Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Emergent Rob Bell *Merged*

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Emergent Rob Bell *Merged*

    I just read a book called Velvet Elvis by him. I was disappointed in some of the things he said. Especially, that he said that Christians should not used the Bible to determine how to live. What do yall think of Rob Bell?
    betty
    5
    Stay at Home
    100.00%
    5
    Suck It Up and Go
    0.00%
    0

    The poll is expired.


  • #2
    Originally posted by Betty View Post
    I just read a book called Velvet Elvis by him. I was disappointed in some of the things he said. Especially, that he said that Christians should not used the Bible to determine how to live. What do yall think of Rob Bell?
    betty
    Where in VE did Bell say that Christians should not use the Bible to determine how to live - page number would be fine?

    To answer your question: "Mostly good things."

    Comment


    • #3
      Sorry I took the Book back to the library, but he did write that Christians used the Bible to much and that we should read other books to determine how to live our lives. I can proof at the moment it is in the book, but it was.
      betty

      Comment


      • #4
        I noticed your first post said Bell said Christian should not use the Bible. Your second post said Bell thinks Christians use the Bible too much. I found nothing in VE anywhere near these assertions.

        I only pick on your statements because Bell is so often misquoted (mostly by watchbloggers) that precision on what he really wrote is necessary.. Sometime these critics misquote Bell, sometimes they ignore the context, other times they just imbue his words with meanings that he obviously never meant... not that you mean to, or did this - here I'm thinking specifically of those who twist his words to justify their own attacks on him. I'm just calling for honest precision.

        Since you cannot site the context or actual sayings of Bell from VE I'll assume you mean the passages where he refers to interpretation and application of Scripture. He's very clear that Scripture cannot be interpreted in a vacuum, that we need to understand culture and history and language to understand the Bible. Some bloggers have taken statements like "We cannot just read the Bible and do it..." and twisted Bell to be denying Sola Scriptura and the like - which is very dishonest thing on their part, since this is not what he says.

        Early in the book bell affirms his belief in "...the virgin birth and the Trinity and the inspiration of the Bible and much more..."

        Historically, question like your's are met with a whole list of sites ripping Bell - some points are legitimate, but most blogs are poorly documented, poorly argued, and downright dishonest... I just thought I'd get this in before the frenzy started.

        Disclaimer - just to be clear Betty, I am not assigning any of these dishonest and un-Christlike methods to you.

        Comment


        • #5
          For example:

          "This is part of the problem with continually insisting that one of the absolutes of the Christian faith must be a belief that 'Scripture alone' is our guide. It sounds nice but it is not true." - Bell in VE, pg. 68.

          One watchblogger in particular took this and twisted it to say that Bell rejects Sola Scriptura. To come to that conclusion the blogger was required to twist bell's words into something he did not say AND redefine the historic meaning of Sola Scriptura.

          In a footnote Bell expounded on this statement. He wrote; "I understand the need to ground all that we do and say in the Bible, which is my life's work. It is the belief that creep in sometimes that this book dropped out of the sky that is dangerous. The Bible has come to us out of actual communities of people, journeying in real time and space. Guided by a real spirit" Bell, VE footnote 64, pg. 185.

          That Bell affirms the historic belief in the inspiration of Scripture is obvious. Equally obvious is his belief that all faith and practice should be grounded in Scripture. So, the bottom line is, Bell not only would not say Christians should not use the Bible to determine how to live - he also did not say Christians use it too much.

          Comment


          • #6
            I will recheck the book since you think I am liar. But, I know what I read. I remember cause I read it to my hubby who was shocked also.

            Comment


            • #7
              I have put a hold on the book again.
              Here is the review the library gave the book:

              Review
              Bell, pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Mich., offers an innovative and intriguing, if uneven, first book. This introduction to the Christian faith is definitely outside the usual evangelical box. Bell wants to offer "a fresh take on Jesus" a riff that begins with the assertion that Jesus wanted to "call people to live in tune with reality" and that he "had no use for religion." Bell invites seekers into a Christianity that has room for doubts (his church recently hosted an evening where doubters were invited to ask their hardest, most challenging questions). He mocks literalists whose faith seems to depend on a six-day creation, and one of his favorite people is a woman who turned up repeatedly at his church, only to tell him that she totally disagreed with his teachings. He cites his church as a place of forgiveness, mystery, community and transformation. Bell is well-versed in Jewish teachings and draws from rabbinic wisdom and stories freely. His casual, hip tone can grate at times, and his footnotes, instructing readers to drop everything and read the books that have influenced him, grow old. Still, this is faithful, creative Christianity, and Gen-Xers especially will find Bell a welcome guide to the Christian faith. (Aug.) Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

