Jump to content


Photo

Rob Bell--Love Wins


  • Please log in to reply
373 replies to this topic

#341 Attica

Attica

    Celtic Creation Mystic, Film Buff- -oon

  • Member
  • 1,831 posts

Posted 19 April 2011 - 05:57 PM

FWIW.

I noticed that in a post awhile back I had said that for God to go back on
his covenant would make him an adulterer. This was a mistake. I think I should have instead said that
this would be kind of like committing divorce.

#342 Stephen Lamb

Stephen Lamb

    Member

  • Member
  • 312 posts

Posted 20 April 2011 - 11:33 PM

Here's the review I've been waiting for: David Dark reviews Love Wins for The Other Journal. And he starts off his review with a story I heard him tell a gathering last night in his backyard, a sort of pre-Wild Goose Festival conversation that also included a couple stories from Gareth Higgins.

http://theotherjourn...w-of-love-wins/

#343 Overstreet

Overstreet

    Sometimes, there's a man.

  • Member
  • 17,037 posts

Posted 25 April 2011 - 12:26 PM

I so wish I could have been there, Stephen. David *and* Gareth in the same backyard. Amazing.

#344 Stephen Lamb

Stephen Lamb

    Member

  • Member
  • 312 posts

Posted 25 April 2011 - 06:31 PM

Lauren Winner had an essay on this topic, including thoughts about the book, in yesterday's New York Times Sunday Book Review:
http://www.nytimes.c...-of-heaven.html

Historians of heaven will tell you that we tend to sort out our most urgent social concerns in part through our visions of the afterlife. Elizabeth Stuart Phelps described heaven for a generation saturated in Victorian idolization of the family and devastated by the carnage of the Civil War: for Phelps and her readers, it was impossible to imagine an afterlife in which intimate family reunion was not central. So, too, Rob Bell is articulating the concerns of a generation of Christians schooled in toleration, whose neighbors and coworkers and siblings are Muslim or Buddhist or agnostic, a generation whose pluralist social commitments are at odds with theological commitments to limited salvation. Bell speaks for those Christians who take the Bible seriously but can’t imagine their secular friends aren’t going to heaven, too. He speaks for that woman in the pew who can’t bear the thought of spending eternity apart from her atheist brother. The tweeting gatekeepers of conservative evangelicalism may also share these concerns, but for them, the solution is to convert the unbelieving neighbor. For them, confident optimism that Jesus simply saves everyone is evasive at best, and heretical at worst. But, then, the gatekeepers called Phelps an infidel, too.



#345 Andy Whitman

Andy Whitman

    Member

  • Member
  • 3,238 posts

Posted 26 April 2011 - 07:54 AM

The gates are open in the New Jerusalem. People wander in and out. I've finally read Bell's book. I've appreciated it and am exasperated by it, moved by the insights and impatient with the shoddy exegesis that casually dismisses or ignores a couple thousand years of objections to his argument. That said, the gates are open. And the implications are staggering.

On a slight tangent, it turns out that musicians have been exploring these ideas for a long time. The songs noted below were first recorded in the 1930s, and are Negro spirituals, written by some unknown bard and embellished over time. The first song is best known from a recording of the Carter Family, the second from a recording by Uncle Dave Macon. Tom Waits borrowed more than a few ideas from the second song in his song "Down By The Train."

FIFTY MILES OF ELBOW ROOM

Twelve hundred miles its length and breadth
The four-square city stands
Its gem-set walls of jasper shine
Not made with human hands
One hundred miles its gates are wide
Abundant entrance there
With fifty miles of elbow room
On either side to spare

Chorus:
When the gates swing wide on the other side
Just beyond the sunset sea
There'll be room to spare as we enter there
Room for you and room for me
For the gates are wide on the other side
Where the flowers ever bloom
On the right hand on the left hand
Fifty miles of elbow room

Sometimes I'm cramped and crowded here
And long for elbow room
I want to reach for altitude
Where fairer flowers bloom
It won't be long til I shall pass
Into that city fair
With fifty miles of elbow room
On either side to spare

