Thoughts on rereading Rob Bells Love Wins: he hates Calvinism and rightfully should. He hates right wing (American) fundamentalism. He should. He rejects penal substitution. He should (somewhat). Some Jesuses should be rejected. I agree. He asks a lot of open ended questions that have an answer. Calvinism is his problem and it rightfully should be. With salvation and damnation here is the answer: fr Maximos says The only thing we can be totally certain about is that God will judge us with absolute love and absolute compassion. He will judge. There is a lake of fire coming for the wicked. He cant understand scripture cause hes either purposely not searching for it or hes not looking in the right place: the Eastern Orthodox (and even Id go so far as saying the Catholic Church too). He says heaven isnt forever. Wrong. His problem with hell is with the Western view of hell. He should study the East more. He says hell is just the garbage dump called Gehenna. Not really. Its the grave. And there is a river of fire in the 2nd coming. Truth: when we die saints go to Paradise with Jesus and sinners go to wait in Sheol. We await the Judgment Day & 2nd Coming when we will all be judged. We will all return to God. Good and wicked. We will all experience God. For the saint the flames of His love will be the River of Life. For the opposite the River of Fire. Does God get what He wants? That was basically the question Origen had and thats why he hypothesized reconciliation. Is it possible? Perhaps. Bell does good on this question and actually has some good points that the West doesnt answer well and would be better suited for the East to do. Bells influence seems to be Origen and a few of the saints. Hes on the right track but to me on a lot he misunderstands and misapplied a lot of stuff to fit his liberal theology intentions. The bible does seem to hint at reconciliation of sorts to some degree. Whether or not it involves people bring saved that experience the River of Fire. How that can or will happen or is possible I dont know. He goes against penal substitution in favor of Christus victor. I can accept this. He seems to suggest theres more than one way to get to Christ. True. But Christ is the only way to be saved. Bell has an inclusive Christ and Christ is exclusive. Bell says the people cant love and accept this God because the God theyve been presented with and taught about cant be loved. That God is terrifying, traumatizing and unbearable. Have to agree. The god of Calvin is. Bell is right. Theres an alternative. Again. Think to the East. The good news is better than that. So in conclusion, Bell is good on some points but he could answer all his things by accepting the Eastern way of Christianity instead of making it some stupid liberal theology which is what hes ending up with to forsake religion. :) his problems are in basics two big things taught in the West. Calvinism and penal substitution. Remedy? Eastern Orthodox. Simple. Hope this wasnt too much of a mouthful. Anyone having read this what are your thoughts?
Posted on: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 06:03:56 +0000