But, again, it's the discussion about this issue that's kept me fascinated. Is Rob Bell a false prophet? Can God save those outside of the Christian faith? What is hell like? Where is it? Who will be there? What is the proper Christian response to false teaching...or to diverse belief? How much diversity can we have within the faith and still keep the faith? THIS I find interesting.
Perhaps the big issue is not Rob Bell, but about Christianity as a whole.
Jason Boyett, who writes over at "O Me Of Little Faith" has a nice post addressing the latter issue...diversity within the church, within the faith.
He says
Right now, Christian theology is broader and more diverse than most Christians are comfortable with. In fact, over two thousand years of biblical interpretation, the Christian religion has proved to be ridiculously flexible, able to tolerate significant theological and practical differences without, you know, us having to say “farewell” to people who land on a different interpretation. Consider:
There are Christians who believe they are saved exclusively through grace, period, full stop … and Christians who believe some manner of works are involved (those “works” may be as basic as an acknowledgment of Christ’s lordship or as complex as to what extent we cared for the “least of these”).
Some Christians believe salvation is eternal. Others believe it can be lost or cast aside.
Some Christians believe the elect are predetermined by God, chosen for either salvation and damnation. Others believe God gives mankind real freedom to make his or her own choice.
Some believe salvation occurs at the moment of baptism. Others believe baptism to be an important, public confession of salvation — but only symbolic.
And he goes on, with some pretty stark differences, diversity we can find within the Christian Church. I know, every time I lead a talk at the Walk to Emmaus spiritual retreat or even preach on Sunday morning, that there are people who are going to disagree. Maybe they come from a different background. Maybe they think it's unbiblical that I practice infant baptism. Maybe they question my interpretation of Scripture. Maybe they're offended that I talk about my female (gasp) clergy friends.
So, how do we still manage to come to the one table to eat and drink Christ's body and blood together? How do we work together as the Body of Christ in the world? How do we act in love, welcoming and not excluding the other?
Girdwood Chapel has been a great model of this for me because we have such great diversity in our midst. When we stand together in a circle at the end of worship singing "On Eagle's Wings" I see it as a foretaste of heaven, when the walls that divide us come down.
We need to approach these discussions with, probably, more humility than we want to. Jason Boyett closes his post wonderfully...with such humility...and a lot of perspective.
Though we base our beliefs on the same source (the Bible and the last couple thousand years of tradition), we Christians are a fantastically diverse people. Some of our core beliefs are not just very different from another, but frequently at odds with one another.
Most of us think we’re right. But we can’t all be right about everything.
Which is to say: almost all of us are wrong about something. Regardless of what we believe, there are Christians somewhere in the world who think you are dead wrong. Dangerously wrong. Maybe even a heretic. Why? Because you are on the wrong side of what they consider a core belief.
For all our talk about narrow roads, Christianity has become a broad, gushing stream. Acknowledging that, with humility, ought to give us pause before we start all the in-fighting and name-calling. I need to remember that the next time I decide Rob Bell is wrong…or John Piper is wrong…or I am right.
What this tells me it that Christianity and the bible are the creations of men, not God. God is perfect (or He wouldn't be God) so if he created a religion, it would be unambiguous...no room for interpretation...non-contradictory and clearly spelled out. In fact, if He really wanted men to come to him thru Jesus, the most obvious, no-way-you-can-ignore-this action would have been to have Jesus walk right into the Temple after the Resurrection and say "See, I told you!"
Actually, I'd say the most obvious way for God to bring persons to him through Jesus would be to force belief upon us. But, I think our God's always been interesting in his desire to have persons come to him through faith, because they want to come to him... sort of like the difference between an arranged marriage and falling in love. It makes the process more murky, but the end result more beautiful.
And, I'd not say that the Bible and the Church were creations "of" men but creations "with" men. Again, springing from God's desire to be in relationship with his creation.
(BTW, from a theological standpoint, this is what makes me an "Arminian" rather than a "Calvinist" and the reason why "Arminianism" shows up occasionally here. It's the belief in God giving us free will that can reject the grace that God offers.)