WHEN THE TRAIN COMES ALONG

Some comes walkin' and some comes lame
Gonna meet you at the station when the train comes along
Some comes walkin' in my Jesus' name
Gonna meet you at the station when the train comes along

Chorus:
Oh, when the train comes along
Oh, when the train comes along
Oh lord, I'll meet you at the station
When the train comes along

Sins of years are washed away
Gonna meet you at the station when the train comes along
Darkest hour is changed to day
Gonna meet you at the station when the train comes along

Chorus

Doubts and fears are borne along
Gonna meet you at the station when the train comes along
Sorrow changes into song
Gonna meet you at the station when the train comes along

Chorus

Ease and wealth become as dross
Gonna meet you at the station when the train comes along
All my boast is in the cross
Gonna meet you at the station when the train comes along

Chorus

Selfishness is lost in love
Gonna meet you at the station when the train comes along
All my treasures are above
Gonna meet you at the station when the train comes along

Edited by Andy Whitman, 26 April 2011 - 10:11 AM.


#346 Overstreet

Overstreet

    Sometimes, there's a man.

  • Member
  • 17,037 posts

Posted 26 April 2011 - 09:53 AM

Tangent:

Lauren Winner is fantastic - an excellent writer and an inspiring speaker with a distinct personality. She's just joined the faculty of SPU's MFA in Creative Writing, which Greg Wolfe directs. And she's teaching memoir-writing at The Glen Workshop in Santa Fe again this summer.

#347 Attica

Attica

    Celtic Creation Mystic, Film Buff- -oon

  • Member
  • 1,831 posts

Posted 26 April 2011 - 01:49 PM

Phlox said:

Would it make sense to call Rob Bell an inclusivist, rather than a universalist?


awhile back Peter T Chattaway said:


FWIW, I would not consider myself a "univeralist", but I *am* an "inclusivist".

[snip]

"inclusivism" retained the "imperialistic" nature of "exclusivism" by insisting that everyone still had to go through Jesus.



I'm not to sure if through Christ alone universalism is all that different from Christian inclusivism (at least as Peter and others have described it.) I guess the word inclusivism isn't a word that is as easily misunderstood,
or for that matter, has as many different understandings and implications, as the word universalism. Although, possibly the word inclusivism describes a belief system that isn't as open to repentance after death, or the idea
of the Lake of fire being ultimately corrective, as through Christ alone universalism.

One of the things that I've sometimes pondered when it comes to different cultures, is the fact that in western culture, Christians for the most part say that one can be saved through Jesus alone. Yet as many know Jesus wasn't the Messiahs real name. It was Yeshua.


Taken from a messianic Jewish site.

Yeshua is the original Hebrew proper name for Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus is a mis-transliteration of the Greek mis-transliteration, Yeysu.


So anyhow, in regards to inclusivism, I've sometimes wondered if another people groups use of a separate name pertaining to Yeshua, is any more inappropriate than us using the name Jesus. God obviously acknowledges our
reference of Jesus as the Messiah because he knows that in our hearts and imaginations this pertains to the risen Yeshua.

Therefore I wonder if there is a possibility that other cultural groups (or at least individuals within these groups) have, now and throughout history, truly accepted and worshiped Yeshua, but we don't realize it because they are using a foreign word for the Christian deity, and culturally unique forms of worship. Likewise, of course, in our culture there are people who say that they believe in Jesus who haven't truly accepted him as saviour.

Just some musings.

Edited by Attica, 26 April 2011 - 01:59 PM.


#348 Persona

Persona

    You said you'd wait... 'Til the end of the world.

  • Member
  • 7,454 posts

Posted 26 April 2011 - 02:22 PM

Phlox said:

Would it make sense to call Rob Bell an inclusivist, rather than a universalist?


awhile back Peter T Chattaway said:


FWIW, I would not consider myself a "univeralist", but I *am* an "inclusivist".

