There is a new book out this month by Mars Hill pastor Rob Bell. Apparently, it is making quite a stir in some parts of conservative Christianity. The book has just been released , but was already receiving criticism before it came out. This is due to the fact that Bell is discussing the reality of Hell and eternal punishment. He seems to insinuate in his video advertisement that a good God would not condemn people eternally because "love wins" in the end. In fact that is the title of the book, "Love Wins". Now I have not read the book and I get very uneasy when people criticize an author/speaker before they have read/heard his/her arguments. It is important that conservative Christians give Bell respect as a fellow believer by reading his book before commenting. If I ever publish, I hope that I will get that treatment.
But Bell's video advertisement did trigger a thought in my mind that often goes missing in discussions on this topic: the human need for justice (Bell may discuss this in his book, I hope he does). Both believers and unbelievers often chaff over the justice of God as we learn about his wrath and judgment upon sinful humans (Rom. 1:18-3:20). How could a loving God send people into judgment? The short answer is that God is just. Justice cannot be separated from His love. His justice judges sin and His love provides the Gospel. It is typical to put ourself in the place of God and say that we would forgive everyone no matter what. But if we stop and think about that for a moment, then we quickly realize that it is not true. We often jettison forgiveness because of a desire for justice.
One of the most pronounced examples of this in my opinion is how the vast majority of Americans rose up with one voice after the events of 9/11 and cried out for justice. Carte blanche forgiveness was not on many lips. We recognized that the innocent had suffered and there needed to be payment. There needed to be judgment. Another illustration is seen by me every week as I teach at a maximum security prison. The offenders are locked up because this is how our system perceives that justice will be satisfied. They have committed crimes and are paying for them. You can imagine the feelings of the victims, if some of these offenders never had to suffer any penalty for their crimes. The cry of "injustice!" would be heard, and bitterness would result. It is not just the victims though who cry for justice. It is also the offenders. They have a strong sense of justice. They see the problems with the "system" better than anyone else and often the desire for justice is expressed.
It makes complete sense that if we as God's creation crave justice, then the creator God would crave justice exponentially more. We often misperceive what is owed to us in order for justice to be met, but God knows exactly the cost of sin and the payment for forgiveness. If we remove the characteristic of justice from God, then we do not glorify Him; in fact we make Him less than human. As human beings we expect justice; how much more should God?
Hey Michael, This is a very solid reply to Pastor Bell's video presentation. The idea of justice is inherent in human nature and the nature of God. One example would be in the Garden of Eden, when God handles Adam and Eve's sin by giving them garments of skin. The implication here is that an animal sacrifice (a substitute) was given in response to human wrongdoing. Cain and Abel and the Flood are all examples of God's justice and judgement on sin. An interesting audio reply can be found at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKMBMOTZwrY , and I have no idea how to embed the link.
ReplyDeleteKyle Lammott has posted a great interview between Rob Bell and Martin Bashir from MSNBC (http://euangelion116.blogspot.com/). So here we get to hear straight from the author's mouth. The truly surprising thing for me in this video is that Mr. Bashir has quite the grasp of Christianity and early Christian history, and how Bell's book impacts those two parts. I did not find Bell's answers helpful in the slightest. On a sidenote, if you watch the video be on the lookout for Mr. Bashir committing the informal fallacy of false dichotomy in the beginning. I squirmed as Bell fell into that fairly obvious trap. But since I have never had to answer theological questions on national T.V., maybe I can throw him a bone. :)
ReplyDeleteI was wondering if Bell makes a category mistake: instead of thinking of love as a subset of God, he thinks of God as a subset of love. This makes God = love and love = God. But this idea is not convertible. God is love but love is not God. God is greater than love, and includes justice, holiness, etc. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteTodd, I can see that. We can argue that the subject contains (or is a part of) the object and that there is some relationship between them, but that does not necessarily mean that if we switch the subject and object around we get the same equation. All dogs are animals, but not all animals are dogs. I get the impression (having not read the book) that Bell is less concerned with critical thinking and more concerned about religious experience. Did you get a chance to watch the video?
ReplyDelete