So now what? I find it funny that so much effort is being utilized to convince other Christians that there is indeed a hell. I’ve devoted several blog posts on the issue since leaving my former church. At times, I’ve grown frustrated in this endeavor, since Jesus and Scripture talk very clearly about its existence. I feel like I’ve written more about it than ought to be necessary. I wish we could stop debating its existence and move on to the implications. It’s like continually debating with someone whether there’s a God or not. There is, so let’s move on to what that means for our lives. This morning, I woke up to discover that David Platt (author of the book Radical) gave his take on the Rob Bell / Robbed Hell controversy. (Man, there are so many plays on words to make regarding this controversy, LOL.) Check out his video response here. His response reminded me of the same conclusion I came to myself when faced with people who laughed at me for my convictions regarding the Gospel and the reality of hell. Read it here. Like I said at the conclusion of that post, Christians have three options when it comes to the reality of hell: Reject the idea of hell, because it is too intolerable to believe any longer Somehow convince ourselves that everyone around us going to hell is tolerable Find it intolerable that everyone around us is going to hell, and do something about it Today, I’ll add a fourth option that is very similar to #1: Believe that there is a hell but that very few people are going there (just the “really, really bad” people throughout history that we don’t want to see in heaven). Sadly, that’s the opposite belief that Jesus taught (few are on the narrow road, and many are on the road to destruction). The lack of evangelization in my life is as disconcerting as those who reject the idea of...

With all of the discussion lately about who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, allow me to write some thoughts along these lines based on my recent readings of Romans. (By the way, Romans is one of the most theologically rich books in the Bible–so much has already been written about it, as it’s packed with so much in there. This is just part of what I’ve gleaned from a few parts of it.) According to the Christian faith, what is required for one to receive salvation from God? First, we must look closely at the wording of that question: salvation is something to be received. That means it comes from something/someone other than ourselves. We do not have the possibility of saving ourselves. We don’t save ourselves by deciding to obey God or by professing any creed. Rather, the only way we can be saved is if someone else saves us. We can’t take care of the problem ourselves. So if we can’t save ourselves, who can save us? Can my neighbor? No, because they too need saving just as much as myself. Everyone is in the same predicament. This is an important place to stop and reflect: Everyone is in the same predicament. We must remember this when we consider who goes to heaven and who goes to hell. Every one of us is under the rule of Sin, and as a result, eternal death is our fate. There are not evil people and good people. Under God’s standard of righteousness, there is NO ONE who is righteous, no not one. As a result, no one can be considered righteous–even if from this point on, I never sin again, my record is still blemished. Not only this, but that scenario is not at all possible, as sin is much more than just an act or deed done in isolation. Rather, sin has also changed the nature of who I am as a person. I am totally screwed up. (If you can’t admit this, that’s called pride.) The illustration of someone who has taken heroine is a good illustration of what sin does to us. Once you’ve taken it once, it alters your brain in such...

I believe there is a movement today that emphasizes the Gospels found in the Bible to the point that it minimizes the writings of the Apostles in the NT (which is mostly Paul) and the rest of Scripture (i.e. Old Testament). I think this movement has been around for awhile now in the “liberal” mainstream church, and is also in the emergent church. If you look at these movements, however, you will find that they really emphasize only certain portions of the Gospels (and completely avoid much of Jesus’ teachings in the synoptics and almost all of John). In my previous church, I definitely saw this. The attitude was, “Yeah, Paul did say that, but how does that line up with what Jesus said here about not judging, etc.?” While I find it silly to pit one against the other, I’d like to lay out a reasonable argument for trusting Paul more than the Gospels, rather than the other way around. Again, let me repeat, I don’t think we should trust one more than the other–I think they are equally trustworthy, but I am doing this to make a point. So here are the reasons for trusting Paul over the Gospels: The letters of Paul were written earlier than the Gospels. We should be aware that as time goes by, the possibility of something losing its truth becomes greater. The earliest views of Jesus should be trusted over the later views, which have more possibility of being invented ideas, rather than truths. Paul’s words are his own words. Jesus’ words in the Gospels were written down by other people, not by Jesus himself. How can we trust that they are what Jesus really said or what He was trying to say? With Paul’s words, we have first-hand teachings. The Gospels sometimes frame Jesus’ teachings, so that in one gospel, Jesus’ teaching seems to mean one thing, and then in another, the same teaching has a different meaning. Even if Jesus did say these things, can we trust that the writers of the Gospels are framing Jesus’ words as He intended them? Are we sure they are being used in context? Luke wasn’t even a disciple of Jesus, so he...

…as pastors quell Bell who they claim fell and yell that they smell very well what he sells. What the shell? (that’s the only other word I could think of that rhymes) For me, the question is: Where the hell does Rob Bell stand? Hahahaha. A lot of controversy surrounds Rob Bell’s new book, and thanks to friends who have kept me in the loop (I have to rely on them, since I never got into Nooma, his books, or Bell himself), I’ve done my share of thinking about it. Without reading his book, and just judging by the interviews I’ve heard from him since he wrote his latest book, here’s what I conclude Rob Bell believes: If you’re an all-around nice person (i.e. obeying the golden rule, etc.), it doesn’t matter so much whether you believe that Jesus is the “Savior of the world” or not. After all, if you’re being kind to people like Jesus taught, you are actually bringing heaven to earth like Jesus wants you to. In the end, that’s really what matters to Jesus, not your religious affiliation. So don’t worry about all the nice people out there who have never heard of Jesus or all those nice people out there who refuse to believe He’s the savior of the world. They’re nice people–they will have made the world a little more like heaven, showing that they belong to heaven, regardless of their religious affiliation. Those who are not nice to people on earth are trying to make earth more like hell. They won’t succeed, because the power of love is stronger than their efforts. All they will be able to do is make their own life on earth more hellish. If you truly love people, it doesn’t matter what they try to do to make your life hell, they won’t be able to. In the end, those people who are trying to make life on earth more hellish will realize that it was a losing battle. They will then be forced to admit they were wrong and give in to the side of love. Two questions to consider now: Is this really what the Bible teaches? Is this really what Rob Bell teaches?...

Our six-month old baby, Sarah, gets super excited every time she sees me. One of those times when her eyes seemed totally locked onto me, I wondered, “Why is it that my presence gets her so excited?” I had many explanations. And I was also reminded that babies don’t have a concept of object permanence. When something they see disappears, they don’t understand that it continues to exist. I realized that Sarah must think this way of me too. Every time I returned, she became excited. Then I wondered, “How much of a spiritual baby am I?” I seem to lack object permanence when it comes to God. When I “see” Him, I get so excited. But when I don’t see Him, it’s like He doesn’t even exist anymore. I just go on with my life with no thought of Him whatsoever. How can I develop object permanence with God? How can I be reminded that God continues to exist, even when I don’t see...