Not only was I truly disappointed with Bell's portrayal of heaven, hell, and God's plan of redemption through Jesus Christ tonight, I am also puzzled with the depiction you give in this article. Yes, you quote his very words, but you fail to give his full statements where he so poetically separates himself from scripture. To the point of universalism, he denies it himself but then goes on to explain how many will be saved by Jesus... Even though they may not know it's Jesus that's saving them. He gives the notion that just a vague obedience to Jesus' ideals will be what saves men. Your ideals are your works. The bible teaches that Jesus and Jesus alone saves men. Quickly, on another point, to the definite or infinite value of Hell... By Bell's definition of Hell, using his own understanding of the original language, hell could be this temporary purging place, where God continues to chase you. If this is the case then, by his own definition, heaven would also be temporary. My great issue with this is that it minimizes Jesus and the gospel to a simple temporary band-aid to a problem that will soon fix it's self. There are many other issues with Bell's portrayal of the gospel... But I have reconciled that the time might be best spent praying for him and those that he may influence. I would recommend reading the bible before reading this book... And then I would recommend not reading this book, but reading the bible again. God bless and please show the full story, this article seems a bit biased.

I watched this by fluke. I just saw a friend had posted it on facebook - I ended up watching the whole thing. I am the lead pastor of a church in Vancouver Canada. I had read Velvet Elvis, Jesus wants to save Christians and our church has used his nooma videos. I was regularly listening to his podcasts as I thought he was such a great communicator. Over the past year I noticed his sermons were tending more into literary analysis and away from theological rigor. Creativity seemed to trump theology. I'm all for creativity, as long as it is held in tension with orthodoxy.

This interview tonight blew me away. I thought Bell was evasive and indirect. His power of communication seemed to overcome his weak answers. What finally did it for me was the number of times he gave completely unrelated stories in response to questions.

Bell is still a great communicator. I just wish he had a better handle on what he communicates.

There is so much in this interview that grieves my spirit that it would be impossible to list in 1500 characters. If we are getting back to the basics as Bell repeats so often then we should get back to Christ being the ONLY way to heaven, that He is the narrow path and that it is not about intention or mood or service or anything other than Christ. We are given the freedom by God to accept or deny the gift of salvation, if you are hit by a car and have not accepted that than yes you will go to hell, a place, not an emtoive state. It is purposeless to live a life for Christ if in the end you have the option to choose "peace....great wine and food" etc. The bible says God devides the sheep from the goats, you don't get to show up and pick your team.

I thought some of his answers were amazing and made a lot of sense. I think he has a great sense of the love of God. It's completely true that he did not answer the question of whether Hell is an actual place. But I got the feeling he felt he was speaking to an audience of people who were very wary about God, which since he was in NYC is not a ridiculous assumption, and trying to recalibrate their notion of who God actually is.

"No, I'm not a universalist but I believe people from all backgrounds will get to heaven." What??? Rob Bell needs to leave the church and get into law or politics. Here's a guy who knows how to use a lot of words to say very little. He says, "Jesus is the mechanism to get to heaven" but when pressed by a Jew about whether her loved ones will get to heaven..."Well, the Bible is very broad." Rob Bell, do you have a spine? This is a classical case of theological pussy-footing.

With answers like that, Rob Bell would make an excellent candidate for 2012.

"No, I'm not a universalist but I believe people from all backgrounds will get to heaven." Sounds like "no, I'm not a racist, but I believe people of a certain skin colour are superior to others."

I had never heard Rob Bell speak until this interview, and what I feel Bell disclosed is that he is in love with himself -- certainly in love with his own thoughts and words. "That's not a verse, but I like it" and "That's not a word ... but (giggle, giggle)." He also played to the crowd to get applause. And so on. When push came to shove, he didn't present the gospel clearly to Lisa Miller, a self-confessed Jew and therefore, by gospel definition, a lost person. Sure, it would have been awkward, and I surely agree he should not have been confrontational or mean, but nonetheless, he didn't say anything close to opening a door that is now closed to her. If she later becomes a Christian, what will she think of Bell's vacilation then?

