Chapter Four – DOES GOD GET WHAT GOD WANTS?

Rob writes, “I point out these parallel claims: that God is mighty, powerful, and ‘in control’ and that billions of people will spend forever apart from this God, who is their creator, even though it’s written in the Bible that ‘God wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth’ (1 Tim. 2). So does God get what God wants? How great is God? Great enough to achieve what God sets out to do, or kind of great, great most of the time, but in this, the fate of billions of people, not totally great. Sort of great. A little great.” (page 97)

• In response to this section, Dr. Ben Witherington writes, “In some ways, the premise of Rob’s question, raised in Chapter Four, is not entirely logically coherent. If the answer to this question (‘Does God always get what he wants?’) was yes, would we even have sin and evil in the world? Would Adam and Eve have fallen in the first place? Would there even be a need for salvation or Hell? If God is truly like the way Augustine depicted him, not merely almighty and all good, but always ‘Charles in charge’, determining every little thing that happens in all of time and history in the whole universe, then it is very difficult to explain, without absolute cosmic dualism (as in Manicheanism which Augustine escaped from) how in the world Evil got a foot in the door of the universe in the first place. And if God didn’t always get what he wanted in the beginning, why in the world would be believe he will get all he wants in the end? Because ‘Love Wins’? Really? But if love is an expression of some sort of freedom of choice, whether by God or by humans, are we really supposed to believe that God’s love stops being freely given and freely received and becomes at some future juncture more like the Godfather than like God—‘making us an offer we can’t refuse?’ This is not a coherent line of thought no matter how much we believe God loves us all. I do wish one of Rob’s friends or editors had pointed some of this out before he wrote the final draft of this book. As it is, the book thus far makes Rob sound more like a hopeless romantic rather than a dangerous heretic.” (http://goo.gl/lQaoZ)

• When you think about the freedom God has given the human race to choose to love Him or reject Him, do you think it diminishes His greatness if some of us decide not to receive His generous gift of salvation? Why or why not?

• Consider the fact that those of us who have accepted this gift have the opportunity and responsibility to warn our fellow human beings about coming judgment and tell them that God has offered a free pardon for anyone who receives His Son as their Savior. With this in mind, do you think the fact that many people are in hell reflects more on the church’s lack of greatness than on God’s? Why or why not?

“God has a purpose. A desire. A goal. And God never stops pursuing it. Jesus tells a series of parables in Luke 15 about a woman who loses a coin, a shepherd who loses a sheep, and a father who loses a son. The stories aren’t ultimately about the things and people being lost; the stories are about things and people being found. The God that Jesus teaches us about doesn’t give up until everything that was lost is found. This God doesn’t give up. Ever.

“Is history tragic? Have billions of people been created only to spend eternity in conscious punishment and torment, suffering infinitely for the finite sins they committed in the few years they spent on earth? Is our future uncertain, or will God take care of us? …Is God our friend, our provider, our protector, or father – or is God the kind of judge who may in the end declare that we deserve to spend forever separated from our Father? Is God like the characters in a story Jesus would tell, old ladies who keep searching for the lost coin until the find it, shepherds who don’t rest until that one sheep is back in the fold, fathers who rush out to greet and embrace their returning son, or, in the end, will God give up?

“Will ‘all the ends of the earth’ come, as God has decided, or only some? Will all feast as it’s promised in Psalm 22, or only a few? Will everybody be given a new heart, or only a limited number of people? Will God, in the end, settle, saying: ‘Well, I tried, I gave it my best shot, and sometimes you just have to be okay with failure’? Will God shrug God-sized shoulders and say, ‘You can’t always get what you want’? (pages 101-103)

