Heaven, Hell & The Theology of Rob Bell
Not having read Rob Bell’s book yet (it’s on the way), I can only respond to what I have seen and heard: his own statements in interviews and the quotes from pre-publication copies carefully and thoughtfully reviewed by Tim Challies and Kevin DeYoung. [UPDATE: Mike has received his copy of Love Wins and has written a more in depth review here].
On the merits of the case so far (as much as I’ve heard), I’m inclined to dismiss this latest critique of hell as warmed-over liberalism. I’m not being mean and sweepingly judgmental here. Seriously, read Schleiermacher’s The Christian Faith, Albrecht Ritschl’s The Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation, not to mention other works by Wilhelm Herrmann, Adolf Harnack, Harry Emerson Fosdick, Bishop John Spong, or Brian McLaren, and you have the basic gist.
That basic scheme goes like this: God’s only attribute is love; his holiness, righteousness, and justice have to be adjusted to this central dogma. Human beings are not deserving of God’s wrath, but only of his encouragement and empowerment to improve. Jesus Christ is primarily a moral teacher, who invites us to share in his vision of creating “a kingdom of ethical righteousness” (Ritschl’s phrase, basically from Immanuel Kant). Since there is no divine justice to satisfy or wrath to propitiate, the cross cannot be represented as a vicarious substitution of “the Lamb of God” for sinners. Since there is no objective condemnation, there can be no objective justification. Since everyone is a child of God, there can be no adoption. The church is merely the community of volunteers for the kingdom-building enterprise. Heaven and hell are as subjective as sin and redemption: it all depends on what you make of your life right now. Yale’s H.Richard Niebuhr captured the essence of liberal religion in this fine description: “A God without wrath brought people without sin into a kingdom without judgment through a Christ without a cross.”
However, the initial impulse to pass over Rob Bell’s book is thwarted by the fact that he is a professing evangelical and his views are indicative of a growing trend. He is not a professor at Harvard Divinity School, but senior pastor at Mars Hill Bible Church. No doubt, he’s reacting to popular images of heaven and hell that have little connection or analogy to our world as we know it. Where Jesus and Paul speak of “two ages”: “this age” (under the reign of sin and death) versus “the age to come” (under the reign of righteousness and life), the popular imagination of many Christians for over a millennium has been closer to Plato’s “two worlds”: the upper realm of disembodied souls and the lower realm of embodied and historical existence. In this view, salvation is ultimately the release of the soul from the prison-house of the body, while in the biblical view salvation is completed when we are raised bodily unto everlasting life. In that day, the vertical boundaries between heaven and earth disappear, as is evident in the Apocalypse. There are many issues that conservative evangelicals need to address in order to weed the garden of low-grade paganism, but they are far less serious than the high-grade paganism that drives moderns to fashion a deity who is other than the one we actually encounter in the pages of Scripture. The biggest issue that the latest controversy reveals is not really whether hell exists. To be sure, we need to challenge the latest examples of Scripture-twisting with respect to the clear teaching of Jesus himself on hell. However, there are even larger questions that denials of hell such as Bell’s raise. Who is God? Who are we? What is our relationship to God? For what can we hope? What do words like “sin,” “redemption,” “Jesus Christ,” “kingdom” mean in the biblical drama? It’s not just a matter of tinkering with a traditional doctrine, but with the very meaning of God’s grace and justice in the cross of Christ. Everything is at stake in this question, especially given the underlying dogmas that Rob Bell, from what I’ve already seen, allows to control his thinking on this subject.
Listen to a special BONUS edition of the White Horse Inn featuring a discussion of the Rob Bell controversy and featuring special guest Kevin DeYoung:
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.


March 15th, 2011 at 7:43 pm
Here’s a link to the Huffington Post where Bell spells out his views to a former classmate at Wheaton: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cathleen-falsani/rob-bell-heretic-schmeret_b_835606.html
March 15th, 2011 at 9:21 pm
Your criticism is dealing with a straw man. Your characterization of Bell’s question is not accurate, but is done in such a way that is easy to dismiss. Bell, I think takes sin seriously, and believes in the sacrificial death of Christ as necessary for anyone’s reconciliation to God. Hell is real. A reasonable question is: what is the duration, and what is the purpose, and what is the result of Hell?
