Rob Bell on the Wittenburg Door
The Wittenburg Door (I remember reading this in my youth minister’s office years ago… which probably tells you too much about my background and my youth minister, now that I think about it…) has an interview with Rob Bell in its most recent issue. Some excerpts:
DOOR: The Church hasn’t always been kind to artists. Especially ones bringing electricity.
BELL: Our assumption is that Church is where you say the things that have to be said. So people will speak but say, “Oh, I wouldn’t say that in church.” Well then, where would you say it? To me, it’s the place where you would push it the furthest. A faith community should be the place with the most honesty and vulnerability and prophetic culture—calling things what they are. So when I hear people say, “That’s nice but you really couldn’t do that in church,” I can’t even fathom that. My understanding is it would lead the culture in reality.Â
I talk about having the first word. This idea that Church waits to see what the culture is doing then produces a D grade version with some sort of clever Jesus twist to me is utter blasphemy. The DaVinci Code, for example. You wait for a C grade movie with stars with bad haircuts and then gear your church teachings around a movie that many people aren’t even going to see? That seems absolutely anemic.
DOOR: Welcome to our world.
BELL: I don’t believe in Christian art or music. The word Christian was originally a noun. A person, not an adjective. I believe in great art. If you are an artist, your job is to do great art and you don’t need to tack on the word Christian. It’s already great. God is the God of Creativity. Categories desecrate the art form. It’s either great art or it isn’t. Followers of Jesus should have the first word instead of coming late to the game with some poor quality spin-off. Let’s talk about things before everyone else.
DOOR: As a pastor, how do you motivate people to the front lines?
BELL: First, the scripture always bends towards the oppressed and the marginalized. Beginning in the Torah—take care of the widow, the orphan, the stranger among you. The story is written by oppressed minorities. And it continues, no room in the inn, they follow Jesus because they are hungry. The story always goes towards the underside of the Empire. I think it is sometimes hard for the American church to understand the Bible because we are the Empire. We are the ones in power, the ones with wealth. I think in some settings that’s why the Bible has such little power—because it’s an oppressive narrative. There are six billion people in the world, three billion live on less than $2 dollars a day, 800 million people will not eat today, and 300 million in Africa alone do not have drinking water. So we as Americans are six percent of the population yet we consume 40 to 50 percent of the resources. We are the upper, upper, rich elite. And our way is taking over the world. So we have to first ask the question—how can we take all this wealth and give it away? All the technology and beautiful parts of capitalism and bless the world and the poor—or else we’re in deep trouble.
DOOR: Sometimes the issue of the poor gets lost in all the left vs. the right crap in this country. How do you cut through that? Serving the poor is not a new message.
BELL: The issue is not saving the poor—it’s saving us. When Jesus uses the word hell, He does not use the word with people who are not believers or not believing the right things. It is a warning to religious people that they are in danger of hell because of their indifference to the suffering of the world. So the parable of the rich man and Lazarus is not what heaven and hell are like. It’s a parable to rich people warning them that their apathy has them in danger. Heaven and hell are present realities that extend into the future.
   For a lot of Americans, this is about the saving of their own soul. Recapturing God’s heart for the world. Otherwise I will end up not caring and not passionate. At our church, people are desperate to understand this culture of excessive materialism. We were made to bless the world. The original call is that blessing was always instrumental. When that blessing gets misconstrued as favoritism you have a very toxic thing happening. Our people are desperate to give, hardwired for it. I assume that people are good and just need opportunities.DOOR: Um, we’re getting the impression we might not see you on TBN anytime soon.
BELL: Ha. I think that’s one of the most warped ideas—that God just can’t wait to bless you. God blesses you so you will bless the world and if at any point I keep that for myself, then I am in trouble.
DOOR: Actually, your church is one of the hottest churches in America.
BELL: I don’t even know what that means. I know there’s a woman in the second row in the second service that has cancer for the third time. I know there’s a single mom named Erin who needs a place to live. I know this guy who just got custody of his kids and he’s trying to figure out how to be a single dad. So to me a Church is real people trying to figure it out. The word hottest isn’t really a word I associate with a community of Christians. (laughs) For my wife and me it’s very important that we live as close as possible to a normal life in our city. So words like hottest and up and coming are not reality and not a place to live. It’s a dead end road.
DOOR: How did this Mars Hill thing happen, anyway?