[snip]

"inclusivism" retained the "imperialistic" nature of "exclusivism" by insisting that everyone still had to go through Jesus.

I find this part of the conversation refreshingly interesting.

I wish Rob were here to answer that question for himself.

As far as this life is concerned, I think Rob and myself and the church (and probably most members of this board!) would like to think we are inclusive, always desiring to connect rather than combat. Like Aaron (ex-Mars Hill worship guy, amazing worship tune lyricist) used to sing, "Bridges are more beautiful than bombs... Love will change the world."

When a person that firmly believes in this position runs up against a traditional faith that puts the afterlife in front of this one and tends to create division based solely on belief of that afterlife rather than a union over the beauty and what we have in common in this life, it rubs the "inclusivist" the wrong way, it actually grates on that person, and it happens all the time. It creates division amongst Christians themselves -- I know for a fact that I am in that camp. I'd rather hang out with a non-Christian than a Christian who wants to separate these things so cut and dry like that. Inclusivism is about this life. We worry about the next in the next.

I think that is definitely a part of what drives this book. Yes, it is partially a reaction to traditional Christianity and that doctrine, but it is even more a reaction to how people use that doctrine to determine who is in, who is out, who I will pronounce a verdict on in this life rather than finding the commonality and letting God worry about it in the next.

I think the division or the wedge was felt first, and the book is Rob's attempt to try to back up his understanding of the wedge. The wedge was felt, but just because it was felt didn't mean there was a real understanding of why the inclusivists feel the knee-jerk way they (we) do, and it certainly didn't mean we could put words or scripture to it. "Love Wins" is the result of years of probing why the inclusivist feels that knee-jerk reaction in the wedge -- these ideas of finding the beauty and the commonality and probing for connection have floated around in our church's teaching for quite some time.

I don't think Rob or anyone have really arrived at an answer yet, because I don't think there is one (certainly not one that can be proven in this life), which makes the book simply a statement about some probing that's gone on behind the scenes for quite some time in this "new kind" of Christianity.

I find all the exchanges and the backlash from traditional Christianity ironic. That backlash is kinda the point.

Edited by Persona, 26 April 2011 - 02:27 PM.


#349 Peter T Chattaway

Peter T Chattaway

    He's fictional, but you can't have everything.

  • Member
  • 29,294 posts

Posted 26 April 2011 - 02:38 PM

Persona wrote:
: As far as this life is concerned, I think Rob and myself and the church (and probably most members of this board!) would like to think we are inclusive, always desiring to connect rather than combat.

Well, yes and no. I don't believe that non-Christians (or even non-baptized Christians) should be receiving communion, for one thing. (And this is a belief that goes back to my Mennonite/Anabaptist childhood. I was baptized when I was 11, for whatever that's worth, precisely because I *wanted* to have communion at my church.) If that makes me "exclusivist" in this life, then so be it.

: Like Aaron (ex-Mars Hill worship guy, amazing worship tune lyricist) used to sing, "Bridges are more beautiful than bombs... Love will change the world."

There's more to life than bridges and bombs. There are also fences and gates, etc.

#350 Attica

Attica

    Celtic Creation Mystic, Film Buff- -oon

  • Member
  • 1,831 posts

Posted 26 April 2011 - 03:45 PM

Persona said:


:"Bridges are more beautiful than bombs... Love will change the world."

You betcha

:I think the division or the wedge was felt first, and the book is Rob's attempt to try to back up his understanding of the wedge. The wedge was felt, but just because it was felt didn't mean there was a real understanding of why the inclusivists feel the knee-jerk way they (we) do.


My thoughts are that this wedge was created way back in early Christianity, and has made it through to our time. I would think that it comes from dualistic thinking inserted by those such as Constantine and Augustine and others. Ya know, the whole the church is the city of God, and everybody outside of it are just a bunch of barbaric pagans, type of thinking. I'm guessing that many Christians realize, and are coming to realize, that other peoples and cultures outside of Christendom do have great value and possibly have had a sense of God or at the very least Godly and good things, and we have a knee jerk reaction to the wedge, because we look at our societies and history, and see how damaging said wedge can be.


:that puts the afterlife in front of this one and tends to create division based solely on belief of that afterlife rather than a union over the beauty and what we have in common in this life, it rubs the "inclusivist" the wrong way, it actually grates on that person, and it happens all the time. It creates division amongst Christians themselves -- I know for a fact that I am in that camp. I'd rather hang out with a non-Christian than a Christian who wants to separate these things so cut and dry like that. Inclusivism is about this life. We worry about the next in the next.

rather than finding the commonality and letting God worry about it in the next.


Well hopefully some of my comments haven't grated on you (at least to much :) .) Just for the record I agree with what your saying, but my posts come at least in part, from the understanding that it's real hard, if not impossible, for many people to not worry about the next life, in this life, if they believe in eternal punishments. Many many people are tormented by this, and can't get past it. To me.... if the hope of ultimate restoration of all through Christ is true, then this belief can lead Christians to trust that God will continually work to bring people to himself, help them get past the troubling thoughts of others eternal destinies, give them a sense of relief, so that they can move to a place of rest and joy. It also, I think, opens up the doors to seeing the human race as more of a Global family that God has not forsaken, which leads to a person having a world view which is more inclined to connecting, and building bridges. I wonder if many Christians would also be more likely to move on to loving others.

I think how we treat others it entirely connected to our view of how God does and will treat them.


Make sense?


: these ideas of finding the beauty and the commonality and probing for connection to all have floated around in our church's teaching for quite some time.


That's kind of where I'm at, and one reason why I find the arts so interesting. There most certainly is art made outside of Christian circles that touches on the beauty and commonality. Of course I also belive there is secular art that Holy Spirit is touching people through. Although of course to my mind there is often a very thin division between Christian and secular when it comes to some of these things.


:I don't think Rob or anyone have really arrived at an answer yet, because I don't think there is one (certainly not one that can be proven in this life.)


I agree that there isn't any direct answer that one could put their finger on. I just think that it comes from a long history with various forms of stinkin thinkin, that has made it into the current Christian climate. I expect a lot of this thinking has come from fear of the other. Or fear that others beliefs and culture will lead us astray. As Christians this is often what we are taught, especially those who grow up in the church. The thing is..... I think there is maybe some small truth to that caution. I guess my view would be to raise up Christians who learn how to interact with people openly and thoughfully, without stumbling into things that are hurtful.





Peter T Chattaway wrote:


:Well, yes and no. I don't believe that non-Christians (or even non-baptized Christians) should be receiving communion, for one thing. (And this is a belief that goes back to my Mennonite/Anabaptist childhood. I was baptized when I was 11, for whatever that's worth, precisely because I *wanted* to have communion at my church.) If that makes me "exclusivist" in this life, then so be it.


This reminds me of my own caution against getting involved with other peoples occultic or dangerous interests, even if there is some hope of connection and bridge building through these things.

Edited by Attica, 26 April 2011 - 04:11 PM.


#351 Persona

Persona

    You said you'd wait... 'Til the end of the world.

  • Member
  • 7,454 posts

Posted 26 April 2011 - 04:33 PM

Persona said:


:"Bridges are more beautiful than bombs... Love will change the world."

You betcha


Hey Marge, can I have a cup of caffee? :)

Well hopefully some of my comments haven't grated on you (at least to much :) .)

No. Actually I didn't mean in the conversation here at A&F, which is typically miles above much other conversation that's out there. I think one can be challenged here in a constructive way, a way that really makes you think things through. I appreciate this forum for that. Don't always agree with everything I read, but the forum is nonetheless appreciated on a regular basis.