I had to switch it off after 27mins when Rob Bell started claiming that to cling to the exclusivity of Jesus as the Way to Heaven is to ignore/deny/brush off Jesus' other teachings.
Jesus is THE ONLY way to the Father (John 14:6). If there were other ways to Heaven, Christ would not have had to die. Luke 22 v 41-44 shows Jesus asking if there is another way, yet he obeys the will of his Father.
When Paul talks to the Athenians in Acts 17 he uses the 'Unknown God' as a way in to preach to them about Jesus. If they already had a relationship with Jesus and their salvation was sorted, he needn't have bothered.
Rob Bell is unfortunately another in an increasing line of dynamic speakers who are just NOT SPEAKING THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL and will draw others away from the truth of Christ and the joy of a relationship with Him.
I am concerned that the starting point for Rob Bell seems to be what he thinks and not what the Bible says.

Hmmm... I had posted something positive regarding the interview, it was here, now it's gone... I hope it was accidental...(see below, Bob. It is still there. - Admin)

Anyway, the gist of what I to say was that it sounded to me like Rob took the opportunity to turn almost every question into a discussion of the good news of the kingdom of God. He used the interview as an evangelical platform rather than a theological debate where he clarified all his points. And I'd much rather him proclaim the good news to the watching world that get into esoteric arguments over dogma. Thank God for Rob Bell!

There was a time when I was a child that I was severly disciplined for saying a phrase I heard in a movie, "my day was hell". Why was it a big deal to say this? Because to use the word hell in a cavileer way is to absolutely rob it of what it really and truly means, the horror and agony that the real Jesus warns us (in love) of and provides us a way of escape from through Him. Even 50 years ago, to speak of hell as merely "an everyday event that we experience when we make bad choices" as Rob Bell now does would have had him thrown out of the church. Not because Christians are harsh, but because of the danger of that trail of thinking... the horrors of the judgement people will unknowingly face unless they reconcile to God, not through their own good works or following other religions, but through Jesus Christ alone. God IS love, and because of His love He gave us Christ that we might be saved through Him. Rob Bell may have been helpful and appeared orthodox at one time, but it is now obvious he has certainly departed from the faith. To talk about hell from a Biblical perspective (which is what pastors are supposed to do, right?) for a full hour and never mention judgement, atonement, THE CROSS, satan, demons, HOLINESS, etc, is proof that He no longer teaches a Biblical hell, a Biblical Jesus, or the full counsel of God. Saying things like "God will give us whatever you want" and implying that Heaven is all about getting a good life here and now is not only theological self-centeredness, but it flies in the face of all the real Jesus called us to: taking up our CROSS and following Him, knowing that for this light and momentary affliction we will enjoy glory with Him for eternity. If Jesus is so laid back, inclusive, and only wanting to give everyone happiness as Bell portrays... why in the world would they crucify Him and nail him to a cross? You don't crucify Mr. Rogers, you crucify people who don't give you what you want and expose the darkness we all have in our hearts, apart from the cleansing blood of Christ.

So if you want to go to heaven, you will. I guess that about sums it up because who wants to go to hell? Faith in Christ is irrelevant. Sin or righteousness is irrelevant. What matters is what do I want? This is the result of a consumerism mindset -- pick the door you want and it's yours. Nothing matters except what you want.The only way that Jesus is involved is that He is the "mechanism." That's an interesting twist on being "the way, the truth and the life".

The comments here about Rob Bell raise up the old Theological question.Universalism v Calvanism and in the latters emphasis on Particular Redemption.
The question being,
Was the death of Jesus effective or not?
Did it actually accomplish anything or is it dependent upon people responding?
Both the Universalist and the Calvanist would say Yes..
One the Universalist would contend that the sacrifice or ransom Jesus made ,was effective and all mankind is redeemed.
The Particular Redemption position was that the death of Christ was effective and Redemption is secured for Gods elect...

It would appear from what I have read that Rob Bell leans towards the Universalist position.

What about most Evangelicals? We seem to reject both and limit God to only those who choose His Son...

I for one,while not embracing Rob Bells theological position,nevertheless applaud him for being willing to confront the question of Effective Redemption,head on.