BELL: Seven years ago, a group of friends were just dreaming of something better. I guess the natural evolution of each generation is to explore what it means. How to live the way of Jesus here and now. So we started and it now feels like fifty years packed into seven. Mars Hill is an old mall. Our “architect”—I say that as a joke—says everything about the church should scream “Welcome to our church service! Now get the hell out of here.” We say, “This isn’t the church, this is a church service. It’s just an hour where we have some teaching, some singing and you’ll hear about things in the community.” If there are 43 “one anothers” in the New Testament—serve one another, carry one another’s burden’s, confess to one another—you can only do a couple of those in a church service. Until you have a community that you are journeying with, please don’t say you are a part of this church. You just come to a gathering. We are very intentional about that. The question is, “Who do you call when your brother ODs on cocaine? If your mom is in the hospital, who comes and sits in the waiting room with you? When you cannot pay your rent, who do you go to and say please help me out?” That’s your church. Â
HT: Bob Hyatt via Chris Pajak
September 19th, 2007 at 8:57 am
This is where Bell diminishes the truth about hell. A reading of Luke 16 can be read many ways (trusting in riches, etc.), but to suggest that God sends people to hell because they don’t feed the poor is the direct inference here. Bell concentrates on the poor part, but insinuates that the “hell” that the rich man finds himself in is on this earth?
Why can’t the rich man go tell his own brothers if he is in hell here? This is a serious wresting of the teaching of Jesus who was slowly leading people to understand the essence of eternal punishment and reward that doesn’t hinge upon this life’s position. The rich man wasn’t even chastened about Lazarus, he was tormented because he had already received good things on earth and Lazarus hadn’t? That isn’t the gospel, Christ is teaching parts in a view to the whole.
The parable was not about feeding the poor although that was an implied component, the parable was one about eternity. Those with a more legalistic bent could use the story of the rich young ruler to insist everyone must sell everything to be saved, so how do we interpret the parables and the gospels as a whole? Only the epistles can shed light on the truths being taught when they are somewhat hidden in a parable.
And after Bell in his teachings dismantles all references to hell as not to be understood in the classical sense, he seems to tacitly admit the lake of fire might be as it seems. This is serious stuff here, not just methodology but a colossal veering from the heaven and hell gospel. It is correct that the manipulated “fire insurance” model is shallow and incomplete, but a gospel without hell is not the gospel at all.
Feeding the poor is important, but is Bell saying that if the rich man had fed Lazarus the rich man would have gained heaven? He is very intelligent, but we can get too cute with the plain meaning of Scripture. There is a hell however you want to describe it, it is eternal and it is a place of suffering, and to dull the edge off that truth by suggesting that most hell is here is seriously flawed and in the end gives many people false comfort.
No one likes the concept of hell, and most preachers do not even deal with it, even those who believe in it. And the others self righteously beat people with it. I cannot read Bell’s casual treatment of a place that now is torturing some of my own loved ones and we speak of it in such antiseptic and pedustrian terms and tones. It is real and people need to be warned, not placated. This is an area in which Bell is very flawed.
And even if he does believe in hell in the classic sense he seems to purposely make it difficult to know that and much of his speaking is targeted to demean the classic definition not to lovingly and humbly warn people about the place of eternal punishment.
And that is the core of the issue, is it not? If there is an eternal place of unspeakable punishment where people go FOREVER, than what is the escape? I know, archaic and unsophisticated, but if we are not careful we will so react to the unpleasant orthodox crowd we will sophisticate ourselves right into the greatest error of all. And when we have to quote obscure writings or spoken words in an attempt to prove a person believes something that should be a given, then either he really doesn’t or he is removing the sharp conviction about the unpleasant truth about eternity.
It is comfortable to listen to a lecture, it is much less comfortable to hear the truth no matter how offensive it may seem. I can see different streams of methodology and all the rest, but when someone removes the teeth out of the most explosive truth in the entire Bible it must be challenged. If there is not a hell, let’s eat and drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die. If there is an eternal hell where people are right now wishing a thousand times a second they could escape, let us never tweek that truth so we can feel more comfortable about it, we feel comfortable enough without being told that most hell is here.
It isn’t. Some save with fear.
September 19th, 2007 at 9:10 am
Rick is correct.
What Bell is saying is that the main purpose of the Gospel is the curing of social ills.
He is also saying that the poor get in based on the fact that they are poor. The rich are punished based on the fact that they are rich. That is not what the parable teaches.
Of course that would contradict everyhting else that Jesus taught.
We can argue, hell, hades, sheol, gehenna until the cows come home. The lake of fire,and the Book of Life are real.
September 19th, 2007 at 9:30 am
No, that’s not what Bell is saying - that is not the point of the parable.
