Time Will Tell

Finally! I finished up my spring semester at Denver Seminary last week and now I am, at last, writing the promised blog on Rob Bell’s visit to the school on April 8, 2011. This morning I reviewed my notes and again listened to my audio recording of the event. I ended up with four additional pages of notes, (oh joy!) but did you seriously expect any less from me? If you would like a bit of pretext before reading the following review you may read this blog and listen to the included audio of the event.  For a “brief” (ha-ha) overview of my take on Bell’s book, Love Wins, see my previous blog.

In Rob Bell’s opening statements he articulates his personal reasons for appearing at Denver Seminary.  Plainly speaking, Bell understands the power of presence and the impact and influence associated with physical presence. Physical presence is captivating and enthralling. The downfall of presence and a distortion of its true intent is manipulation. It is in light of these two polarities that I approach my analysis of Bell’s visit. 

Equality on the playing field is how I would describe the initial address to the students at Denver Seminary. We were reminded of our fallen human state and that misguided pursuits of dreams are but foolishness. Sometimes we enter into ministry out of desperate attempt to gain a sense of love and to satisfy an inner desire to be needed. The quick pace of Bell’s speech did not allow for introspective analysis of personal motive to enter into a discerning spirit as he spoke. I imagine I was not the only person in the room who felt as if my endeavor at seminary to become better equipped in the Word was being stripped and demeaned on the spot. But I need not concern myself with that, because God loves me and love wins. What a relief! Perhaps there are some, of which I am not one, who come to seminary with self-righteous motives. I have never carried any disillusions of my fallibility and incompetence. But the tone of address carried with it an accusatory note that I did not discern as conviction. Feeling somewhat disarmed however, I ignored the slight and attempted to focus on content. 

Dr. Wenig began the Q&A session with a reference to the methods and theology of Friedrich Schleiermacher, more prominently known as the “Father of Modern Liberal Theology.” Dr. Wenig asked Rob if he envisioned himself as a modern day Schleiermacher in his ministry to make the gospel more relevant to culture through the redefining of biblical terminology. Bell’s initial answer involved some interesting imagery. The question brought to his mind a wet piece of toast. I thought this odd since I have never had the privilege of eating a wet piece of toast. So what do I do? I went to the kitchen and made some toast. Then I soaked my piece of toast. The result was interesting. The crispy piece of bread did not simply lose its “oomph;” it cracked apart and essentially disintegrated in my hands. I guess the imagery was accurate because I believe this is exactly what happens to the substance of God’s Word when we attempt to redefine or infuse with meaning its original meaning and context. The realization and application of the gospel is a two way street. I begin in the present, where I am right now and I must travel to the gospel in its original context for realization of God’s Word. The journey to application describes the road back to the present with those realizations in hand. If I reverse the order my interpretation falls apart and disintegrates. Bell referenced Plantinga’s definition of sin as the “culpable disturbance of shalom” as a good example of the proper redefining of terms. But I would argue that the definition in and of itself means nothing if we do not firstly comprehend “shalom.” So my caution in this practice would be to make sure we do not use loaded terms in our definitions that have further potential to create distortion.  (Read here for a working definition of peace to better understand phrases such as “culpable disturbance of shalom.”)

The second question dealt with Bell’s chapter on Heaven. Dr. Wenig stated that according to Scripture on end-times judgment, it did not appear that love wins. The question posed was whether or not he accurately understood Bell’s meaning of love in this context. Bell placed God’s desire to set all things right at the forefront of his answer. I find this aligns with Scripture and in particular with Jesus’ practice of restoration during his ministry here on earth. So what do we do with justice? This is of course one of those terms that may need a little philosophical pondering. Bell described the relationship between justice and mercy, likewise in his book (pg 39), as a type of tension filled dance. I concur with this analysis from a fallen perspective, but God in and of Himself is not characterized by tension. Tension is a characteristic of the encounter between good and evil. So to understand justice and mercy as they pertain to the character of God we must approach the matter differently. 

