons- right on!
I know, I had the same thought! You just have to love kids!
Nothing like bigotry and stereotypes showing up in the church. “Let your good works shine before all men so that they will give glory to the father”.
Keep up the bashing men. It’s a beautiful example of the wounds our Christ wears.
I don’t understand why so many people bash Bell. Any explanation?
Thanks for your comment.
I don’t think I would call it ‘bashing’ so much as defending the truth. Would you call Judes epistle an encouragement in ‘bashing’? How about the apostle Paul naming names to Timothy? Or what of our Lord’s use of language such as ‘you brood of vipers” etc? Is that bashing as well?
Rob Bell is misleading many with falsehood, and that makes him an enemy of the Gospel doesn’t it? What you call ‘bashing’ is (most often, I hope) warning others of the dangers of his theology.
“Any explanation?”
Rob Bell And Emergence Christianity Reject Cardinal Doctrine Of Sola Scriptura.
Ken,
Good to know you haven’t given up on your man crush on Rob Bell. Now if you good use logical in your posts that would be great.
See, I asked an honest question and you just gave me some vague but long response which was talking more about Bible stories than where Bell’s theology falls short. I’m sincerely wondering what Bell is saying that shakes your faith up so much that you would call him an enemy of the gospel.
Actually, you only asked for ‘an explanation’ why so many, as you termed it, ‘bash’ Rob Bell. You did not ask how/why Bell’s theology ‘falls short’ did you? No, you did not. For the record, you presuppose my faith is shaken because of Bell, you are incorrect. As for Bell being an enemy of the Gospel, absolutely, anyone who opposes clear scriptural truth is just that.
If you desire an answer to a specific question, you must first ask it!
When you say he opposes clear scriptural truth what does that even mean?
What does it mean? Ok, fair question. For starters, go here: http://apprising.org/2009/03/rob-bell-and-emergence-christianity-reject-sola-scriptura/
Rob Bell, in a nutshell, promotes living the way Christ did as the very essence of the Gospel. But you don’t have that ability do you? In other words, he teaches Jesus as an example, not as the author and finisher of the faith, alone. He calls the virgin birth as being “non-essential,” he relegates the new birth as less than important…need I go on? Again, see Apprising.org. There is more information there about Rob Bell than you can possibly digest in a week.
Again, thanks for your comments.
-JT
Oh, I see. Well here’s my story. I read Bell’s books before I ever knew there was any controversy over his teachings. I picked them up at the local Christian book store. And honestly, I have yet to soak in anything from his books which straight up conflicts with my faith. So it’s hard for me to accept people’s claims on him, ya know? I’m trying to hear both sides of this discussion. When I hear people discuss your perspective on what Bell said about the virgin birth, it just doesn’t seem like what Bell was getting across at all. Honestly. Really, I’m not trying to be difficult, I’m just trying to get to the bottom of what is going on here. Honestly, I don’t desire to go read a website about Bell. I’m looking for active and personal conversation regarding Bell. I don’t think that’s too much to ask from people who are so passionate in their stance against him.
Justin,
Oh but it is too much to ask. You will find no full quote from Bell that denies the gospel, nor lessens Christ. You will however find lots and lots of people who join hands in their happy little chorus of “heretic”. You will also find lots of people who want to tell you what Bell meant but you will never find anyone who can actually quote Bell and prove him unblibical.
Orthopraxy vs. Orthodoxy. They don’t like the way he says it because that’s not the way they say it so it must be heretical.
The happy chorus bellows on with pleas of donations to support their cause for they have made careers out of tearing apart the body of Christ. And that is expensive work you know.
Sad that chris must stoop to ad hominems because he really has no actual arguments.
The point is that anyone who would suggest, as Bell did in VE that the Virgin Birth of Christ could ever be a negotiable doctrine, obviously does not understand the Person and Nature of Christ Jesus.
Pure and simple. No Virgin Birth, no Monogenes with a Divine nature; no unique one-of-a-kind God-Man with a Divine nature, and we would have no Savior.
Ken,
How many times have you attempted to use the Virgin Birth issue? And you accuse me of ad hominem?
Velvet Elvis is a book, as in read it cover to cover, don’t prooftext, and have at least some intellectual honest to not imply what you assume Bell meant about the Virgin Birth.
Win.