              Comment


              • #8
                Apprising on Bell

                Velvet Elvis Book Review part 1

                Velvet Elvis Book Review part 2

                Velvet Bell

                Bell's Meditation Exercises
                Last edited by Buzzardhut; May 24th, 2007, 03:54 PM.



                Revelation 22:17a The Spirit and Bride are now saying, "Come!" The ones who hear are now saying, "Come!" The ones who thirst are now saying, "Come!" so come LORD Jesus !
                Buzzardhut.net |The Watch Parables | The Rapture | Romans | The Virgin Mary | Roman Catholicism
                Never Heard of Jesus? | The Evidence Bible | Tent Meeting | The Beast/666 | The Kingdom of Darkness | The Nephilim

                Comment


                • #9
                  I would be very leary of Rob Bell

                  Here are some articles for you to decide for yourself.

                  www.apprising.org/archives/rob_bell/index.html

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Betty, Bell is a viper hon. He is not Biblically sound at all and it's not without good reason the Emergent Church loves him and his books. Apostate would imply he actually started out knowing the truth, and maybe he did, but everything that he teaches now is not of God.

                    The devil was the most beautiful of angels, and knows very well how to twist truth into a lie.

                    Please read the links you were given. Bell is bad.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Betty View Post
                      I will recheck the book since you think I am liar. But, I know what I read. I remember cause I read it to my hubby who was shocked also.
                      Betty,

                      I'm not sure how you took my posts as calling you a liar, but that was not m intent. I tried to distinguish your comments from other who do lie about Bell... but I must have failed.

                      My apologies.

                      That said, I think you incorrect when you say Bell said Christians should not use the Bible to determine how to live. He obviously believes we (himself included) should.

                      I'll peruse my copy and see if I find such a statement as you remember - if I do I'll post it.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        ROB BELL: THE ELVIS OF EMERGENT

                        ROB BELL IN A NUTSHELL

                        The Bible itself, he writes, is a book that constantly must be wrestled with and re-interpreted. He dismisses claims that “Scripture alone” will answer all questions. Bible interpretation is colored by historical context, the reader's bias and current realities, he says. The more you study the Bible, the more questions it raises.

                        “It is not possible to simply do what the Bible says,” Bell writes.
                        (Online source, emphasis added)

                        Then in Velvet Elvis, after laying out a neo-orthodox understanding of some of the Biblical writers, Bell specifically says:

                        This is part of the problem with continually insisting that one of the absolutes of the Christian faith must be a belief that “Scripture alone” is our guide. It sounds nice but it is not true… When people say that all we need is the Bible, it is simply not true (067,068, emphasis mine).

                        In the Christianity Today article The Emergent Mystique we find out that Bell is another McLaren disciple. CT has now put it into archive and one must register to read it, so the version I’m referencing comes from Brian McLaren’s own website and complete with his comments. Also the following material is condensed from my own article Seeing Bell in a New Light.

                        Please keep in mind here that Bell happens to be the pastor that writer Andy Crouch chose to use as he opens his article on the Emergent Church. Crouch tells us:

                        The Bells started questioning their assumptions about the Bible itself–discovering the Bible as a human product,” as Rob puts it, rather than the product of divine fiat. “The Bible is still in the center for us,” Rob says, “but it's a different kind of center. We want to embrace mystery, rather than conquer it.”

                        “I grew up thinking that we’ve figured out the Bible,” Kristen says, “that we knew what it means. Now I have no idea what most of it means. And yet I feel like life is big again–like life used to be black and white, and now it's in color...”

                        The Bells, who flourished at evangelical institutions from Wheaton to Fuller Theological Seminary to Grand Rapids’s Calvary Church before starting Mars Hill,...[felt] that very world, as the Bells tell it, became constricting–in Kristen’s phrase, “black and white...”