• Dr Witherington helps us put this section in biblical perspective. “Rob cites a pile of texts, soundbyting them rather than doing contextual exegesis of them, for the purpose of suggesting that God never ever gives up on anyone. The problem with this is that many of these OT texts are about God’s covenant faithfulness to his own chosen people, not to the world in general. And in regard to the notion that we are ‘all children of God’ the Gospel of John in fact says—No we are not! We are all creatures of God, created in God’s image, but we are not all inherently ‘children of God’. John 1-3 is pretty clear you don’t become a child of God through the decision of your parents, or through mere physical birth, or through the will of a spouse, you become a child of God by being ‘born again’. My goodness, even Nicodemus is told he must be born again in order to enter God’s kingdom. Does God love everyone, the whole world? Yes he does, as John 3.16 says. Does that, or being created in God’s image automatically make anyone a child of God—no. There are issues of being part of the people of God. And here perhaps more than anywhere else is one of the fundamental problems with Rob’s argument—bad ecclesiology. As Paul puts it in 1 Cor. 12, when it comes to being a real child of God “we were all baptized by one Spirit into the one body of Christ (whether Jew or Gentile), and all given the one Spirit from which we all drink. God has a people, and the lost need to become found and a part of that people. This is one of the major messages of both the OT and the NT and it involves covenanting, it involves a people set apart, it involves conscious involvement in the people of God, if you don’t die in infancy. One of the real problems with this chapter (see e.g. p.102) is the tendency to talk in binary opposites. Is God like the woman who seeks the coin, or is God one who will allow you to spend an eternity in Hell? Is history tragic, or does love win? In fact, the Bible is complex, and it gives complex answers to these sorts of questions— questions we have debated for two millennia and can’t be resolved with a simply setting up of a ‘you can give me this or you can give me that’ (cue the Kia commercial) because both can’t be true. In fact both can be true. It can be true that a good deal of history is tragic and also true that God’s love wins in millions and millions of cases.” (http://goo.gl/lQaoZ)

• In Deuteronomy 30:15-20 God says to His people, “See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. For I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess. But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess. This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the LORD your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the LORD is your life.” In your opinion, if humans choose to turn from God or ignore Him, is it unfair for God to give them the consequences of their choice?

• Yes, the Bible says that God wants everyone to be saved, (1 Timothy 2:4) but what if people don’t want God’s salvation. Does their rejection of His gift mean that He has failed? Why or why not? (See Romans 3:3-4)

• Do you think Rob’s frustration should be redirected at the community of believers who know the way to eternal life and yet, in many cases, aren’t telling their friends and family?

“God in the end doesn’t get what God wants, it’s declared, because some will turn, repent, and believe, and others won’t. To explain this perspective, it’s rightly pointed out that love, by its very nature, is freedom. For there to be love, there has to be the option, both now and then, to not love. To say no. Although God is powerful and mighty, when it comes to the human heart God has to play by the same rules we do. God has to respect our freedom to choose to the very end, even at the risk of the relationship itself. If at any point God overrides, co-opts, or hijacks the human heart, robbing us of our freedom to choose, then God has violated the fundamental essence of what love even is. (pages 103-104)

“The question that flows out of this understanding of love, then, is quite simple. Lots of people in our world right now choose to be violent and abusive and mean and evil, so why won’t they continue to choose this path after they die? That Question leads to another idea, one rooted in the dynamic nature of life. We aren’t fixed, static beings – we change and morph as life unfolds… What makes us think that after a lifetime, let alone hundreds or even thousands of years, somebody who has consciously chosen a particular path away from God suddenly wakes up one day and decides to head in the completely opposite direction?

“And so a universal hugfest where everybody eventually ends up around the heavenly campfire singing ‘kumbaya,’ with Jesus playing the guitar, sounds a lot like fantasy to some people. Although we’re only scratching the surface of this perspective – the one that says we get this life and only this life to believe in Jesus – it is safe to say that this perspective is widely held and passionately defended by many in our world today.” (pages 104-105)

• Rob acknowledges that part of loving and being loved is the freedom to say “no” and to turn away from the one who is extending love to us. He agrees that God must “play by the same rules.” God respects our right to choose Him or reject Him because that’s what love does. But he then raises a question about the permanence of that decision. What if someone who has spent their life rejecting God, dies, and then, thousands of years later, decides to repent and return to God. Couldn’t they still do that? Wouldn’t love continue to accept their repentance after death? What do you think about this idea?