March 15th, 2011 at 10:37 pm
[...] Michael Horton, Heaven, Hell and the Theology of Rob Bell [...]
March 16th, 2011 at 6:41 am
Well said Michael.
Michael, Daniel Dan’s comment is telling of how our adversary has tweaked the historical religious arguments. I am dealing with a former church member now who believes in the judgement and hell, but that hell is not eternal but ‘purifying’. This seems to be the current confusion… not that hell does not exist but the nature of its ‘duration’. It is the logical ‘progression’ of a man-centered theology that is traditionally and culturally “founded” on the Scriptures.
It seems that in the post-modern/post -religious evangelical world of today we are losing people because of categorical errors rather than blatant/rebellious heresy. The challenge is how to adequately correct with gentleness when they are defending their erroneous ‘hermeneutic’ from the same level that we are… the Scriptures. I can appeal to a system of theology to explain my position, but the root issue of anti-intellectualism and an independent spirit soon rear their ugly heads and any discussion usually ends with ‘That is your opinion’.
The errors are so subtle that one has to ask, “Is the duration of hell important as long as they believe in hell.” It seems like a fight not worth picking at first, but under the guise of their good intention lies a grave misunderstanding of the nature of human depravity and justice-as-love. As we know, this fundamental understanding affects the rest of our theology for better or for worse.
What is the line between contending for the faith and ‘casting pearls’? The line is even more blurred when we take into account the ‘victimization’ of most evangelicals who grew up in good homes and churches with terrible (almost Godless) theology. This is the trend I have been noticing, whether the discussion be about hell, the nature of salvation, election, faith… the errors are half-truths that result in untruth and everyone is appealing to the same source to defend their position. In light of what I wrote, how do we–and when should we–be ‘patient with the doubters’ and contend for the faith?
Thanks Michael. Grace and peace.
March 16th, 2011 at 8:11 am
[...] Mike writes: “On the merits of the case so far (as much as I’ve heard), I’m inclined to dismiss this latest critique of hell as warmed-over liberalism. I’m not being mean and sweepingly judgmental here. Seriously, read Schleiermacher’s The Christian Faith, Albrecht Ritschl’s The Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation, not to mention other works by Wilhelm Herrmann, Adolf Harnack, Harry Emerson Fosdick, Bishop John Spong, or Brian McLaren, and you have the basic gist.” Read more» [...]
March 16th, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Doesn’t it seem like Rob Bell’s view of hell is close to the Roman Catholic view of Purgatory? It’s a place where you go until you are deemed ready to enter paradise.
March 16th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
[...] Heaven, Hell & the Theology of Rob BellMichael HortonGod is Still HolyKevin DeYoung (offsite)Hell: The Very Idea of ItMichael HortonHeaven Came DownMichael Horton RECOMMENDED BOOKS [...]
March 16th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
Thank you so much for a concise (and comprehensive) review of Bell’s new book by Horton, DeYoung and Challies! To the detractors of this review, and anyone critical of Bell’s quasi-Christian theology, may I suggest you take a look at this (well-conducted) interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg-qgmJ7nzA
As with any confrontation of questionable doctrine, we must go directly to God in prayer, and search the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit’s discernment.
On another note, I just wanted to thank White Horse for all of the great posts; I have really enjoyed following your website since 2010. You and a few others have inspired me to start my own blog (http://thecaffeinecemetery.blogspot.com/). Hopefully you don’t mind the “spam!”
In any case, I’m really looking forward to the messages God will give your readers through this blog in the future. Take care and God bless you!
Sola scriptura
March 16th, 2011 at 2:32 pm
[...] Heaven, Hell & the Theology of Rob Bell Michael Horton God is Still Holy Kevin DeYoung (offsite) Hell: The Very Idea of It Michael Horton Heaven Came Down Michael Horton RECOMMENDED BOOKS [...]
March 16th, 2011 at 3:37 pm
Paul Grace, thanks for that article. The author Falsani records Bell committing not one but two etymological fallacies (“the root of heretic/radical”), and that’s before she even gets to describing his proposed theology. I think that’s rather telling about his entire hermeneutic.
March 17th, 2011 at 12:30 am
I read the Huffington Post article. The way he plays with the words “radical” and “heretic” don’t give me the impression of a serious Christian mind.
