Tag Archives: Lady Gaga

Thoughts On Rob Bell’s “Love Wins” and the Sad State of American Christianity

By Eugene C. Scott

I’m coming late to the Rob Bell lynching. In case you’re coming in late too, Bell is swinging from the gallows for writing a book titled “Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived.”

Despite the megalomaniacal title, Bell’s book shouldn’t have earned him a golden noose. This is not to say that what Bell writes about heaven and hell is not controversial or important. Rather I believe the size of the controversy dwarfs the contents of the 198 page book. Others–Bell cites a few of them–have said and written similar things about “heaven and hell and the fate of every person who ever lived” without stirring as much dust.

So why the excitement? Because Bell is part of the American Evangelical star-maker machinery: hip, good preacher, mega church, author of a previous best-selling book called “Velvet Elvis,” huge following, and conference speaker–though he won’t be speaking at as many conferences because everybody is mad at him. Bell is a Christian celebrity. If I had written this book–or you–only our friends and family members would have called us heretic.

To me the decibel level of the outcry says more about the state of American Evangelicalism than it does about Bell or theology. Evangelicalism has blindly bought in (pun intended) to consumerism as a cultural ideal.

Duck into any Christian book/trinket/Jesus-junk store. Based on most of the products there, we are a community 1,000 miles wide and an 1/8 inch deep. At our local store you can buy “Christian scripture candy” called “Testamints.”

One company sports a name and logo that is oxymoronic: “Not of This World: A Christian Clothing Brand All About Jesus.” As if slick marketing and a cool logo is not of this world. And notice the books in these Christian book stores. Authors having a “platform,” read sales potential, often outweigh artistic writing or powerfully poised ideas.

This focus on celebrity and consuming things supposedly representing our All Consuming God has done far more damage to our sad state of faith than Rob Bell’s debatable theories on hell. Consider how many of us go to church to get our spiritual tanks filled, or hear a good sermon rather than to encounter God. The former are all consumer ideas not found in scripture.

Second, Bell’s book is controversial because he may or may not–it’s hard to tell–believe in hell as eternal punishment the way most other American Evangelical stars do. This is similar to (though more consequential than) a Hollywood star, say Lady Gaga, declaring herself a Republican.

Two of Bell’s main ideas in “Love Wins” are that heaven is not a place in the clouds but living in God’s presence and creation both here and now and then and there (after death) and also that hell is not an eternal fiery pit but rather separation from God here and now and then and there. The after life hell he posits is a redemptive place where those who do not chose God in this life will be able to, eventually.

His first theory–heaven begins here–is not new. Nor is it controversial, despite how most of pop Christianity wrongly believes heaven is only the place we go when we die. Orthodox theologians George Eldon Ladd and Dallas Willard also pointed out that Jesus brought the kingdom of God (heaven) with him when he came to us as Incarnate God and did not take it with him when he left as Risen Lord. If this idea interests you–and it should–read more about it in Willard’s “Divine Conspiracy” or Ladd’s “The Gospel of the Kingdom.” They are not easy reads but they are worth the work. As Bell argues, living as if heaven begins here and now makes a profound difference in our day-to-day lives.

Bell’s second major theme, hell is redemptive, also is not new. It is, however, troublesome and controversial. Bell does incredible interpretive and linguistic gymnastics to get to this point. But he never dives deep into his reasoning nor into any of the competing arguments. Even his prose style feels as if it skims the surface. He uses short, incomplete sentences that read more like bullet points than flowing narrative. This has caused some to accuse Bell of setting up and knocking down “straw-men.”

Hell must be redemptive, Bell argues because he cannot conceive of God not getting what God wants. In other words, “Love Wins.”

Bell reasons this on the basis that God is good and loving and it is inconceivable that a good and loving God would torture his creatures for eternity. Therefore he says, those choosing hell will only be there until they finally choose God.

Aside from the biblical problems this raises, it trips over other issues. First, why is God more loving to–in Bell’s words–“torture” people for only 10,000 or 10,000,000 years? If hell is not compatible with a loving God, then it does not matter how long one suffers there. One second is too long. This solution only reframes the problem but does not solve it.

Second, will people who had incredibly hard and indifferent hearts to human suffering and God’s love here on earth have the same hearts in hell? If so, how much time would they have to spend there to finally choose God? Will Hitler spend 10,000,000,000 years while the woman who murders only her husband spends only 1,000 years in hell? How does that square with unearned grace?

Third, though Bell claims he believes love only lives in freedom and that that freedom allows us to choose or reject God’s offer of eternal love and heaven, Bell’s hell seems to be a place–full of suffering–where all there will change their minds. That sounds more like prolonged determinism not love inspired freedom.