I think we need to be careful judging a man in whom God has used to save thousands and to disciple probably millions. I believe Rob Bell says it best when he says that we often believe there must be a right side and a wrong side. That we must always pick a side. He says that He believes that you don't have to pick a side, but to be ok with their being some gray areas. I think he gets this from Jesus' own teachings. As Bell states, Jesus is extremely inclusive and extremely non-inclusive at the same time. He says that Jesus is a paradox. So, it seems that Rob Bell is simply not driving a stake in the ground on these issues. Although, I don't think I agree with him on some of these issues, it drives me to my Bible to study and to my Lord for better understanding.

Shortly after Mr. Bell bypassed the opportunity to present any kind of specific Christian witness to his questioner, Lisa Miller, who described herself as Jewish, he also sidestepped a perfect opening to identify Jesus Christ as the "firstborn" or "firstfruits" of bodily Resurrection from the dead. Why, Rob, are the doctrines of the cross and the resurrection so painful to you to enunciate that you must perform verbal gymnastics to keep from saying the words?

I repeat the late Vance Havner's truism: "If you don't know where a man stands, then you know."

I am not sure what most you you heard here because most of what he said seems right on while he is saying things and challenging our western perspective he seems well founded, balanced and well studied study of the good news,the gospel and ministry of Jesus Christ. It is time to open up and challenge what we have been taught, where it came from and have to ask the question is it truth just because it is what we were taught to be truth without in-depth study of regional intent and context. Is your system being threatened? If so dig deeper than your western commentary and theology and look at it from a eastern mindset. Then take it back 2000 years and you will find it much different than what we have been taught in a western view and mindset.

Jesus condemned the pharisees as a brood of vipors and white washed tombs. (and I bet that these were pretty likeable guys as Jesus even tells them that they look "beautiful on the outside") To me though, the real sting is when Jesus calls them "blind guides." When an army recruit falls out of line during basic training and is made to do pushups, this will perturb the behavior for a season. When an army recruit is punished a second time for the same offense by punishing the entire group of his buddies in his platoon with pushups, this will perturb for a lifetime. I often wonder about what is floating around the religious leader's mind when they stray from the Word of God to "the wisdom of man" and encourage others to do the same. Don't they realize that there is more at stake then just pushups and more at stake than just punishment for them alone? Bell mentions the paradoxes in the Scriptures to justify his non-universalist universalism. But the paradox Bell finds himself in is that by lovingly relying on the "wisdom of man" by encouraging the masses with confidence of right standing, he inevitably will find himself a fool and most hated as the vast majority of those who followed found themselves outside knocking. "But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgement." Mt. 12:36

There is a lot of key things missing from the interview which suggest Bell is a univeralist (although he does not admit it). I am concerned that CT is so biased not to present what Bell said. CT's coverage of the whole Bell saga has been so diplomatic towards Bell. CT please let everyone know what Bell also said.

I posted a fuller transcript of the interview here: http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Additional-Resources/You-Will-Call-I-Will-Answer.html

The above is pretty misleading, actually. He said "No," but then gave an extreme definition of universalism (which was not the definition Lisa Miller proposed. But then he said yes, he believes that people of all labels - and she had specifically mentioned "Jews, Hindus...etc" get saved. So he is a universalist in the looser sense.

Wow, I've never read Bell's stuff directly or listened to a pod-cast of his until this, but after listening to this conversation I understand why Richard Mouw can affirm his orthodoxy and love of Jesus. After nearly 35 years in the evangelical community of faith I completely get why so many find his perspectives and presentation of the purposes and love of God disturbing. I also completely appreciate how his approach to communicating the Gospel threads the needle, the narrow gate, the 'for those who have ears,' the "you have been with me all this time and you still don't understand," kind of view, and how he recreates the mysterious ambiguities of the Gospel presentation of the Jesus of faith and history. Wow, are we more closely aligned with the Zealots, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, or the modern and contemporary this and thats if we aren't able to appreciate what God is doing through Bell? I don't know for sure, but if you are inclined to cast those like myself who do resonate with God's Gospel _a la_ Bell into the outer darkness, judge on you teachers of the Law, but take care lest you be caught up in the sins of judging others as you will be judged.