• Hebrews 9:27 says, “People are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment.” Jesus told a story about a rich man who went to hell and was repentant. But he was told, “between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.” (Luke 16:26) The Bible teaches clearly that death seals the fate of those who reject God in this life. There is no “universal hugfest where everybody eventually ends up around the heavenly campfire.” Given the clear teaching of Scripture on this, why do you think people still hold onto this idea? Do you think it is wishful thinking? Why or why not?

“… And then there are others who can live with two destinations, two realities after death, but insist that there must be some kind of ‘second chance’ for those who don’t believe in Jesus in this lifetime… At the heart of this perspective is the belief that, given enough time, everybody will turn to God and find themselves in the joy and peace of God’s presence. The love of God will melt every hard heart, and even the most ‘depraved sinners’ will eventually give up their resistance and turn to God.

“And so, beginning with the early church, there is a long tradition of Christians who believe that God will ultimately restore everything and everybody, because Jesus says in Matthew 19 that there will be a ‘renewal of all things,’ Peter says in Acts 3 that Jesus will ‘restore everything,’ and Paul says in Colossians 1 that through Christ ‘God was pleased to …reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven.’

“In the third century the church fathers Clement of Alexandria and Origen affirmed God’s reconciliation with all people. In the fourth century, Gregory of Nyssa and Eusebius believed this as well. In their day, Jerome claimed that ‘most people,’ Basil said the ‘mass of men,’ and Augustine acknowledged that ‘very many’ believed in the ultimate reconciliation of all people to God.” (pages 106-108)

• I’m referencing Dr. Witherington again because I don’t have expertise in church history. He writes, “And now we come to the escape clause part of the argument. Since it is obvious that God’s love doesn’t win over everyone in this lifetime – can we go into overtime, and indeed continue to play overtimes until God finally wins, outlasting our ‘March Madness’? Does God final melt even the hardest of hearts— somewhere out there? The texts, like Col. 1 or Phil. 2 which are thought to suggest such an outcome (and of course no one is suggesting such an outcome is impossible for an omnipotent God if he is prepared to run roughshod over the wills of billions of humans), are not quite on all fours with such an assumption about ‘love winning’. Some of these texts are about how when Jesus comes back, everyone, whether willingly or unwillingly will have to recognize who is Lord, even if they don’t like it. Notice for example in Phil. 2 Paul seems to refer to demonic or angelic beings who will have to recognize the truth about Jesus, but we are not being told they will trust and be transformed by this truth. Indeed, Col. 1 says Jesus triumphs over the powers and principalities on the cross, and 1 Pet. 3 is about Christ proclaiming victory over the ‘spirits in prison’ who are the fallen angels (see Gen. 3). And then there are the texts about God reconciling ‘all things’ (not all persons, all things) by which is meant God’s kingdom will include all of creation, all will one day be under his rule. These texts do not proclaim the salvation of every last individual—- and they never did. Once again, Rob appeals to some church fathers in support of some kind of universalism. The problem is that he is citing theological speculation of this or that church father, not the settled convictions of the church as revealed in their creeds, councils, confessions. There is a difference. The creeds, councils, and confessions are the result of the body of Christ reasoning together and coming to some consensus on what orthodoxy looks like. They are not isolated shots fired in the dark by one or another church father. I hope no one holds me to every speculative thought I have put into writing at some point. The point is— neither in the Catholic nor the various Orthodox, nor the various Evangelical traditions has there ever been a statement of faith by any such church suggesting what seems to be suggested in this chapter in this book. Rob wants to suggest that the stream of orthodoxy is broad and includes those who at some point advocated universalism. This can only be said to be true if you ignore the importance of churches collectively, and stick with speculating individuals. It can only be said to be true if you ignore the nature of the NT canon. Where did it come from? Did it drop from the sky? No. It was assembled by various Christian groups, and then there was agreement of whole churches in the east, and in the west, and in north Africa in about 367 A.D. that ‘these 27 books and no others’ are our NT Scriptures. This was not decided by Constantine, it was agreed upon and recognized by church synods and councils. Why am I pointing this out? You wouldn’t even have the NT to argue about were there no churches and church decisions, and you had best not ignore what the church writ large has said about the interpretation of this Bible along the way, not just cherry pick this or that church father’s momentary entertainment of some idea. In short your theology and soteriology are interconnected with ecclesiology, and you cannot and should not try to decide theological or ethical issues just on the basis of your very selective reading of the Bible or church fathers. Even the Protestant Reformers would not be happy with that sort of approach to theology and ethics.” (http://goo.gl/lQaoZ)

• Rob want so resolve this dilemma in his mind, so he is offering the idea of continuous chances to repent after death. He uses several passages of Scripture that most interpret differently and several quotes from the church fathers to support this idea. From what you know of the Bible and church history, is this view part of orthodox Christianity?

• What is the danger, in your opinion, of holding a theological view about the option of repentance after death that is different from the teaching of Scripture, the creeds and the doctrines of the church?

“Central to their trust that all would be reconciled was the belief that untold masses of people suffering forever doesn’t bring God glory. Restoration brings God glory; eternal torment doesn’t. Reconciliation brings God glory; endless anguish doesn’t. Renewal and return cause God’s greatness to shine through the universe; never-ending punishment doesn’t.

“To be clear, again, an untold number of serious disciples of Jesus across hundreds of years have assumed, affirmed, and trusted that no one can resist God’s pursuit forever, because God’s love will eventually melt even the hardest of hearts.” (page 108)

• In Revelation 14:7, the Apostle John quotes the angel, “Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of his judgment has come.” The Bible teaches that God receives glory both for extending mercy and for executing judgment. In Romans 9: 22-24, the Apostle Paul writes, “What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?” Do you think Rob’s assumption that God’s judgment on unbelievers is something embarrassing for God reflects the view of Scripture? Why or why not?

“Could God say to someone truly humbled, broken, and desperate for reconciliation, ‘Sorry, too late’? Many have refused to accept the scenario in which somebody is pounding on the door, apologizing, repenting, and asking God to be let in, only to hear God say through the keyhole: ‘Door’s locked. Sorry. If you had been here earlier, I could have done something. But now, it’s too late.”

• Throughout the Bible there are stories of people who were shut out because they were too late, starting with the people who laughed at Noah as he built his ark on dry land and then were destroyed by the flood. In Matthew 25: 1-13, Jesus told a parable about ten virgins who were waiting for the bridegroom. Five ran out of oil for their lamps and, while they were going to get it, the bridegroom came, entered the wedding banquet, and shut the door. They pounded on the door and cried out, ‘Lord, Lord, open the door for us!’ But he replied, ‘Truly I tell you, I don’t know you.’”

• In Luke 13: 25-27, Jesus said, “Once the owner of the house gets up and closes the door, you will stand outside knocking and pleading, ‘Sir, open the door for us.’ But he will answer, ‘I don’t know you or where you come from.’ Then you will say, ‘We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.’ But he will reply, ‘I don’t know you or where you come from. Away from me, all you evildoers!’”

• The Apostle Paul wrote, “He (God) will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed.” (2 Thessalonians 1:8-9)

• Based on your understanding of the Bible, do you think God will continue to let people in after the door has been shut? Is there an urgency to respond to God in this life? Why or why not?

“Which is stronger and more powerful, the hardness of the human heart or God’s unrelenting, infinite, expansive love? Thousands through the years have answered that question with the resounding response, ‘God’s love, of course.’ At the center of the Christian tradition since the first church have been a number who insist that history is not tragic, hell is not forever, and love, in the end, wins and all will be reconciled to God.