One positive thread Bell wove into “Love Wins” is questioning many status quo, popularly held Christian beliefs. Are these beliefs, such as heaven is only where we go when we die and hell is a fiery place presided over by a horned devil, biblical or do our pictures and ideas for them come from other, less inspired places? But the book is not in-depth enough to answer these questions adequately. That said, I do not believe Bell chickens out in the end, as some have accused. I find Bell lets the infinite nature of these questions remain somewhat of a mystery. I want stronger answers. But we mere humans may not have been given them. Finally, I have read these same questions and answers before and better explored in other places–but by less famous authors.


Filed under Uncategorized

Lady Gaga, The Church, And You

Yesterday, a snippet of  Larry King’s interview with pop singer Lady Gaga was posted on CNN.com. King asked the singer (whose real name is Stefani Germanotta), “You were raised a Catholic. What are your feelings toward church and religion in general?”

“Well I struggle about my feelings about the church in particular,” she confessed. “But I guess it’s, quite honestly, completely separate isn’t it? Religion and the church? They’re completely separate things.” Later she explained that while she believes in Jesus, she is reluctant to endorse anything organized.

How relevant is the church today? Do we even need it? Continuing the discussion, yesterday CNN also offered another article entitled, Are there dangers in being “spiritual but not religious”?

Please join me as we explore these pertinent questions.


2 Samuel 22:1-23:23
Acts 2:1-47
Psalm 122:1-9
Proverbs 16:19-20


2 Samuel 22:1-23:23. The words in the psalm David wrote in chapter 22 is more or less found in Psalm 18. Although it appears at the end of 2 Samuel, it was written earlier in David’s reign. The psalm in chapter 22 expresses David‘s experience with God.

The psalm in chapter 23 emphasizes the covenant God had made with David and pays less attention to his enemies.

We’re coming to the end of David’s life. Even today, Israel considers him their greatest leader and, with his son Solomon, his reign resulted in Israel’s greatest influence and affluence.

But think about David’s many struggles. He spent his young adult years on the run from Saul and in his latter years he found himself on the run from his son. The feeling of peace and “settledness” seemed elusive to David throughout his life.

Acts 2:1-47. Acts is the second installment of a two-part series authored by Luke. Reading the first chapter of both Acts and the Gospel of Luke, you’ll noticed that a man named Theophilus is addressed. He was likely a member of the Roman aristocracy whom Luke might have sought to influence on behalf of the gospel.

Psalm 122:1-9. The people sang this psalm as they walked “up” to Jerusalem. It’s a “song of ascents” because of the hike in elevation going up to the royal city.

If you’ve found A Daily Bible Conversation helpful, share it with your friends! Forward your daily email or send them a link to the website: http://www.bibleconversation.com.


The second chapter of Acts has been called the birthday of the church. Although Jesus’ followers assembled and prayed together after his ascension to heaven, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (which not-so-ironically occurred during the Pentecost religious holiday) certainly mobilized and empowered the people into unit.

In both the Greek and Hebrew languages, the word for “wind” and “Spirit” are the same. The symbolism of wind blowing when the Spirit was given in Acts 2 cannot be ignored. In Genesis 1, we read that the “Spirit of God” or “wind of God” was hovering over the waters during creation. In the same way, Pentecost was symbolic of a new creation for the whole world.

Simon Chan explores this in his fascinating book Liturgical Theology,

The church precedes creation in that it is what God has in view from all eternity and creation is the means by which God fulfills his eternal purpose in time. The church does not exist to fix a broken creation; rather creation exists to realize the church…God made the world in order to make the church, not vice versa. Scripture itself testifies to the logical priority of the church over creation by referring to the church as chosen in Christ before the creation of the world (Ephesians 1:4), or to Christ who was slain before the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8).

If Simon Chan is correct in his assertions, and if Acts 2 is symbolic of a new creation, then the importance of the church cannot be ignored.

Iranaeus, the ancient church father who lived a generation after the apostle John, reportedly said, “You cannot have God for your father if you do not have the church for your mother.” While I’m reluctant to equate salvation with membership in a church, I cannot ignore the importance of the church in the early days of the Christian faith.

People may debate the validity of the church and excuse themselves from it because they see it as irrelevant, but that seems to approach the subject from the wrong end. It’s kind of like the tail wagging the dog. Trendy beliefs based on the ever-changing winds of whatever is considered “relevant” seem a bit shallow, in my estimation. Beliefs should be based in truth, but experience is so subjective that it serves as a shaky foundation for anything.

My point in all of this? Two thousand years ago God sent his only Son Jesus to save us. Then he sent the church—not individual disparate followers of Jesus—into the world to continue what he started. It assuredly isn’t perfect, but the church is God’s primary means of rescuing the world from itself. Not because of the people, but because of Jesus’ work through those imperfect people.


  1. What spoke to you in today’s reading?
  2. If you were to write a psalm about your life-long experience with God, what would it look like?
  3. Reading through Acts 2, what is God’s intent?

If you’re reading this blog on FaceBook and you’d like to join the conversation, click here.


Michael co-pastors The Neighborhood Church in Littleton, Colorado.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized