nothing like civil war. i was waiting for this to happen. there is always someone somewhere who disagrees especially when it comes to something as sensitive as faith. they'll always think they are right and the others will always think they are right and then they will precede to fight to the death over some truth that they probably both haven't grasped.
what am i talking about?
i present to you an article that is titled "Rob Bell denies the Gospel"
the same beloved Rob Bell who wrote Velvet Elvis
just thought it was interesting and i would share it with you
i'm not here to hate on Rob Bell or the other guy but it's interesting to see their different views and takes on the bible.
and of course, the most interesting is how they call each other (or at least this guy calls Bell) a heretic like he has all the answers and the "true" christianity.
but we all know God is bigger than one man and one idea.
http://www.sliceoflaodicea.com/archives/2006/10/rob_bell_denies.php
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
First off, just an initial thought and response to the article. you know.. something to do to relax on before continuing to cram for my Psych 325 Midterm tmr.
Anyways, i read some of the article, and it doesn't seem to have a strong support in what she is reporting and saying. There's a part where it mentions about finding our "true selves". but isn't that thought kina along lines of mainstream evangelical thought? we are saved at the cross and the acceptance of it by faith, but at the same time, it doesn't stop there. we are constantly striving and being molded into the image of Christ, as we deny ourselves (let's not go into the debate of what that means.. haha.. dats not the focus anyways), and follow Christ. In THAT sense, we are finding our true identity and self, and ultimate, to be glorified with God as He glorifies Himself... hence, "He's bring many sons to glory."
The thing about "Bell's "Christian" message is that mankind is already forgiven of their sin", just doesn't really give us a clear picture and argument.
1. Rob Bell never specifically states his position of what the cross represented, next to the idea of redemption of sin. He simply states and calls for our attention to the idea of T'shuva, to think about what we're hearing from our churches. (isn't that itself, the response the church should be having, especially with the "hot-tub" religion phenomenon that we're having in North American Churches?).
2. I hvn't looked into yet, but the thoughts and theology evangelical mainstream is running into a lot of troubles too, especially in this time and age (God and Truth remains the same, but thru which lens we look at it changes with culture, time, and mindset. The word 'MAINSTREAM" has two meanings and standards for me. haha. talked to kev about it. Ask me later, for it really isn't our focus right now). I remember telling some of my buddies to read the last chapter of "Knowing God" by J.I. Packer. He states something along the lines about "just believing and acceptance" of the cross is PART of salvation, but not all of it. (I MIGHT BE WRONG, SO YOU GUYS MIGHT WANT TO READ UP ON IT FIRST).
Maybe it's something that we, haha, including me, should look at before more further discussions.
Plus, we have no idea where this author is coming from. On what authority and on what is she making this statement?
Cool. Random thoughts are over. It’s 7:30pm, just got off the phone from selling out Dan Wong for dinner. Back to cramming. Waiting to get pwned by you guys or something. Hey, the tradition of constant searching and revisitin', to rid of anything in way of Christ and to remind ourselves of what we and our forefathers have forgotten, no?
Shalom Aleichem.
hey, actually i went to check out the "core beliefs" page of Rob Bell's church. It's actually very consistent to mainstream evangelicals. Here's the website if you guys are interesterd. oh yeah, Rob Bell's the founding pastor of the church too.
http://www.mhbcmi.org/about/faith.php
clearly someone didn't do enough research before blabling.
my bad. :P
I think a lot of times, the non-emergent traditional churches are so caught up with attacking the "new" churches that they don't see the problems in themselves. They accuse people of being toxic and twisted, but fail to see why their numbers are dropping. In some sense, they are like the old school catholic church when protestants first started coming out. They literally declared war on them (what this critic is doing). And what do we get? Catholic churches are now reforming, going back to see where they need changes. Modern day protestant churches aren't perfect, neither are emerging churches. But they are there so that we could gain a closer experience to God. If God is truth, then all truths would lead to him no?
thanks for selling me out wing
anyways i just thought it was interesting to finally see some of the otherside. i don't agree with everything she says and i don't agree with everything Bell says. it was kinda crazy with that part about the person who use to go to Mars Hill. Is it true? dunno but it could be.
btw where are kevin and andrew?
Lurking.
I haven't read Velvet Elvis.
I tried reading that article, but frankly, I get really tired of I'm-right-they're-wrong-ALWAYS arguments. Really, really, tired.
So, I'm gonna sit back and enjoy the conversation.
For now.
Post a Comment