March 17th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
[...] Horton critques Rob Bell (via White Horse Inn) Posted on March 17, 2011 by Reformed Joe Heaven, Hell & The Theology of Rob Bell Mar.15, 2011 by Michael [...]
March 17th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
“Duration of Hell?” How can Bell or anyone else have a view of that other than his own personal opinion? If there is anything about it in scripture, I’ve missed it.
But actually I am glad Bell has raised the topic. Christians seem to be embarrassed about the whole idea of Hell — and Satan — ever since Saturday Night Live mocked us through “the church lady.”
Yet, if the 20th Century taught us anything it is that evil exists as a real, constant, and palpable force in this world. Evil is the work of Satan, who is very much alive and every bit as seductive today as ever.
If Hell is just a halfway house for sinners, do we believe that Satan will somehow see the error of his ways? Maybe he is just suffering from a lack of self-esteem.
March 17th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
Dan,
You said, \A reasonable question is: what is the duration, and what is the purpose, and what is the result of Hell?\ Dan if you watch Rob Bell’s interview with Martin Bashir, I’m not sure he actually thinks what you think he thinks about hell. He is pretty quick calling an attempt to answer the questions you pose as a \paradox.\ If the question that is reasonable is:
What is Hell’s duration- answer is eternal.
Matthew 25:46 \These shall go away into everlasting punishment.\
Hell’s purpose- many things, but it is at least a warning – Matt. 10:28 we should beware, \of him who can destroy both body and soul in hell.\ and it is at least a place for punishment. \He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished.\
What is the result of hell? Doug Moo in his paper on Hell said,
that Paul uses Hell to encourage and stimulate unbelievers to repent and for believers to thank the God of Grace who has been so kind to us, by saving us.
Bell answers none of the questions.
March 17th, 2011 at 9:09 pm
Horton does argue against a straw man – after seeing the Martin Bashir clip, it’s obvious that Rob Bell is that straw man.
March 19th, 2011 at 2:19 am
I feel unsure that you actually read the books by the people you mentioned. I’m not sure that any of those people would say that Jesus was ‘primarily a moral teacher,’ or that, ‘God’s only attribute is love.’ I’ve read some of them, and they don’t say that, and they say things that would contradict those characterizations. If you’ve read them, why would you say that when you know it’s not true? Really? I mean have you thought about why you’re doing this? Have you considered who you might be hurting? Have you considered that you might be the one you’re hurting?
For some historical roots behind Rob Bell’s argument read the blog post that I wrote tonight.
http://g0spel0fj0hn.com/2011/03/19/love-wins-by-rob-bell-initial-thoughts-2/
March 21st, 2011 at 8:30 am
[...] of heaven and hell that have little connection or analogy to our world as we know it.” –Heaven, Hell & The Theology of Rob Bell by Michael Horton – Mar.15, [...]
March 24th, 2011 at 10:28 am
Love Won
March 24th, 2011 at 2:31 pm
If one is interested in the actual beliefs of those members of the body of Christ who believe that ultimately, “when the times will have reached their fulfillment”, that ALL things, (actually ALL things) in heaven and on earth will be brought together under one head, even Christ; when ALL will be made alive, even as ALL died in Adam; after a just and appropriate age of punishment in Hell, where there will indeed be weeping and gnashing of teeth…if you would like to read a good summation of that interpretation of scripture, I recommend the book: “The Inescapable Love of God” by Thomas Talbott.
That book really does a better job of dealing with these issues in a thorough way than Bell’s book I think.
Finally, I have heard countless leaders of our faith denounce Bell’s understanding as a distortion of the gospel of Christ. Since when did the interpretation that Hell was an eternal place of conscious torment, with no possibility of any different outcome become a part of “the gospel”? That detailed and systematic theologically derived view of hell was certainly not a part of “the gospel” preached in Acts. It is odd that not one of the “gospel” sermons in Acts threaten this. We all preach Christ and Him crucified as the only Way to Life. How we view the ultimate outcome of those in Hell doesn’t change, distort or take away from the gospel of Christ. Rather, I think those who insist on this specific interpretation as an integral part of the gospel of Christ are the ones who are distorting or adding to the gospel.
