Rob Bell: "I am for marriage. I am for fidelity. I am for love, whether it’s a man and woman, a woman and a woman, a man and a man"

Rob Bell jumped off the “Evangelical” ship quite a while ago and only now makes headlines because he is a darling of the MSM. What a surprise! ROB BELL SUPPORTS SAME-SEX MARRIAGE!

NOT!

What is the next Rob Bell “surprise”? His support of polygamy?

Bored now. :/

Rob Bell is an idiot. He threw the Bible out a long time ago. Let’s talk about something of substance.

Some might say this to be an un-Christian remark, no? I am certain MBBC’s seminary has a manual on logical fallacies, including ad hominem?

[TylerR]

Rob Bell is an idiot. He threw the Bible out a long time ago. Let’s talk about something of substance.

I pastor a small church in the shadow of the church Bell formerly pastored—his words still influence many, many (many!) people. They will soak up his thoughts like sponges (as they have in the past). He will likely get a full two page write up in the Grand Rapids Press (as before), and I will be arguing against his notions anew, as we meet people in our community—whether trying to relate with people about Christ, or meeting people who were formerly involved in church. People are enamored with him—young and old.

Conservative and fundamentalist pastors all over West Michigan and throughout the country have to provide carefully thought-out answers to Bell’s ideas.

In fact, we have to offer ideas of substance, not invective. Invective is easy, but oddly not all that effective. Jus’sayin’sall…

Rob Bell is this generation’s George Templeton, except Templeton had the sense to walk away from the ministry when he fell into apostasy.

Bell was speaking to the Cathedral’s Grace Forum in an appearance presented in partnership with his publisher, HarperCollins.

Harper Collins is counting on the controversy that this will generate by the public outcry of evangelicals, which then created curiosity of evangelicals and everyone else so that it will sell his new book. It worked with Love Wins. They hare hoping it works with his new book. Free marketing through controversy!!!!!!

Nobody is denying we have to stand up to those who seek to water down or outright deny what Scripture teaches. Your not so subtle rebuke that I am still in Seminary was cute, but ultimately meaningless. I served a decade in the military and am not a wide-eyed school child.

I view SI as a forum where fundamentalists can candidly exchange ideas and thoughts with one another in an informal manner. If I’d realized I had to keep the wall of political correctness up among brethren on a blog forum, I wouldn’t have bothered posting my comment. I could fashion a neutral essay and coldly discuss the matter in an academic fashion, but SI is a blog, not an academic journal.

I would also challenge whether you didn’t privately mutter something along the same lines of “Rob Bell is an idiot” when you read the article in the comfort of your own home, office or car! I also doubt you’d hesitate to express this sentiment to a Christian friend over a cup of coffee. Perhaps I’m mistaken, but I assumed SI operated in that precise sort of virtual context.

For the benefit of those who seek political correctness, here is v 2.0 of my post:

Rob Bell has repeatedly evidenced a lack of Biblical discernment; indeed, a lack of respect for Biblical authority as the rule of faith and life. He does not deserve to be taken seriously as a Christian leader and he does not legitimately speak for the Christian community at large. Christians should repudiate this man and his teachings as the opportunity arises, and encourage the flock to not be taken in by this false teacher. We must stand on God’s Word, not man’s opinion.

Like it or not, Rob Bell’s message has had a definite appeal to those raised in American Evangelicalism. Bell’s influence took root in Grand Rapids, Michigan, which is a hotbed of anything and everything one can find in US Christianity. Sam is right in that, as tempting as it is to dismiss him as an idiot, that will accomplish little more than giving one a sense of smug superiority.

At the same time, I will also observe that countering Bell is not easily done through ration and ideas- though in the end, it is the only way. Bell articulates what people feel- it’s a perfect example of Moralistic Therapeutic Deism. It doesn’t have to make sense or correspond with an authoritative source- it just generally seems consistent with what nice people would think and do- “don’t rock the boat, man.”

Whatever else, simply dismissing Bell and people like him as “an idiot” is certainly not going to give you an audience with those who are considering what he has to say. It will lead them to think that you’re just another “Bullhorn Guy.” Like it or not, this is the climate we are called to proclaim in.

I agree Rob Bell must be countered. I never suggested I’d tell a teenager from my Youth Group, “Rob Bell is an idiot.” I expressed that in this context, on this blog only.

TylerR,

I know SamH personally, and have benefited from his ministry as my family and I looked to him as our pastor for a time. I also know that Sam knows from his own experience how easy it is to be, as you put it, “candid.”

SI (and the internet in general) do offer a certain freedom of expression. At the same time, as a minister of the gospel, what you give expression to in one setting will influence how you communicate in others. 2 Timothy 2:24-26 is best applied consistently in our lives, including internet interaction.