Just for the record I agree with what your saying, but my posts come at least in part, from the understanding that it's real hard, if not impossible, for many people to not worry about the next life, in this life, if they believe in eternal punishments. Many many people are tormented by this, and can't get past it. To me.... if the hope of ultimate restoration of all through Christ is true, then this belief can lead Christians to trust that God will continually work to bring people to himself, help them get past the troubling thoughts of others eternal destinies, give them a sense of relief, so that they can move to a place of rest and joy. It also, I think, opens up the doors to seeing the human race as more of a Global family that God has not forsaken, which leads to a person having a world view which is more inclined to connecting, and building bridges. I wonder if many Christians would also be more likely to move on to loving others.

I believe I started weighing these thoughts years ago, over a decade or two before I'd heard of inclusivity or Rob or Brian McLaren, etc. I think it was when I first saw "Heaven's Gates and Hell's Flames," and a few years later was in a position where I had no other choice but to take part in the play. I hated it. The manipulation and lack of thinking through, things like sin, redemption, the love of God, pride and the church, oh, I cannot tell you how much I hated that play! (This is the play that seems to have launched other evangelical movements like the fright fest seen in the documentary Hell House, for the record.) That is where the wedge first started for me. My background as an evangelical PK has a definite hell in it, and while my family didn't make this the focus of our faith, growing up in that environment you can't help but run into those who do. On a pretty regular basis.

:I don't think Rob or anyone have really arrived at an answer yet, because I don't think there is one (certainly not one that can be proven in this life.)


I agree that there isn't any direct answer that one could put their finger on. I just think that it comes from a long history with various forms of stinkin thinkin, that has made it into the current Christian climate. I expect a lot of this thinking has come from fear of the other. Or fear that others beliefs and culture will lead us astray. As Christians this is often what we are taught, especially those who grow up in the church. The thing is..... I think there is maybe some small truth to that caution. I guess my view would be to raise up Christians who learn how to interact with people openly and thoughfully, without stumbling into things that are hurtful.

One of the things I appreciated about the book is that is makes the differentiation between the hell of the Bible and the hell that was/is already understood in culture. I haven't seen this addressed in the "traditional" reactions around the web. Truly a fascinating part of the book.

Which I need to read again. I read it 1-1/2 times, but in order to draw specifics from it, I think I need to give it a quick read one more time.

Edited by Persona, 26 April 2011 - 04:35 PM.


#352 Attica

Attica

    Celtic Creation Mystic, Film Buff- -oon

  • Member
  • 1,831 posts

Posted 26 April 2011 - 09:30 PM

[quote name='Persona' date='26 April 2011 - 03:33 PM' timestamp='1303853638' post='250369']
[quote name='Attica' date='26 April 2011 - 04:45 PM' timestamp='1303850741' post='250365']
Persona said:


:"Bridges are more beautiful than bombs... Love will change the world."

You betcha[/quote]

Hey Marge, can I have a cup of caffee? :)


Okey Dokey.


Persona said:

I think it was when I first saw "Heaven's Gates and Hell's Flames," and a few years later was in a position where I had no other choice but to take part in the play. I hated it. The manipulation and lack of thinking through, things like sin, redemption, the love of God, pride and the church, oh, I cannot tell you how much I hated that play! (This is the play that seems to have launched other evangelical movements like the fright fest seen in the documentary Hell House, for the record.) That is where the wedge first started for me.


I'm not a big fan of that kind of thing either. I've used to go to an evangelical church where our pastor said that those ways of evangelism largely don't work anyhow. Sure they scare lots of people into the "salvation prayer". But eventually a large number of them fall away.

Also. There is lots of talk about inclusivism, or Christian universalism being a heresy or blaspheme. But there are two sides to that particular coin, being that if the Christian universalists are right, then it would stand to reason those kinds of plays present a blasphemous view of God's character. As pertaining to what you have said earlier, even if eternal Hell were to be true, the "Hell house" view most certainly doesn't represent God's inclination towards people in this life.


Through my reading about Christian universalism, I began to learn more about the Abrahamic covenant, which has led to the theopraxis that because God covenanted with Abraham to bless and care for his heritage of the people in the nations, then myself as a Christian, am called to do the same under the Christian covenant.