I am a Canadian pastor and Church planter from Montreal. I really like Rob Bell but after watching this interview I realize that he is a bit confused about Heaven and Hell. Rob just tried to avoid a straight answer to the simple question "Is hell a real place?". I used all the Nooma videos in the past but after this interview I have some doubts about where he is going with all this. I will read the book because I want to be informed about it first hand and not trough critics but this interview was very disappointing. Answering "that's a great question" but not giving a straight answer to any of the questions indicates to me that there is maybe a hidden agenda. I listened to Rob Bell's podcasts and messages and I agree with him in most of what he says ant teaches but denying the existence of hell as a real place is to white wash God's judgment and is a very dangerous doctrinal mistake.

I think Rob Bell is being misunderstood in his comments regarding 'anyone can go to Heaven'. He rightly intimates that it is God who is the Judge. I think that it would have been helpful had he continued by mentioning the fact that Christians are being renewed and empowered here on Earth so that they will be the overseers of the New Earth. Christians will be the ones 'in tune with His Holy ways for Eternity. They will be the ones prepared for the task. Never mind what God wants to do with the others. that is up to Him.

God is judge. You are not. What can't some Christians accept this?

Hmmm. at about 30:21 Bell inverts our Lord's words. Jesus did not say "if you are not against Me, then you are for Me." He said the exact opposite: "if you are not for Me, then you are against Me." The two statements are diametrically opposed.

For Bell to make the inverse statement is to obliterate and reverse Jesus' meaning altogether. I think this miscue on Bell's part is more than telling. It opens the floodgates (in my mind at least) to Bell's central error (although he has many other wonderful things to say about Jesus..sob! what a strange, sad situation).

God is still in control. He can still use discussions like this, flawed theology and all, to draw people to Himself. I pray that in spite of these errors, that is what happens.

Are we really so desperate that we have to say that this book which is filled with error and purposeful misquotes from Jesus may still be used by God? So many people seem clueless about God's holiness and sovereignty. I would certainly hope that Christians would not recommend a book like this to non-believers or new believers. There are many good, theologically sound books to recommend, thank God. Remember what 1Cor 5:6 says "Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the *whole* batch of dough?" Heaven forbid that I would be guilty of recommending a book by an author who purposefully misquotes Jesus to further the author's purposes. It's too bad that people like Rick Warren and Rob Bell make money by writing totally flawed books that are gobbled up by people who evidently don't know their Bibles well enough. The Bible says that those who teach will be held to a higher standard, so I pray that the false preachers will repent before it's too late. It's time that we stop putting pastors on some celebrity list, and get back to God's Word, the real truth.

After watching the video I think that Rob Bell accurately represents the Universalist position (not necessarily the Unitarian Universalist but the Evangelical Universalist). Even though he denies being a Universalist, he really is one since he seems to believe that "Love Wins" for each and every person (and demon, I suppose). For love to "win" would mean that God (Love) gets his way (wins)and everyone is brought to Christ as it says in Romans 11:32, "For God has bound ALL MEN over to disobedience so that he may have MERCY on them ALL." Or "EVERY knee shall bow in heaven and on earth and UNDER THE EARTH (Satan?), and EVERY tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord" (Phil 2:10-11). And then there's "For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him and through him to reconcile to himself ALL THINGS, whether things on earth or things in heaven (all angels), by making peace through his blood shed on the cross." Notice there is "EVERY" and "ALL" in these verses--there are no exceptions. Every being is reconciled to God eventually. I invite your response to imauniversalist@hotmail.com.

Yes....I am desperate to say that God reigns in spite of human stupidity and sin. That is the gospel message. And it happens every day. Jesus reigns no matter what untruths are said about Him. No matter what damnable atrocities are uttered from the lips of men or performed by human beings, God is sovereign. Paul said, "The important thing is that in every way...whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached." Philippians 1:18.

At the same time, I agree that a horrible fate awaits those who distort or pervert His Word and that those who teach will be held to a higher standard. I agree with you that R.B. is on terribly dangerous ground.

But all truth is God's truth, and it is my prayer that whatever kernels of truth DO exist in Bell's book are what remain in the minds of his readers, and not the falsehoods.

For books that are heavily (versus sparingly) laden with truth, yes, there are many others which abound and I would hope that truth-seekers would eventually find those. But again, God can is sovereign. I had a friend who accepted Christ while he was high. Is being high good? No. But God worked in my friend in spite of his error. Let us pray the best for those under the influence of Rob Bell's teachings.

Oh. And I wouldn't recommend this book. If somebody happened to read it, I just think God could still override the errors, because He is God.

Oh. And also...does anybody else feel the Rob would make a great Catholic? A lot of his positionings seem to be more compatible with Catholicism than Protestantism (he seems to allow for some kind of "purgatory position" where you can still turn to God even after you've left earth). Maybe this is part of the problem...spouting off Catholicisms while simultaneously posing as a Protestant. IDK...either way, I hope the best for anyone who encounters his teachings.

Sarah: You are correct that Jesus said, "He who is not with me is against me" (Mt 12:30). But Rob is ALSO correct because Jesus said, "for whoever is not against you is for you" (Lk 9:50). Second, the concept of Purgatory is similar to the notion of a second chance to accept Christ as Lord as in Universalism. So, unless we consider Catholics to be heretics,(and hardly anyone does any more) then we Universalists are not either. Third, there is a horrible "fate" awaiting those who reject or oppose Christ, it just isn't a literal Lake of Fire and it won't last forever. Read C.S. Lewis' "The Great Divorce" for a balanced view of this perspective. I also recommend George MacDonald's sermon entitled "Our God is a Consuming Fire" which is available on line. Any comments can be directed to me at imauniversalist@hotmail.com.

Paul, I've found that when there are major disagreements on major points, it's very hard to change anyone's mind. For your Romans verse, if you look just a couple of verses earlier, it mentions the elect. Yes, all the elect will be saved. Elect is a dreaded word by so many people, but yet if you look up the words elect, predestine, predestined, chosen, choose, you will find many, many verses. Almost every NT book says how God chose us. Not the other way around. Jesus says that nobody can come to Him unless the Father draws them. Romans chapter 9 explains a lot of this and answers almost all of the questions that people bring up. If you read it a couple of times and pray about it, it becomes clearer and makes sense. God loves us, and I trust God and know that there is no fairer judge than He. I trust God. I guess people just skim right over it, instead of taking their time and closely reading the verses, or they don't like it and they skip it. It's their loss, because it is all the word of God. In your Philippians verses, just read one more verse, and it completely takes away the meaning you gave it. The letters were obviously not broken up into chapter and verses, so read one more verse for a different meaning. Yes, if you read Revelation, every knee will bow. Demons are not made of flesh and bone, they don't have knees, and there is absolutely no reference to them having another chance or having a way of salvation like we do. Satan rebelled against God and 1/3 of the angels followed satan and are now demons. But after the acknowledgement of Jesus as Lord, the Bible says that Jesus will be judge, and he will separate the sheep from the goats. From Rev 20:7 "When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore.They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever." Then skipping a few verses, because of limitation of space it goes on to say "Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire." All I can say is that if you truly have a deep love of God, nothing seems "unfair". Romans also tells us that God reveals Himself to all, so that there is no excuse. Romans 1:16 "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes" Romans 1:18-20 says "The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." Actually, reading all of Romans really helps explain so many things. What we think is fair or unfair, may be very different from the true definition, which is God's. Our knowledge is kind of like a bacteria compared to the Creator of the universe, who made everything out of nothing. Do I have to understand how God can do that to believe it? No, not at all. Jesus said our belief should be like that of a child. We are clay in the Potter's hand. True love brings peace to our questions. Asking the Holy Spirit before reading the Bible helps, but we can never understand everything. But we can certainly love and try to please our Creator. I am so thankful for the faith that He has given me, for we are justified (saved) by faith.

Barbara: Thank you for your EXCELLENT response. You obviously know your Bible. Yet, I disagree with your comment regarding the mention of "election" (Ro 12:28) changing the plain meaning of verse 32. The two verses are not directly related and the context of the whole passage is that "all Israel will be saved" (v 26) which implies that all humanity will be too, which is exactly what verse 32 tells us. My comment on Philippians 2:10-11 is not affected by verse 12 because all of us are working out our salvation with "fear and trembling" since there is reason to "fear" God and his punishment. I have never said there is no "hell" per se, I just believe that it is not what litteralists interpret it to be. The words translated "hell" in the NT are not what we modern Christians have been taught for the most part.Rob Bell actually has an excellent chapter on this in his book. To address your section on Revelation 20, you need to look at 15:2 which talks about the "sea of glass mixed with fire". Jonathan Edwards explains that this is the "Sea" in the OT Temple (Notes on the Apocalypse, Stephen Stein, ed. Yale Univ. Press, p 100) where the priests washed (baptized) themselves (cf. Lev 8:6). This "Sea" sat right in front of the Temple (1 Ki 7:23). In 21:1 we read that "there was no longer any sea" and in 22:1 we read that the "sea" has been turned into the "river of the water of life" which comes out from exactly where the "Sea" used to be in front of the Temple. Since the first mention of the "sea of glass mixed with fire" relates to the Sea of the temple where the priests cleansed (baptized) themselves it is evident that the "lake of burning sulfer" into which Satan is thrown is exactly the same "Sea" which becomes the "river of the water of life." Obviously this imagery is drawn from many sources, and it takes a lot of study to put it all together, but please do not assume that the interpretation you have been taught is the only valid interpretation. The implication of this interpretation is exactly what George MacDonald wrote about when he said that "our God is a consuming fire" (He 12:29) and that Satan would be thrown into God to be punished and purified. Read his sermon on "Our God is a Consuming Fire" found on line.When you state that demons do not have knees, you are speaking incorrectly because from Genesis 6:1-4 we see that the Sons of God (v 2) (angels/demons) mated with human women and bore children. This is a controversial interpretation, but I have researched it and am confident this is exactly what happened. If they mated with human women and had children (the Nephilim v 2) then they must be the same basic species we are because their genes could match with human genes. Therefore, they have knees just as we do. Find me a scripture that says "demons don't have knees." You can't. Don't assume stuff just because it is a Christian "rumor." For you to assume that I do not pray when I am reading Scripture is a very judgmental statement, and I would counsel you to reconsider your words when you are trying to "instruct" someone who is as versed in Scripture as you are. With that said, I do not take it personally. If you want to continue this discussion, it would be easier to do if you contacted me at imauniversalist@hotmail.com. Thanks again for your well thought-out remarks.

Saw the interview and was not alarmed by what Bell said even though he resisted the forms of the questions put to him. Bought the book and read it already.

I have much more concern about the religious atmosphere that makes people afraid to think about or explore these questions.

Politican talk--didn't answer any questions with any clearity--just more of Satan's origianal attack on Eve-"Hath God said..." Nothing new under the sun-just a modern twist of a false prophet trying to deceive and make money while doing it. I will not buy this book of lies..

Rob Bell impresses me as a very charismatic person. He is really interesting to listen to and read, as well as being quite provocative.

However, human charisma and popularity do not necessarily have anything to do with ... the truth. I am concerned that in this interview about heaven, hell, and God's love, nothing was said about the cross of Christ. The focus of Jesus' ministry was to "give His life as a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45). The gospel ("good news") is about Jesus for me, not good news about me and my service, my accomplishments.

Romans 5:8 puts it this way: "God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

I applaud Rob Bell for wanting to be relevant in today's culture. It seems like he misses the centrality of the gospel, which is all about Jesus and the message of John 3:16.

Yes, the Holy Spirit radically changes our lives with fruit like love, joy, and peace (Galatians 5:22-23), as well as reaching out to those in need in very practical ways (James 1:27). However, a works-righteousness approach does not mean that I have a vital relationship with the Almighty God (Ephesians 2:8-10; Philippians 3:3-9); that is only through the person and work of Jesus Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 1 Timothy 2:5).