 

When we dance with a partner (as would be the case between justice and mercy since they are two separate qualities), one person leads and one follows. The roles are equal in importance but different in function. In the dance between justice and mercy, justice leads and mercy follows. Without justice there can be no mercy. Think of a typical court case. There is justice, which usually entails a verdict and sentence. Only after this is there any exercise of mercy. So yes there is a dance between justice and mercy, but it is not an interpretive nonsensical display; it is orderly and precise. I think our misinterpretation of justice is that it involves the execution of a sentence devoid of mercy and this may be where Bell is headed but perhaps not able to articulate. Judgment means that the sentence for wrongdoing is set in place and into effect. Mercy means the removal of consequence through saving grace. The wage, consequence, and just result of my sin is death. But the merciful gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ (Romans 6:23). Here is our dance and the circumstances that surround it – Jesus Christ - who both metes out justice and subsequently offers mercy and grace to those who believe in Him. There is no tension in this dance, but absolute order. 

Bell goes on to refer to the fires of judgment as refining in nature. I can accept this definition, but we must go further and understand what fire refines. As far as I could find in my research the only context for the refining properties of fire pertains to metal (gold, silver, bronze, steel, etc.). These metals are analogous for the properties of divine qualities in the Word of God. Ephesians 6:11-17 defines these qualities for us: truth, righteousness, peace, salvation, and the Word of God. The fires of refinement only purify these elements of faith and without them one will dissolve into ash. If we do not have Christ in us, there is nothing to refine. Bell’s reference to divine life, as a “pilot light,” is problematic in its theological implications and I will not delve into this diversion right now as I am unsure about his meaning.

The third question posed to Bell by Dr. Wenig dealt with Jesus’ use of the word aion in Matthew. Bell redefines this word in his book as a “coming age” or indicative of the “intensity of an experience” in somewhat of a “lost track of time” sense, not a forever sense. Dr. Wenig invoked the work of several biblical scholars to support the traditional understanding of the word and framed the question so as to understand how Bell arrived at his conclusion of the interpreted meaning. Bell’s answer simply reiterated what was stated in the book as to the definition but fell short of adequately explaining “due process.”

The final question addressed the matter of salvation, the unsaved, and the extension of God’s grace after death. If there is an opportunity to repent after death then what drives any sense of urgency for the present? Bell answered by explaining his intent to balance between the tensions of urgency and possibility in the book. Bell spoke of the two extremes in dealing with the matter as either laissez faire or “extra crispy – you’re done.” I think both of those approaches fail to comprehend the complexity of God or understand His provision of grace. What we can be absolutely sure of is that God is just and He will mete out justice to all of us. God’s provision of grace and mercy that follows the outpouring of His wrath in justice culminates at the foot of the cross.

Bell’s overall approach to the topic was interesting since it leaves one with the sense of suspension and perpetual presence. Here is a question that has not been fully or adequately answered for two thousand years to which he writes a book in address, full of more questioning and no resolution. I understand the desire to find resolution through open dialogue and the profession of this intent through literary expression, but I did not receive this impression from the live event. I question the spirit behind a pursuit that lauds and thrives amidst so much tension or as Bell phrased it “the friction of the tension is part of the joy.” When asked who he intended as a target audience, Bell could identify no one in particular, but concerned himself more with the intrigue offered in the question.  However as Scripture repeats over and over throughout the narrative, Jesus Christ is the mystery revealed in all its fullness. The distinguishing factor between heaven and hell, life and death, justice and mercy, is Jesus Christ. 

In closing, Bell makes a statement that “there is what you believe and then there is how you believe it, and you can believe the right thing wrongly.” This is definitely true, but so is the adverse. You can believe the wrong thing, rightly. It is not all about the “what” or the “how;” it is about the “what” AND the “how” and “what” is pivotal to our practice of “how”. I opened my analysis with a reference to the power of presence. Rob Bell brings forward a fascinating new spin on an age-old question. The question propels forward on the power of his presence. He is an excellent pastor and relational human being and it shows. We are faced with two options. Either it is time to address the question with all sincerity and perseverance and for this reason Bell is an instrument in the hands of God to bring the matter to our attention, or he is serving his own desire to impact our generation for his own purpose. One will ring eternal… as in forever, and the other will pass away with this age.  Only time will tell.