Having read some historical commentaries on this parable, Jesus was making some significant observations on the social order of the day, along with demonstrating the stubbornness of those who would not believe in him.
Note the descriptions of the Rich man (”who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day”) and Lazarus (”covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.”) This is the only information we are given about the Rich man and Lazarus prior to their death.
When the Rich man speaks, it is not to Lazarus, but to Abraham. However, when he wants a drink, who does he ask Abraham to bring the drink to him? Lazarus! When he wants someone to warn his family, who does he want Abraham to send? Lazarus! Even in death, the Rich man is treating Lazarus as a second-hand servant.
If you make this parable as being about hell, you miss the point. The setting of the parable is the afterlife, but the point of the story is not the setting, but the action and plot.
Look at the parable again -
The gospel is not about giving a warning of the end results of your lifestyle - it is about accepting grace so that you are ‘in Christ’, which frees you to love and to pass on blessings given to you.
Jesus tells us that we are not to worry about tomorrow, but that we should concern ourselves with today, and tomorrow is his. The hell we deal with today is here, and it should not be a comfortable thought. We have no power over the eternal “hell” (more accurately, the lake of fire into which death and hell are thrown), but we have hope because we are ‘in Christ’.
From the parable, we do not know what would have ‘gotten the Rich man to heaven’, we only know the condition of his heart from his treatment of Lazarus. And it is that heart condition, we must assume, which has led him to where he is.
September 19th, 2007 at 9:32 am
Rick,
“but insinuates that the “hell†that the rich man finds himself in is on this earth”
I really don’t see this… I read and re-read it and what I see is that if we do not be careful we will live out the parable of the rich man and Lazarus which though we have heaven now, will experience hell later. As that is what the parable teaches and what I get placing Rob’s statement in that context.
I think we need be careful that we do not over look that the bible is full of warnings…
Jeremiah 9:
23 This is what the LORD says:
“Let not the wise man boast of his wisdom
or the strong man boast of his strength
or the rich man boast of his riches,
24 but let him who boasts boast about this:
that he understands and knows me,
that I am the LORD, who exercises kindness,
justice and righteousness on earth,
for in these I delight,”
declares the LORD.
25 “The days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will punish all who are circumcised only in the flesh- 26 Egypt, Judah, Edom, Ammon, Moab and all who live in the desert in distant places. [d] For all these nations are really uncircumcised, and even the whole house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart.”
If i am wrong can you show me the quote that states it as you are saying?
Blessings,
iggy
September 19th, 2007 at 9:34 am
The blockquote was meant to be a “bold” letter… oops!
iggy
[Fixed - Chris L]
September 19th, 2007 at 9:41 am
No - he is saying that that is the main purpose of the kingdom - not the gospel.
You have two aspects to the message of Jesus - the gospel and the kingdom of God.
It is not the gospel whose purpose is ‘curing social ills’ - the gospel is more individually focused - on Jesus and on our response. The gospel is about who Jesus is, and how we are to respond in gratitude for the grace given to us and for his defeat of satan and death. This is faith in Jesus.
It is a key purpose of the kingdom - where people are in community with God, and where things are as He would have them - to cure social ills. To feed the poor, to heal the sick, to care for the widow, the orphan and the stranger.
James sums this up very well:
September 19th, 2007 at 9:47 am
He is saying this no more than Jesus says this:
Why are the poor blessed? Because they have nothing to give in return for a freely-given gift. When you have no means via which to repay your forgiven debt, how much more can you truly show love in return.
Jesus hints at this many other places, as well:
September 19th, 2007 at 10:29 am
The parables of Jesus dismantle many entrenched attitudes about a lot of issues, but throughout His earthly ministry he was building an eternal teaching that would culminate on the cross. I have listened to Bell’s epistymological exegesis concerning the word “hell” and he is some right but most wrong. What is his point and how integral is feeding the poor as it relates to eternal punishment? And so what if we suffer on this earth, one minute in hell will eclipse a lifetime of earthly suffering.
If feeding the poor is an active component of the gospel then we all are bound for the “lake of fire”. Who cares if you say “hell” or “hades” or “lake of fire”, if people are going there how can they escape? It’s simple and yet profoundly critical. Does Bell believe we are consumed with the prospect of hell? We are not, none of us.
I believe that his teaching on “hell” is intellectualism and counter prductive to a general understanding of the dualism of eternity. One can take the gospels and with a little suggesting make them sing any song you desire. It has been said that justification by faith is difficult to teach exclusively from the gospels. The epistles clearly teach eternal punishment.
We Americans have an aversion to inconvenient and uncomfortable truths. We fall woefully short of helping people both here and throughout the world. People die all the time from hunger and we go to the Outback after a sermon on helping the hungry, so even the teaching on helping the poor usually affords us a little conscience salve as we collect some food stores or clothing drive. Who would empty his savings and 401k to feed the poor? They are dying and you could help. You are just as much a hypocrite as am I on thatsubject no matter how you try and emphasize the Biblical teaching.
So it is disengenuous to suggest that if we refocus the Biblical teachings to include a much more expansive teaching about the poor that we are up to the task, it just illuminates the hypocrisy that we all live in and have become adroit at hiding. But if we, through teaching that only an educated and well read society can comprehend, dismantle the underlying truth that the cross is a forgiving of sins which would have led a lost people to an eternal damnation, only adds to the American ambiance that shapes its society to accommodate our desires not others needs.
Even feeding the poor can be used to meet our need to see ourselves in a philanthropic light rather than a literal Biblical interpretation concerning this world’s goods. Jesus died for the sins of the world and not caring for the poor is one among many. To bring that to the forefront and treat is as the core of redemptive teachings is misguided at best.
There are some things the mean, old, orthodox people believe that are true! Even the mean Calvinist people believe in the simple heaven and hell gospel. There is a movement afoot that makes it more complicated by removing the eternal teeth of the penal punishment. If there is no literal hell, Christianity is nothing more than a soup kitchen.
If there is a literal hell, what in the world are we doing? Let’s not diminish the one truth that sometimes moves us, because we spend more on our dogs and cable than we do on the poor. In this area Bell is spitting in the wind, and it just happens to be the most important area of all. When we can teach about hell without tears we really do not believe it exists, or more devastating, we don’t care. Finney said if you can preach on hell and then shake hands at the door with people nodding and smiling, you haven’t preached hell, you’ve presented a oratorical performance.
Sorry, Bell is wrong on this.
September 19th, 2007 at 10:31 am
BTW - when I say “you” I mean all of us not just Chris L.
September 19th, 2007 at 11:33 am
Rick,
I wanted to share a bit of my testimony.
I think we Americans need be ashamed that our dogs eat better than most people living in other countries… and that this will be one of the things we will be held accountable.
“If there is a literal hell, what in the world are we doing? Let’s not diminish the one truth that sometimes moves us, because we spend more on our dogs and cable than we do on the poor.”
I might point out I for one was never afraid of hell… I welcomed it before I was saved… It was the Love of God and His Kindness that won me over. Hel was to be the “party place” where one could do as they willed.
I also believed my father who had died when I was very young to be in hell, so desired to meet him there.
Again, Hell never has been a motivating factor other than when God was in pursuit of me and I began hear His call, Satan kept showing me my insignificance… to me heaven was not an option… I was damned when I was born… why did I believe that? Satan told me so… He showed me hell and the mixture of men’s souls who were too weak to accept Satan’s offer, they got there thinking they were good enough for heaven, but we who knew we were not were to reign with Satan.
Now, I did not consider myself a Satanist… but one who had knowledge. I did not worship Satan in some formal way… as they were not truly pure in their self sacrifice…
I was very young when Satan told me this… 12 maybe…
God revealed His love for me through a youth pastor who told me of the Cross… he told me of hell and I told him I was not afraid of it and welcomed it…. He was shocked. He kept telling me about how Jesus gave His life for me… and invited me to a rock concert at his church… I listened to the man and talked about “if you have troubles with drugs, alcohol, sex, whatever, give it to Jesus… I thought about my life and that I had not really known love… so I prayed, “If you can keep me sober tonight, I will see what I can do for you.†At that moment a heavy load lifted form me and I was sober. Now that got my attention.
There is much more, but suffice it to say that each step I took with God was because of love and kindness and not out of fear of hell… even now I have little to no fear of hell, and I know Satan for who he is… a liar, and thief and a destroyer of people.
Be Blessed,
iggy
September 19th, 2007 at 12:02 pm
I’m not sure I understand the connection you’re trying to make here, Rick. Throughout the Bible is a deep concern for the oppressed. It is at the heart of the parable of the sheep and the goats, as well - the picture we are given of the final judgement.