I have a hunch that Rob Bell would feel that I am being one of those "narrow minded Christians," based upon what I have just written. I believe the real point is this - it doesn't matter what Rob Bell, I, or anyone else opines about eternal truth. That is God's call, and historic Christianity maintains that the truth is found in the Living Word Jesus Christ and the written Word the Bible.

Maybe that is not clever enough for many people to not like. So be it. However, if you take the person and work of CHRIST out of CHRISTIANITY, then you are left with I-anity.

First, I want to say that most of the people who have posted here have made it very clear through their words that they have NOT read Bell's book.

Second, if Bell answered everything he talks about in his book when they interviewed him, who would buy the book? Simple marketing, here. Of course he avoided some answers.

Finally, Bell is not a universalist. He fully believes, according to what he wrote in the book, that man can and will reject God. He is simply HOPING, and wanting us to hope, that eventually everyone will break down and accept God, even if that happens after death.

Have you ever read much C.S. Lewis? Bell's position is pretty much not saying anything that Lewis has not already said.

God bless Rob Bell. He is fighting the good fight and contending for the faith once delivered unto the saints which has been buried and corrupted for years beneath the rubble of man-made religious institutions which, like the Pharisees of old, have fashioned vast, weighty burdens of dogmas and doctrines OF MEN, and bound these to the shoulders of others, grievous to be borne, while not lifting a finger to help carry them. These same institutions have spread bigotry, imperialism, persecution and war all over the globe until the name of Christ has become a stink of filth in the nostrils of sensitive and sensible and loving people everywhere instead of a sweet aroma and savour of life unto Life, as His precious Name SHOULD be.

I absolutely 100% believe that Christ is the only saviour and only way to our Maker, period. I just don't believe that means anyone has to sign up at one of these flesh-nature-infested mass-production socio-political-morality farms, these brick-and-mortar mini-matrices, to wear their theological colors, parrot their hatemongering spew, and dance to their shibboleths in order to belong to Christ. Belonging to Christ is, as one commentator here has already pointed out, a matter for God to determine, not us with our theological and moral "litmus" tests (or probings for imaginary "witches' marks" either). HE separates the sheep from the goats, true, but we most definitely get to "pick our team" -- why not try actually READING Matthew 25 before quoting one line from it out of context, and discover how those "teams" are picked. Nowhere in there does it say match up to some self-righteous hypocrite's notion of correct religious dogma. Nowhere in there does it say speak Christianese, either. I think the reason RELIGIOUS people despise Rob Bell is simply because he actually KNOWS what scripture says, whereas they just make money and wreck lives by PRETENDING to.

Oh and if anyone reading this wants to have a go at me? Save your breath and focus on responding to the article, instead. Matter of fact, save it entirely and go talk to God about it. If there's any kinks in me, He will straighten them out, because I actually DO belong to Him and Him alone. and guess what ... NONE OF YOU GET ANY SAY ABOUT THAT, AND NONE OF YOU GET ANY SAY ABOUT ROB BELL BEING HIS EITHER. Nyah Nyah!!!

Satan got Eve to question what God had clearly said in the garden. She was emboldened to take what God had forbidden by the devil's clever insinuation and paid for it. It astounds me that in a book about heaven and hell that supposedly is teaching what the Bible says that Rob Bell would never even quote the clearest OT passages about the resurrection of the dead and the eternal damnation of sinners- Isaiah 66:22-24 and Daniel 12:2. And even more so, key NT passages like Luke 13:23-28, Mark 9:43-48, Romans 2:4-5, Romans 10:14-17, Luke 12:58-13:9, etc. These passages and others so perfectly refute the writer's conjectures that if he merely quoted them without explaining them away he would then have nothing to write about.

The good news of the gospel is necessary because there is bad news, as Paul shows in Roman 1:18-3:20- our guilt before God and righteous condemnation of us on the day of judgment- if we're not made new creatures and forgiven in Christ. The Bible says "Flee from the wrath to come" and to bring forth fruits meet (fit) for repentance (Matthew 3:7-10). That is the response we must make to God's generous offer of mercy and grace through the death and resurrection of Christ.