You see (as a small rabbit trail) when you mention those plays and the Hell house documentary, I immediatly think of the end times movement and the various end times movies. In my current understanding not only are they problematic as film art (which is a statement that I don't expect is going to bring a whole log of argument from these forums), but also problematic in their views on how God treats peoples of the nations, and those outside of Christianity. It seems to me that the judgements mentioned in the old Testament prophetic books came from the complex interactions between God, Israel, and the Nations under the Abrahamic covenant, where the judgements on the nations had, at least in part, the intention of bringing the people of the nations to repentance and thereafter back under God's wings and care, because God was covenanted to their father Abraham. Some of these people upon repentance would literally walk through the open gates into Jerusalem.

I think that God's character is unchanging and that his judgements in Revelation, have the same shepparding purpose under this covenant (it says that he sheppards the nations with iron.) This is an understanding that the end times movies seem to completely oblivious to, or else completely neglect. Some Christians seem to have a hard time believing that God's love is not separate from his judgements.

But with my understanding God's heart is that no one will be left behind (I know... lame pun.) ::pinch::

But where I'm going with this, is that we have created a Christian culture that often sees through the world view of us completely separate from, or opposed to the other, where I think that, under the Christian covenant, which is connected to God's covenant with Abraham, we are called to care for and bless others. This of course leads to a connection with people through the common beauty of life.

In the prophetic books of the Bible God even weeps with some of the nations when he is judging them (for doing some pretty rotten things to), so it would seem obvious that God weeps and laughs with the people outside of Christianity in this life, and that we therefore are called to do the same. These folks are not separate from God's heart and therefore I would think, are not to be separate from ours.

This is an understanding that I think traditional Christianity, for various reasons often hasn't fully understood. As a matter of fact I'm pretty sure that I don't really get it. Therefore I posit that a Christian culture which influences Christians to unhealthily oppose or neglect those outside of its church doors is amiss, and that includes connecting with them through culture.


:One of the things I appreciated about the book is that is makes the differentiation between the hell of the Bible and the hell that was/is already understood in culture. Truly a fascinating part of the book.


Yep. I've read a bit on this as well. It's amazing how much our views have been shaped by the medieval arts take on the subject, which was influenced by some of the ancient pagan beliefs.

Yet I suppose that does show how impacting the arts can be.

Edited by Attica, 27 April 2011 - 12:09 AM.


#353 Peter T Chattaway

Peter T Chattaway

    He's fictional, but you can't have everything.

  • Member
  • 29,294 posts

Posted 27 April 2011 - 02:18 PM

Link to the section in our thread on Tim Keller's views on hell where Ross Douthat's response to the Rob Bell controversy has come up.

#354 Persona

Persona

    You said you'd wait... 'Til the end of the world.

  • Member
  • 7,454 posts

Posted 19 May 2011 - 07:14 AM

In a brilliant move on Sunday, Rob didn't mention the book at all, but in speaking out of 1 John Chapter 2 he specifically referred to the section where it says that Christ died for the whole world, and noted the difference between orthodoxy and orthopraxy, and how you never hear the latter in the same breath as the former. Link Here.

Edited by Persona, 19 May 2011 - 07:22 AM.


#355 Attica

Attica

    Celtic Creation Mystic, Film Buff- -oon

  • Member
  • 1,831 posts

Posted 24 May 2011 - 07:42 PM

In a brilliant move on Sunday, Rob didn't mention the book at all, but in speaking out of 1 John Chapter 2 he specifically referred to the section where it says that Christ died for the whole world, and noted the difference between orthodoxy and orthopraxy, and how you never hear the latter in the same breath as the former. Link Here.




That was some good stuff on. Thanks for sharing Persona.



On an interesting note, I saw the following in the comments section and was pleased with the effect that the message and your church has had on at least one person.... you might find
it encouraging.




FABULOUS TEACHING !!!

I wonder how my life might have beeen different if I had ever been told as a child that God is FOR me, instead of being taught that God was against me
because I was a norrible sinner (beginning at FOUR years of age !!!) and being taught that God was an impossible to please taskmaster.