“…It’s important that we be honest about the fact that some stories are better than others. Telling a story in which billions of people spend forever somewhere in the universe trapped in a black hole of endless torment and misery with no way out isn’t a very good story. Telling a story about a God who inflicts unrelenting punishment on people because they didn’t do or say or believe the correct things in a brief window of time called life isn’t a very good story.

“In contrast, everybody enjoying God’s good world together with no disgrace or shame, justice being served, and all the wrongs made right is a better story. It is bigger, more loving, more expansive, more extraordinary, beautiful, and inspiring than any other story about the ultimate course history takes.” (pages 110-111)

• This section gives a glimpse into Rob Bell’s changing view of Scripture. I’ve attended his church for over twelve years. In the beginning he had a high view of the Bible as God’s inspired Word. More recently he has been viewing it as an ancient conversation with different, sometimes contradictory voices. He thinks that God’s revelation didn’t stop with the completed “canon” of Scripture but is still going on today. He teaches that we are part of the continuing conversation. So he doesn’t respond to “proof texts.” Rob is interested in what makes sense, what sounds right, and what makes the best story. Do you agree with Rob’s current view of the Bible? What implications does this have for how you would interpret and apply it to life today?

• If the Bible is the authoritative Word of God (as I believe it is) and it clearly warns of coming judgment and eternal punishment in hell for those who reject God’s gift of pardon (as you’ve seen that it does if you’ve read the verses cited in previous chapters), do you think it matters if we don’t like the story? Do we get to re-write the parts we don’t like in the Bible?

• The Apostle Paul is quite clear in 1 Thessalonians 1: 8-9. “He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.” Based on this passage and Romans 9:1-3, do you think Paul would have agreed with Rob’s desire for a better story? What about when he was sitting in a jail cell because people didn’t like his story? How do you think he would have responded to this section of Rob’s book?

“…We read in these last chapters of Revelation that the gates of the city in that new world will ‘never shut.’ That’s a small detail, and it’s important we don’t get too hung up on details…But gates…are for keeping people in and keeping people out. If the gates are never shut, then people are free to come and go. Can God bring proper, lasting justice, banishing certain actions – and the people who do them – from the new creation while at the same time allowing and waiting and hoping for the possibility of the reconciliation of those very same people? Keeping the gates, in essence, open? Will everyone eventually be reconciled to God or will there be those who cling to their version of their story, insisting on their right to be their own little god ruling their own little miserable kingdom?”

• Again, I’d like to let Dr. Ben Witherington address this section. “Towards the end of this chapter (pp. 112ff.) Rob points out that the book of Revelation doesn’t end with blood and violence. It ends with the picture in Rev. 21-22. True enough, but that new creation only emerges after the last judgment and the casting of demons, the Devil, the wicked into the lake of fire. You don’t get to Rev. 22 by bypassing Rev. 19-21. You have to go through that part of the story. The end of the chapter stresses that if we want heaven or hell, we can have it. God will allow us to have our freedom of choice, and some do and may well continue to choose evil rather than good, unto all eternity. It is statements like this that allow Rob to insist he isn’t a universalist. But Rob wants to leave the door open a crack, and so he draws attention to the fact that in the new Jerusalem the gates are always open. Now that imagery implies to Rob that there is still hope for the outsiders who have chosen darkness rather than light. The problem with that is not only texts like Rev. 21.8 and 22.14-15. The problem is that Rob ignores the verse that speaks of angels at the Twelve gates of the city— God’s bouncers, who will never allow the wicked in (check out the angel guarding the Garden of Eden post Fall). Indeed, the fate of the lost is said in Rev. 21.8 to be the second death in the lake of fire. We are not told the angels at the gates have fire extinguishers and will hose down the outsiders, so they can become holy and enter the city. Because, as John says—- you have to be holy, have to be set apart by and for God, to enter the city. In other words, the image of the open gates is a reassurance to John’s persecuted, prosecuted, and executed churches that there will be no more danger to them when they arrive at the crystal city. There will be no more night, no more deeds of darkness— they will be safe and secure in God’s arm forever. Revelation is the book of the martyrs and the imagery here is meant to reassure the martyrs they will not have to deal with their tormentors any more—- ever. It is not meant to encourage speculation about reversals in the afterlife.” (http://goo.gl/lQaoZ)