When you refer to the gospel, are you referring to all of Jesus’ teaching, or just about personal salvation? If you are referring to the former, then I have to disagree, because care for the oppressed is at the core of living within the kingdom. If you are referring to the latter, then I don’t disagree, but I wonder where Jesus’ message of the kingdom comes to play…
How about because ‘hell’ and ‘hades’ and ‘the lake of fire’ are three different concepts we’ve wrapped all into one.
If they’re not seperate entities, then how exactly do you throw it into itself?
Here again, you’re mixing the individual gospel with the expectations of the kingdom. For more on this subject (along with their interrelatedness), and a better explanation, perhaps you should listen to last week’s Mars Hill podcast “Lift a Finger” - which I think did one of the best jobs of describing what it means to be ‘in Christ’, and what that frees us to be.
September 19th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
Should we be?
Should our motivating factor be fear of hell or Love of God?
September 19th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
I have read his teachings on the subject. My point about dissecting the different hell words is that the lake of fir (if you will) trumps them all. That is the accepted meaning of the word “hell”. And I believe the Scriptures basically mean the same.
My foundational point is that we are complacent about the eternal damnation of people and we do not need more linguistic teaching that makes the subject more mircurial and indeed, more residual. From time to time we need a good, old fashioned “People are going to hell and do you care?” sermon. Instead we get people leaving a message on hell saying, “Wow, I really got a lot out of that word study. I knew all that hell talk couldn’t be what God was actually saying”.
I guess that really dates me and frames today’s ecclesiastical genre.
September 19th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Rick,
Perhaps the jist of the ‘new’ message (with an intent to get the original meaning) is not “People are going to hell and do you care?â€, but “People are living in hell and will stay there for eternity and do you care? 
September 19th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
Rick you said, you’ve read his teachings on the subject, would you mind telling which teachings those were? And where?
September 19th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
I have listened to an orthopraxy message and thought it was solid and good. I listened to two of his hell series and thought it diminished the eternal hell at the expense of earthly torure which of course is universal.
September 19th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Ok, so you haven’t actually read anything? The reason I ask is because I’ve never seen anything written down about that stuff.
September 19th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
I misspoke, Joe, it was all on the audio from the Mars Hill website. My point was let us not throw the BIG baby out with the bathwater. Eternal punshment in a place of torture FOREVER trumps all other understandings of hell (used as a catch all).
September 19th, 2007 at 12:44 pm
Rick,
I’m not trying to argue with over this, I would normally stay out of it all together, but when you said you had “read” it I wondered where b/c I would be interested in reading it. That’s why I asked.
September 19th, 2007 at 12:46 pm
I know, I did not read it, I heard it. Maybe there was some paragraph that defined his sermon and I remembered that, but mostly I listened to his message.
September 19th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
I don’t see Bell as diminishing Hell, he’s just trying to get some context of Jesus’ message back in the conversation. When Jesus talked about Hell, he didn’t use it to warn sinners. He used it to warn the religious leaders of the day that they misrepresenting God and it had grave consequences. Also, the Jewish audience did not have the same conception of the afterlife as a Western audience does today.
When Jesus told the Jewish religious they were in risk of going to Hell, it was not a little thing. The people respected them, looked up to them. It was a pretty gutsy proclamation. For any Jew to think he or she was facing judgment was probably hard for them to swallow. They were God’s chosen. He was supposed to keep them.
It’s easy to see the parallel to today. Many church members are content being the chosen, and content that they are escaping judgment. However, I believe Jesus would say the same thing to us today - if we neglect our calling in the Kingdom we ourselves risk judgment.
September 19th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Phil,
Good point as Jesus stated that one’s righteousness must surpass that of the Pharisee to enter Heaven… This is the funny thing I see in those that oppose much that is of emergent as often I see those people taking offense when we speak against “religion†or call someone a “religionist†which Jim Bublitz decided what I had write was about him…! What he did was proclaim himself the “religionist†I was writing against.
I have also seen a person do a whole series against McManus’ “The barbarian way†as he took the stance that he was of the “civilized religion†McManus wrote against! LOL! He was so offended that his “religion†was being called “civilizedâ€!
Yet, Jesus spoke most harshly to the religious leaders than he did against “sinners†as he ate with them, and forgave them and told the Pharisees that it is the “sick that need a doctorâ€. It is notable that the religious missed they were just as sick as the sinner.
Be Blessed,
iggy
September 19th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
If I may I would like to throw another log on the fire (pun intended).
I don’t believe in hell as a physical place I believe it to be more of a spiritual condition. Conversely I don’t believe in Heavan as a physical place. It is my belief that eternal seperation from God is a torteous state whether it be a physical seperation or a spiritual seperation.
