An electrifying, unconventional pastor whom Time magazine calls “a singular rock star in the church world,” Rob Bell is the most vibrant, central religious leader of the millennial generation. Now, in Love Wins: Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, Bell addresses one of the most controversial issues of faith—the afterlife—arguing that a loving God would never sentence human souls to eternal suffering. With searing insight, Bell puts hell on trial, and his message is decidedly optimistic—eternal life doesn’t start when we die; it starts right now. And ultimately, Love Wins.
This product description, probably provided by Rob Bell’s publisher, has started a Tunisia reaction on Twitter and in the evangelical Christian world.
Until Bell’s book is out and his own remarks can be viewed in context, I’m not too interested in jumping into that fray. What concerns me more is how many Christians seem to hold to principles of universalism or act according to such principles without any awareness of their own misunderstandings whatsoever.
If Rob Bell comes out definitively for universal salvation, then he is only another reflection of the times we live in. Rarely, if ever, does one hear any of the following words in Christian assemblies: Hell, Satan, Devil, eternal punishment, the Lost.
Even in Bible-believing churches we have sugar-coated these words, preferring to speak of evil, separation, seekers, unchurched—if we reference such things at all.
I can understand a rationale for controlling the offensiveness of our public conversation, but is it possible that by removing these words from our common vocabulary that we have been naïvely, but dangerously covering up the horrible truths that those words represent.
You’ve probably heard of Jonathan Edwards’ famous sermon called Sinners In the Hands of An Angry God. Look at the points he made:
- God may cast wicked men into hell at any given moment.
- The Wicked deserve to be cast into hell. Divine justice does not prevent God from destroying the Wicked at any moment.
- The Wicked, at this moment, suffer under God’s condemnation to Hell.
- The Wicked, on earth – at this very moment – suffer the torments of Hell. The Wicked must not think, simply because they are not physically in Hell, that God (in Whose hand the Wicked now reside) is not – at this very moment – as angry with them as He is with those miserable creatures He is now tormenting in hell, and who – at this very moment – do feel and bear the fierceness of His wrath.
- At any moment God shall permit him, Satan stands ready to fall upon the Wicked and seize them as his own.
- If it were not for God’s restraints, there are, in the souls of wicked men, hellish principles reigning which, presently, would kindle and flame out into hellfire.
- Simply because there are not visible means of death before them, at any given moment, the Wicked should not, therefore, feel secure.
- Simply because it is natural to care for oneself or to think that others may care for them, men should not think themselves safe from God’s wrath.
- All that wicked men may do to save themselves from Hell’s pains shall afford them nothing if they continue to reject Christ.
- God has never promised to save us from Hell, except for those contained in Christ through the covenant of Grace.—from Wikipedia
I find myself shocked at the unmitigated declarations of these contentions! Not a word of mercy! Not a gracious note! But after you get over the shock of reading such inflammatory rhetoric, ask yourself which of these ten principles is not true!
Probably either you agree in principle with all ten—or you are so reviled by them that you didn’t even finish reading the list. If you are a Christian and were reviled, then I have to pose these questions for you to think about?
1. Do we now believe that people cannot be lost? We have spent a great deal of energy convincing a generation that grew up with hell-raising sermons that they can be saved by God’s grace. Have we, however, failed to preach the full gospel that also says, “ . . . and he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:16).
2. Do we still believe in guilt which is the God-given consequence of sin? Jesus did say, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains” (John 9:41).
3. Do we truly believe that no one comes to the Father except through Jesus (John 14:6)?
4. Do we believe that people are either slaves to sin or slaves to God (Romans 6) and that there is no other alternative?
5. Do we really believe in sin? And do we believe that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23)?
Even as I write these things, I’m tempted to just hit Delete and not pursue this—it is particularly disturbing—even painful. But perhaps it should be more disturbing to me that I do not shudder when reminded of the wrath of God or that I feel no visceral relief that I have been saved from the wrath of God (Romans 5:9).
If we believe there is no sin, no guilt, no hell, then will we ever cry over Jerusalem as Jesus did? Will we go to our cross? Will we completely surrender?
We dare not anesthetize our theology nor our language, but especially not our hearts, against the evil of sin, nor the pain of guilt, nor the darkness of hell, lest we find ourselves in a place where we no longer fear the Lord!
Mark's Blog 
Another Biblically-based view, though certainly not common, is that espoused by Edward Fudge in The Fire That Consumes. As per Fudge, torment does not have to be unending (perhaps suggesting a sadistic God) to be eternal. Rather its eternalness lies in its finality, the fact that it is irreversible.
I find it odd that you turn to Jonathan Edwards for your opinions about Hell. I’m not sure how his hardline Calvinism matches with the adult, free choice baptism that defines Churches of Christ.
Is it possible that our idea of what Hell is and who goes there is more based in Dante, Milton and Edwards than it is in the New Testament?