How much more loving might I have been?

How many personal physical illnesses might I have avoided
instead of punishing myself subconciously with illness after illness?

Would I be legally blind today if I had truly felt the healing love of God? Would I have had a stroke last week? I believe in the God-mind-body connection. Can we love ourselves
and others with “completeness” if we don’t really KNOW down deep in the core of our beings that God loves us all?

I believe that the toxic way I was raised has inerfered wih my physicsl as well as emotional and spirirual health.

GUARD THIS !!! GUARD THIS WELL.


My husband and I are VERY grateful for the outpouring of love, prayers and help from Mars. We’re so happy to belong to the Mars community. Without love we have nothing.
LOVE WINS !!!

#356 Andy Whitman

Andy Whitman

    Member

  • Member
  • 3,238 posts

Posted 26 May 2011 - 09:03 AM

Without getting into the specific arguments of this book, I have to say how disappointed I was with the writing and editing. There were grammatical errors and typos galore, which was particularly puzzling given the phalanx of editors Bell thanked at the end of the book. What happened?

And I'll add just one note on the rhetoric. I realize that Rob is more interested in posing questions than offering answers. But it's not helpful when those questions are posed as a series of mutually exclusive options when, in fact, they are no such thing.

So, did Jesus' death on the cross ransom us from death?
Or did it win a victory in a military sense?
Or did it free us in a judicial sense?
Which is it?


Here's the deal, Rob: it's a floor wax AND a dessert topping. The false dichotomies made me crazy.

#357 M. Leary

M. Leary

    Member

  • Member
  • 5,415 posts

Posted 26 May 2011 - 09:05 AM

And when you are posing the classic atonement dichotomies, please include the moral example one, as it is kind of important.

Edited by M. Leary, 26 May 2011 - 09:05 AM.


#358 Persona

Persona

    You said you'd wait... 'Til the end of the world.

  • Member
  • 7,454 posts

Posted 26 May 2011 - 10:30 AM

So, did Jesus' death on the cross ransom us from death?
Or did it win a victory in a military sense?
Or did it free us in a judicial sense?
Which is it?


Here's the deal, Rob: it's a floor wax AND a dessert topping. The false dichotomies made me crazy.

I kinda thought that was the point.

#359 Andy Whitman

Andy Whitman

    Member

  • Member
  • 3,238 posts

Posted 26 May 2011 - 01:09 PM

So, did Jesus' death on the cross ransom us from death?
Or did it win a victory in a military sense?
Or did it free us in a judicial sense?
Which is it?


Here's the deal, Rob: it's a floor wax AND a dessert topping. The false dichotomies made me crazy.

I kinda thought that was the point.

The question "So which is it?," which resounds like a litany throughout this book, would seem to suggest that we have to choose between these alternatives. And we don't. It was a rhetorical device that rang hollow fairly early on, and didn't improve with extended usage.

#360 Persona

Persona

    You said you'd wait... 'Til the end of the world.

  • Member
  • 7,454 posts

Posted 26 May 2011 - 01:30 PM


So, did Jesus' death on the cross ransom us from death?
Or did it win a victory in a military sense?
Or did it free us in a judicial sense?
Which is it?


Here's the deal, Rob: it's a floor wax AND a dessert topping. The false dichotomies made me crazy.

I kinda thought that was the point.

The question "So which is it?," which resounds like a litany throughout this book, would seem to suggest that we have to choose between these alternatives. And we don't. It was a rhetorical device that rang hollow fairly early on, and didn't improve with extended usage.

I don't see it as a rhetorical device to choose between the alternatives. I see it as a rhetorical device to suggest that it's either all of these things or none of these things, but it is certainly not only one of these things. In the context of the book, which is in the context of Rob's understanding and teaching over the years, it feels to me like he's tackling not just one, but many, boxed in perspectives. Maybe it is a language issue and you don't like the way he speaks, but what I'm saying is that I think you're agreeing with him (but I'd have to go back and see the context to know for certain).