                        And how did the Bells find their way out of the black-and-white world where they had been so successful and so dissatisfied? “Our lifeboat,” Kristen says, “was A New Kind of Christian.”
                        (Online source, emphasis mine)

                        The New Postmodern Cult Of Liberalism

                        So we start here because without this anchor of sola Scriptura Rob Bell’s neo-orthodoxy (being quite lenient) has now led him into a “repainted” [i.e. redefined] liberalism. And you need to understand that his embracing of mystery is Emergent-speak for the practice of contemplative mysticism.

                        Bell’s neo-orthodox view of the Bible would be along the lines that the text of Scripture itself is not necessarily inspired but rather as the Holy Spirit inspires a particular passage to a particular person it then comes to life as it becomes the Word of God. We would then breathe it in, so to speak, living it out in subjective and existential experience.

                        This heretical view sees the Bible as “a human product” and in fact denies the plenary inspiration of the text of Holy Scripture which it claims for itself (e.g. 2 Timothy 3:16). Now you know the underlying reason why Emergent men like Rob Bell make studying the texts of Holy Scripture far more difficult than it needs to be.

                        Rob Bell’s repainting of false teaching looks like a merger of the dialectic philosophy of Hegel, the liberalism of Rudolph Bultmann and the neo-orthodoxy of Karl Barth. Rob Bell has embraced these and other errors and merged them into postmodernism, an anti-Christian philosophy teaching the impossibility of absolute truth. Both postmodern 21st century philosophy and 20th century “modern liberalism” have influenced Rob Bell.

                        A more appropriate title for Rob Bell’s painting, his “Velvet Elvis”, is “Postmodern Liberalism”. Rob Bell accomplishes what he sets out to do. His painting includes “every person everywhere who has asked big questions of a big God” even when their answers deny the truths of the Bible.

                        We have already seen that Bell clearly tells us he flatly rejects the Biblical Reformed position of sola Scriptura. So now we add Bell’s disregard for the plenary inspiration of the Bible to his fascination with the Hebrews Roots movement and the strong influence of Ray Vander Laan.

                        As we then combine this with Bell’s embracing alleged postmodernism and the contemplative spirituality at the core of the Emergent Church you will now be able to see that Rob Bell has been seduced into its new kind of social gospel, which just as in liberation theology, reduces Christ Jesus to a social reformer–little more than a cause to live for as one fights poverty, aids, social injustice, etc.

                        The Heart of the Emergent Church
                        Last edited by Buzzardhut; May 24th, 2007, 04:09 PM.



                        Revelation 22:17a The Spirit and Bride are now saying, "Come!" The ones who hear are now saying, "Come!" The ones who thirst are now saying, "Come!" so come LORD Jesus !
                        Buzzardhut.net |The Watch Parables | The Rapture | Romans | The Virgin Mary | Roman Catholicism
                        Never Heard of Jesus? | The Evidence Bible | Tent Meeting | The Beast/666 | The Kingdom of Darkness | The Nephilim

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I have heard an MP3 of Bell refer to Genesis as "myth" (an no he didn't have a lisp). Anyone who refers to any part of scripture as myth is a false teacher in my book. That might sound strong but it's the truth. For someone who has made it his life's work he sure has a soft view of scripture.

                          And no, I don't have the MP3 anymore. Someone said listen to him, I found this one, and about flipped out when I heard him refer to Genesis as myth.
                          Last edited by corby; May 24th, 2007, 04:05 PM. Reason: added a bit

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Rob Bell defenders routinely ignore the actual passages in his books that show he is not interested in what the Bible actually says.
                            It's a long thread, but you will see the same circular argument used to defend Bell and ignore the real agenda in his words.

                            Wide is the path to destruction.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by LivingbyFaith View Post
                              Here are some articles for you to decide for yourself.

                              www.apprising.org/archives/rob_bell/index.html
                              This is the very watch-blog I was referring to, but didn't want to direct people to... He's guilty of taking things out of context, changing the meanings of what people say to fit what he wants them to say... he's guilty of inserting meanings into the writings of others that are not what was intended... he'll edit a quote to imply something is being said, when in reality the full quote shows something else... ad nauseum...

                              CRN.Info and Analysis is a site that exposes his highly questionable and sometime downright dishonest tactics. It falls under the category of watching the watchblogs.

                              The thing that annoys me most about him is his propensity to deny the salvation of those with whom he disagrees.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X