When we consider that Jesus himself warned his hearers to turn from sin or be punished in hell forever; and that he left a responsibility for us to do so in the limited time of our lives in this world in Mark 9:43-48, Luke 12:58-13:9, then anyone who claims to speak for Jesus and denies that warning and that urgency must be treated as a false teacher/prophet. Jesus loves us more than anyone else, and to deny and leave out what he has clearly said is to oppose him.

What "Love Wins" does is give false comfort to those who have not turned from all sin and let Christ take his rightful hold on their lives (Psalm 2:10-12, Hebrews 5:9). The same type of false comfort the Serpent gave Eve in the garden.

"Love Wins" also doesn't take into account that it is often more pleasurable SHORT-TERM to disobey God than to follow Christ. There is a pleasure to sin that is very uncomfortable to forsake to the point it can be called suffering to do so (See Hebrews 11:25, Romans 8:17). That goes against Bell's premise that hell is what we create for ourselves by disobeying God. Truly obeying God can be extremely unpleasant and only those who are totally convinced by Christ's total faithfulness and the sureness of his promises will actually be his disciples and walk the narrow way that leads to life. That is when God really does get glory. We have the privilege that we can go straight to the Bible to see those promises, the truth about heaven and hell, and the entire counsel of God regarding salvation. May all who read this not be deceived by preachers who say what appeals to the itching ears of people.

I must first and foremost state that I disagree with Bell's theology on the afterlife. What I will say is that people are so quick to say that Bell is a heretic or that he does not have "orthodox" theology and it disappoints me. Can we Christians take an accurate account of church history for just once? "Today's (church) leaders are yesterday's heretics." Whether you believe Menno Simmon's view of adults being baptized, Calvin's reformed theology, Mother Teresa's service, or N.T. Wright's view of heaven, they all would have been deemed heretical a 1000 years ago. Without ecumenical counsels like the ones that took place in the early church, no accurate measurement of orthodoxy can be made anyways, especially for us and our many splintered theologies. Be honest, everyone thinks their own theology is right and that they are in the heaven "ingroup." Can we just once be honest with ourselves, our church history, our own "unorthodox" views that we don't tell others, and let someone theorize about answering very, very hard questions? Give the guy a break even if you disagree with him.

bought the book and read it.

if Mr Bell is correct then us pastors, may as well quit - we're wasting our time ‘cos everyone gets 'saved' in the end.

It’s like he’s deliberately written with the intention of being controversial rather than have any regard to truth;
makes unsubstantiated statements, then bases his argument on those statements;
takes scriptures out of context and ignores any scriptures which contradict his argument.
If everyone is saved in the end, what’s the point?
poor theology, abuse of Scripture, irrational conclusions.

'God is Love' is a statement addressed to already redeemed people.
35,000 verses in your Bible
35 refer directly to the love of God
each one of those 35 is addressed to redeemed people.
(count them for yourself and check me out)

standard rule of thumb for Bible study:
1 who is speaking
2 who is being spoken to
3 why is it being said

Mr Bell conveniently ignores this and applies just one aspect of God's character to everybody

what about the Holiness, Righteousness, Justice, Wrath of God as well as His Mercy Compassion and Love?
can't pick and choose otherwise we make God in our image - which is what Mr Bell is doing.

'Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God' (John 3:18)

Ephesians 2:1-4 is referring to those who are redeemed and started on the road to salvation and who are experiencing the love of God having already repented and believed in Jesus

'Love Wins' is Marcionism reborn

Here we go again...another wolf scattering the flock...at least those lacking discernment and the Holy Spirit...Is there a hell?...well,JESUS spoke about it and warned us to avoid it at all cost..you make Him a liar and there will be a severe price to pay...enjoy your 'success' while it lasts..I personally,ain't buyin' it pal...

I just have one (1) simple question: If it is true as scripture states, "For as in Adam ALL die, so in Christ ALL will be made alive" (1 Cor 15:22)....QUESTION: Is it conceivable that in the end Adam's fall will take down more souls than Christ's sacrifice for "the sin of the world" will take up? Don't fudge; answer this particular verse directly.

Read John 5:24-30 and Matthew 7:13-14 for the answer to your question.