While this post may be fascinating to those who lean “young, restless and reformed” I was expecting love to see an exploration of this question rooted in the theology of the Churches of Christ. Beyond the coC, you might consider others whose understanding of salvation is rooted in free-will, such as Mennonites and Wesleyans.
Sorry for the late response. Universalism is a fundamentally theological, rather that chapter and verse, argument for a certain conception of the final judgment. In that way, cases for universalism, even concise ones, tend to run long and complicated. These are pretty essential reads from contemporary theologians who reference the classical tradition. 1) Thomas Talbot, The Inescapable Love of God; 2) Gregory MacDonald, The Evangelical Universalist; and 3) Jan Bonda, The One Purpose of God (quite academic, but insightful).
I was speaking to someone who is far better versed in Patristics and early Orthodox tradition than I. What he said struck me as pretty reliable: “Orthodox people, especially early in Christianity, don’t spend much time talking about death and the ongoing power of sin, because they assume that it has/is/will be defeated. In that way, universalism isn’t really systematically or rigorously defended, because the centrality of Jesus over victory and death being central, they assume that it doesn’t have to be. That’s not to say that there were no voices in the early church that contended for unending torment, or that there were no conversations related to such ideas, but they are peripheral and minority sources.
I enjoyed this post, and especially to hear how Edwards grates against our sensibilities in our own time. A few things I would like to point out. Universalism is a pretty old belief, and was held by people in leadership of the church before the official canonization of the New Testament in the 4th century (Clement of Alexandria and Origen as two notable examples, though Gregory of Nyssa and Macrina the Younger followed). So the idea that Universalism is simply a product of postmodernism I think is untenable, though I am sure that people being instinctively charitable towards the doctrine is a sign of the times. People being especially preoccupied with colorful doctrines of eternal damnation was probably also contingent on cultural strands of medievalism, but I’m not sure that (in and of itself) is a weighty critique of the doctrine.
I don’t know of any universalist theologians, past or present, that don’t believe in ” sin, guilt, or hell.” Universalism simply proposes that if death and sin are defeated on the cross, then allowing mortal death to close the door on post-mortem redemption or rescue is not really a defeat of death at all. A classical universalism allows, and even confirms, all of the last, six propositions you mentioned.
This is small but, I don’t find it self evident that (contra Edwards) what any person does during a finite amount of time justly deserves infinite punishment. I would in fact say that is a perfect, prototypical example of injustice.
Just a few thoughts. From someone who is not a universalist : )
Great to hear from you, Mark. I appreciate your call back to the historical perspective on Universalism. I am aware of a variety of strains of universalism along with an entire spectrum of positions within universalism on hell, for instance. Rather than using a rather brief and shallow vehicle (blogs) for a longer, more in-depth examination, I chose to limit my comments to what I perceive to be the more popular, common conversation. Mark, you might be just the right person to put more meat on the bones of this discussion. If you do, be sure and send me a link to it!
I came here via Twitter as someone posted a link to this blog.
I believe in an everlasting Hell, but I disagree with Edwards main presupposition. The scriptures (specifically in the original languages) do not indicate a single person has been cast into Hell, at least not yet. In fact, Hell hasn’t even been “opened for business” yet as judgement has yet to occur.
I think I agree with you, but I don’t think the timing of eternal punishment was really what Edwards was talking about, do you? I think he was trying to describe with human terms the eternal condition of those who would be separated from God if judged today! I also thought that we modern readers might get hung up on the term “Wicked”. We have chosen different words to describe the unregenerate. Thank you for your comment.
I was kind of worried about posting my reply initially.
I don’t think the timing of Hell was Edward’s goal, but from what other Edward’s sermons I have read I do believe he believed in a present Hell. His goal was true repentance (which really needs to be preached more today).
This whole topic has made my head spin. From the dismiss the heretic attitude to the he’s the only real man willing to ask questions. Meanwhile the bigger issues are missed. It’s like the old evangelism question – “if you were to die tonight would you be in Heaven or Hell?” Seriously?!?
I think there are so many bad ideas on Hell though. I saw a tract the other day about rapture (another fun theological discussion) that had Satan (cartoonish Satan) sitting on a throne in his “H.Q. in Hell”.
Enjoyed your post and that you actually interact with commenters! Thanks.
Thanks for addressing this, Mark. I really like Rob Bell and the very relevant way he has communicated God to so many. I’m interested in picking up this book when it comes out and learning from it. However, if he comes out in favor of the kind of universalism that the previews seem to suggest, I will have to politely reject that area of his theology. I would like such a theology to be true, but it is impossible to reconcile with scripture.
Thank you, Mark. I worship the God of the Bible. I grew up under the harshness of the 40’s and 50’s. But I am thankful that the Bible class teachers and pulpit speakers taught me to read the Bible for myself. I have spent more time reading the Bible than what some “great mind” says about it.
By doing this, I learned that God is real…just like the Bible says, that Satan is real and that he is the enemy. Of course, if we don’t know the Bible…or don’t care what it says, we make our own interpretation. Do you think that the God who created the universe is going to accept our own interpretation of His Word?