I finished reading Love Wins (March 15, 2011) by Rob Bell. Until September of 2011, Rob Bell served as the pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church, a church he founded in Grandville, Michigan, just outside of Grand Rapids, which had grown to a 10,000 member church. He wrote several books before Love Wins, the first named Velvet Elvis in 2005. Time Magazine recently named him in their 2011 100 list as among the most influential persons in the world.
Though I think this book is important, and should be read, I didn't like it. For one thing,
I
don't like it
when people
write
like this.
Bell employs this device throughout this book to emphasize his points. It may seem trite, but it annoys me, and I think there are better ways to emphasize a point.
Another reason I didn't like it is throughout the book, and especially in the first chapter, he likes to pose many questions, one right after another in a series, sometimes 7 or more in a row. Now I like questions. But these are gotcha-like questions, and the author is clearly not interested in an answer (even if he could hear you), nor is he interested in carefully providing a careful consideration of the question, with possible answers, as it seems to me a writer should. Instead, the purpose seems to be to make you feel dumb for whatever position you might have held.
Many Christians are upset with the book, because they say he supports universalism (the belief that all will be saved). In an interview with Martin Bashir, Rob Bell said he doesn't, though he didn't make that clear in the book where he addresses the subject many times. It seems to me that if an author addresses a subject in a book as a major topic, and he disavows a position, he should state it clearly in that book, and not leave others guessing.
Mark Galli, the Senior Editor of Christianity Today, in his lengthy review of this book states, After reading the book, it's hard for me to believe that Bell doesn't espouse universalism, but to be fair, he never formally affirms such belief. I agree.
Bell fairly points out that universalism finds a tradition within Christianity. What he fails to state is that it is a tiny minority position - most traditions in Christianity reject it, and many have outright condemned it. It might be interesting if his book undertook a serious study of this position in church history. Instead, he doesn't seriously engage in the arguments against universalism, and glibly asserts that if all are not saved, that means God doesn't get his way, an assertion those opposed to universalism do not agree with, and have answered on numerous occasion before. However, the book raises an important issue within Christianity. At least Rob Bell is trying to discuss it in a relevant manner for our generation. I just wish Rob Bell had done a better job of addressing it, and I hope someone else will address this issue in a manner that is relevant to our generation.