March 24th, 2011 at 5:05 pm
There is a maxim that states: “The greatest evil in the world is that Man is teacher of Man!” In this sense, “evil” is not meant to express our usual use of the word, but as a misapplication of choice, and/or, energy. The reason for this is that first, and foremost, it has been expressed by other, more ancient, concepts of God, that there has never been a “beginning”. Thus, the absolute state of being, or existence, can ever be fully explained. This leaves each individual expression of the (One) Universal Soul, uniquely alone with their own abilites, understanding and efforts towards revelations of Self! Unfortunately, the concept of a “beginning” has proven to be a useful utility of Man to control the individual from without; for “beginnings” require explanations, or narratives, and those who will follow them!
I would suggest, for those with an open mind, reading the gospel of St. Thomas, which is part of the apocryphal texts. Also, it must be understood that the “devil” is merely the extant personication of the human ego. Refer to “Satan”- Khalil Gibran, and “Cloud Upon The Sanctuary”- Karl Von Eckartshausen.
March 29th, 2011 at 7:46 am
I have heard Rob Bell through some of his NOOMA videos. A pastor at the church I currently attend brought in Bell’s book SEX GOD for the Sunday school class to go through a few years ago. After reading and hearing Rob Bell, I will go so far as to wonder whether or not this man actually knows what real saving faith is at all.
March 29th, 2011 at 9:48 pm
Dan,
You said, \We all preach Christ and Him crucified as the only Way to Life.\ Really? That’s a huge assumption. Especially if one is now preaching some kind of weird (semi-universalism\. You also said, \ How we view the ultimate outcome of those in Hell doesn’t change, distort or take away from the gospel of Christ.\ It does Dan if there is no justice! We are saved from the \Wrath to Come!\ If there is no wrath, then logically Dan, there is no need for a Savior, only a need for a good moral example, which could be anyone! Then you said, \Rather, I think those who insist on this specific interpretation as an integral part of the gospel of Christ are the ones who are distorting or adding to the gospel.\ It is an integral part of the Doctrine of God, THe doctrine of HOly Scripture, and if there is no need to distinguish between correct doctrine, on something like how a man escapes damnation, or ultimately goes to heaven anyway, then Dan, we don’t have Christianity. It is a vital part of the Christian faith to believe in a Hell, that our Lord said existed, and was preparted for the Devil and His angels, and was a place where the smoke of their torment rises, and the worm dyeth not! Dan this is a non-negotiable. It is so basic. If you don’t have a Biblical hell, it’s because you don’t have a Biblical doctrine of Scripture, or a Biblical Doctrine of God.
March 30th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
Gage, God’s justice is satisfied by the shed blood of Christ. I believe in Hell. I take it very seriously. I have a feeling that if any of us were to spend one day in Hell, much less eternity, completely separated from God we might conclude that justice and wrath poured out on finite creatures does have limits. Fortunately for me, and you, our ultimate fate and the fate of the entire world will be determined by a just and loving God who has poured His wrath out in its entirety on His only begotten Son. No creature will ever experience Hell as Jesus did. I understand that we differ in our interpretation of this, but I believe that the Bible clearly teaches that Christ came to save the world, and I believe and rejoice in the my faith in the God who will ultimately do just that. If I’m wrong about that, then I pray that the blood of Christ will cover that. If you are wrong, then I believe the blood of Christ will cover that too. If this position places me outside of the camp where I cannot receive Christian fellowship from some, then so be it. And I applaud Rob Bell for having the courage of his convictions to address this subject.
And I say again, when the gospel was preached over and over in Acts, go find where your clear interpretaion of Hell was included as an integral part of the gospel message.
April 29th, 2011 at 7:03 am
Here is the elephant in the room for Bell and his defenders. It seems to me that the goal of Bell is defend a specific “God” that he thinks exists. He tells us God is love and everything else about God must be understood through Bell’s definition of love. And so, away with wrath, and eternal punishment, and the like. However, Bell also tells us that the true story of Jesus has been hijacked, for centuries now I suppose. So here is my question: how could a loving God (as defined by Bell) ever send anyone into fire (albeit temporary) because they rejected, in essence, the WRONG story of Jesus. Isn’t Bell rejecting that story too? How could a loving God punish anyone, for even a second, because they refused to accept what Bell defines as the psuedo Jesus story?
January 2nd, 2013 at 12:29 pm
[...] Mike Horton interviews DeYoung on White Horse Inn regarding Love Wins. Here’s what I gleaned from Horton’s interview of Kevin DeYoung: [...]