Tyler’s comment has been addressed and he has responded. This thread isn’t about Tyler.

We could focus on how to counteract what looks to me like an evangelical Oprah. There’s no doubt that Bell has a broad, feel good appeal. Sort of like Velveeta cheese, which of course isn’t cheese, but a “Pasteurized Prepared Cheese Product”.

…but it does provide a good reminder that people who find Rob Bell appealing cannot be engaged in this way with any degree of effectiveness. This is a discussion accessible to anyone on the internet. Don’t forget that. It may not be likely that Rob Bell himself will read this, but it is not at all unlikely that someone favorably inclined toward him might. It is a good thing, I would reason, that an audience reading this would not assume that all Fundamentalist types, at least, find it acceptable to refer to those with opposing views as “idiots,” much less that it is consistent with Biblical guidelines.

[Greg Linscott]

…but it does provide a good reminder that people who find Rob Bell appealing cannot be engaged in this way with any degree of effectiveness. This is a discussion accessible to anyone on the internet. Don’t forget that. It may not be likely that Rob Bell himself will read this, but it is not at all unlikely that someone favorably inclined toward him might. It is a good thing, I would reason, that an audience reading this would not assume that all Fundamentalist types, at least, find it acceptable to refer to those with opposing views as “idiots,” much less that it is consistent with Biblical guidelines.

Consider us reminded.

Farewell Rob Bell!

…not as a yawn,

not someone to express “bored”dom about,

nor as an idiot.

The “many” to whom I refer in my Subject line includes several serious, good men here in the WMich area who think that Bell’s ideas are foolish and heretical, but none will treat him as described just above, because to do so will be to weaken their arguments with the Christians (or church attendees) to whom and with whom they minister. What is the value of having strong arguments against him with these ones? Because the eternal danger to people is real. Along with the lost who may stumble across this website (as they search for Rob Bell’s name), many Christians and church attendees see hope in him personally, and his teachings. If we are arguing the substance of his errors, then they might be aided and not dismissive of what they see here. But, one of the things I run into is that conservative and fundamentalist Christians are seen as not being worth listening to (as regards Bell) because they are “haters.”

Let’s admit that many of these people will think that kind of thing anytime you disagree with someone like Bell (even if you do it without committing logical fallacies, and within the bounds of civil and/or Christian discourse). That is the sad but current state of logic in our culture (Christian or secular). How much more will I lose them if in my zeal and passion for truth I commit a Malchus’s ear mistake and actually give them real ammo against me? The name, fame and cause of Christ are dirtied by this. (If you see my web presence here and there, I am guilty of many Malchusian (to coin a term) moments when I admittedly “acted like an idiot.” (Greg Linscott is right re: my own candidness as it were [rueful, sorrowing smile].)) I have paid for these instances—sometimes with the lost, sometimes with Christians to whom and with whom I minister.

To Tyler: I mean no rebuke as to your age/being in seminary. Age/maturity and station of life have nothing to do with this. I did mean to point out what Greggie (he hates when I call him that) already stated well. Additionally, in the church I pastor, sometimes I see clear evidences of my cynicism, sarcasm and caustic-ism in them, and I mourn—having each time to go to them to point out that I was wrong to (as Bauder says) use “mustard” when I should have used something else. (Bauder notes that like mustard, cynicism and sarcasm have a place, but like mustard, one might not want to make a steady diet of them.) I am guessing that some of your teens with whom and to whom you minister for Christ’s sake may see what is written here [though it looks like that church reference has been removed]. As to your seminary status, I too am in seminary currently (Th.M Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary).

We are all young in comparison to someone—I am surrounded by wiser older men (my profs) at PRTS, who (even while in casual conversation with me) correct me and teach me with their questions. (Be it said, in probably more elegant & cultured ways than what I have attempted with you.) It is humbling.

Finally, I did not mean my remarks to detract from the OP, because Bell’s stock and trade includes the message that what he is presenting is a godly, biblical, and loving answer to the (real or perceived) errors of fundamentalism and conservative evangelicalism—including name-calling.

We need to teach everyone, from children, teens and adults to know and believe orthodoxy and to live and breathe orthopraxy. So the,n when they are in the world, around other Christians and the lost, they will be able to lovingly and carefully describe and argue for God’s viewpoint, and invite the other person to glorify Christ with them in whatever that issue is. With the lost especially, presenting a biblically taught understanding of God’s view of sexual sin (of all types, including same-sex sin) can be a path to showing them how to glorify God in trusting Christ. That confrontation in the realm of ideas will be confronting enough to them, their hackles will go up even higher if they sense an unloving invective in us. God help us all.