This is me thinking out loud. I would love to hear what my wiser brothers and sisters in Christ think.
September 19th, 2007 at 8:06 pm
They are literal places whether or not they are physical as we know them. Remember, Paul said that he went to heaven and whether it was in or out of the body he could not tell. So that lets us know that it is real even if it is another dimension.
September 19th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
Chris L,
You asked about Rick’s comment: “If feeding the poor is an active component of the gospel then we all are bound for the “lake of fireâ€.
Rick can certainly respond for himself, but I got he meant from his other comments such as “which one of us would empty our 401 K to feed the poor” to mean that even the most “active” of us in this regards are hipocrites so if salvation depends on feeding the poor we are all in trouble.
Is that what you meant Rick?
September 19th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
Exactly. Even though feeding the poor is important, those who now observe that as a component of the kingdom/gospel vision do not meet their own standard, just as we do not meet the witnessing to keep people out of hell standard either.
It is faith in Christ alone without works.
September 19th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
That is why I am skeptical of the “kingdom” view as the flip side of the “fire insurance” view. Both are wanting. You can’t get one local assembly to sell out and stay in unity and we are going to bring in God’s kingdom.
The kingdom of God cannot be seen, only glimpses of Christ in us.
September 20th, 2007 at 10:58 am
They are literal places according to the bible, chris.
I’ll take up the issue of being wiser in E. Lansing, but here is my thinking out loud on the matter.
The only spiritual conditions are alive and dead; just as there only two types people–alive and dead. Those don’t really need much more description than that.
John describes the new heaven and earth, complete with dimensions and other descriptive details. We need to find out where else a spiritual condition is laid out in such detail and say, to be consistent, “That really didn’t/won’t happen like that.”
Hell was likened to Gehenna, the big dump. Now while I wasn’t at Gehenna, I have seen my share of landfills. Gotta be careful of landfills. The methane buildup can result in spontaneous explosions and fires. The smell will bring flies from all around. They lay eggs and you get a lot of hungry maggots. Now, even if we were to spiritualize that, can we spiritualize Rev. 21:5-8 without consequence?
And if the beast and the false prophet were thrown in the lake of fire, and the devil and the fallen angels go there as well, is that just a spiritual condition they experience? Satan and the demons are already spirits and this was the place reserved for them if memory serves. People go there because they rejected God’s offer of salvation and made themselves fit for hell. And Jesus makes it clear that you do not want to go there in any case.
Just my thinking on the matter.
September 20th, 2007 at 11:08 am
For the record, I believe in “literal” places yet I see that these are not “places” in the sense we may understand in the physical.
For instance, I do not think “Heaven” is a place up there in the sky somewhere where people sit on “clouds” playing harps… yet the Bible refers to “heaven” as the sky itself many times.
Hell is a place, a kingdom, and a spiritual condition… as it is related to Death which/who rules over it.
The issue is that the “common” teaching of hell is not biblical… we are not saved to “get out of Hell” but saved unto New Life in Christ… to be New Creations… getting out of hell is a by product of salvation, but not the sole purpose as many represent it. I wonder why if the “emerging conversation” is trying to reclaim the biblical understanding of hell that many seem bent against that.
Be blessed,
iggy
September 20th, 2007 at 11:17 am
I think the hell that is refernced as being thrown into the lake of fire is either the place of torment or a general reference to all evil.
September 20th, 2007 at 11:29 am
Rick,
It is also Tartarus where the fallen Angels are held in chains.
I might add I see these are “other dimensions” and other than “the grave” may not be in the physical realm. A 12th century Hebrew scholar Nachmonides, taught the text of Genesis that the universe has 10 dimensions. He taught that four are knowable and six are beyond our knowing. Interestingly Quantum Physics is stating we that there are at least 10 dimensions…
Be Blessed,
iggy
September 20th, 2007 at 11:37 am
I meant to do this earlier.
I understand this is an interview, and not every statement can be fully developed. But even if I try to massage an optimistic view into who Rob is talking about, I keep bumping into Is 53:6, Luke 18:19, Rom 3:12, 7:18 and so on.
It could just be me, but I don’t think I’ve ever said something like that even in a casual conversation.
September 20th, 2007 at 12:02 pm
Iggy, I’ve seen heaven(s) referring to the terrestrial atmosphere, outer space (stellar heavens) or God’s dwelling.
I remember being told by friend as a kidlet that if you dig deep enough in the ground you’ll knock a hole in the roof of hell.
Whatever the case, God’s worked it out. The question is, are we willing to believe it?