• We are a culture of second chances for politicians and sports stars. We all love the stories of people who make dramatic reversals in life. The Bible teaches that God will extend grace to anyone who comes to Him (see Ephesians 2:1-10). But it also teaches that when we die, there are no second chances (Luke 16:26). When faced with the realities of the afterlife, which would you prefer, the truth that makes you sad, or an untrue story that makes you feel better?

Chapter Three: Hell

“Trust God, accept Jesus, confess, repent, and everything will go well for you. But if you don’t, well, the Bible is quite clear… Sin, refuse to repent, harden your heart, reject Jesus, and when you die, it’s over. Or actually, the torture and anguish and eternal torment will have just begun. That’s how it is – because that’s what God is like, correct? God is loving and kind and full of grace and mercy – unless there isn’t confession and repentance and salvation in this lifetime, at which point God punishes us forever. That’s the Christian story, right? Is that what Jesus taught? To answer this question, I want to show you every single verse in the Bible in which we find the actual word ‘hell.’

“First, the Hebrew scriptures. There isn’t an exact word or concept in the Hebrew scriptures for hell other than a few words that refer to death and the grave. One of them is the Hebrew word ‘Sheol,’ a dark, mysterious, murky place people go when they die, as in Psalm 18: ‘The cords of Sheol entangled me’ (NRSV). There’s also mention of ‘the depths,’ as in Psalm 30: ‘I will exalt you, LORD, for you lifted me out of the depths;’ the ‘pit,’ as in Psalm 103: ‘The LORD…who redeems your life from the pit;’ and the ‘grave,’ as in Psalm 6: ‘Who praises you from the grave?’ There are a few references to the realm of the dead, as in Psalm 16: ‘My body also will rest secure, because you will not abandon me to the realm of the dead,’ but as far as meanings go, that’s the extent of what we find in the Hebrew scriptures. So what do we learn?

“First, we consistently find affirmations of the power of God over all of life and death, as in 1 Samuel 2: ‘The Lord brings death and makes alive; he brings down to the grave and raises up;’ and Deuteronomy 32: ‘There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life.’ We do find several affirmations of God’s presence and involvement in whatever happens after a person dies, although it’s fairly ambiguous at best as to just what exactly that looks like…Simply put, the Hebrew commentary on what happens after a person dies isn’t very articulated or defined. Sheol, death, and the grave in the consciousness of the Hebrew writers are all a bit vague and ‘underwordly.’ For whatever reasons, the precise details of who goes where, when, how, and with what, and for how long simply aren’t things the Hebrew writers were terribly concerned with.” (Pages 64-67)

·      Rob says the description of the afterlife in the Hebrew scriptures (the Old Testament) are “ambiguous at best.” Here are a few additional passages that don’t use the words heaven or hell but do seem to shed clear light on the afterlife:

According Daniel (12:1-3), at the end, “There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered. Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever.”

Job said, “I know that my redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand on the earth. And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God; I myself will see him with my own eyes—I, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!” Job 19:25-27

Isaiah writes, “As the new heavens and the new earth that I make will endure before me,” declares the LORD, “so will your name and descendants endure. From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, all mankind will come and bow down before me,” says the LORD. “And they will go out and look on the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; the worms that eat them will not die, the fire that burns them will not be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind.” Isaiah 66:22-24

Moses describes hell in Deuteronomy 32:22: “For a fire will be kindled by my wrath, one that burns down to the realm of the dead below.”

In Psalm 16:9-11 David writes, “Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices; my body also will rest secure, because you will not abandon me to the realm of the dead, nor will you let your faithful one see decay. You make known to me the path of life; you will fill me with joy in your presence, with eternal pleasures at your right hand.”

·      Based on the passages from the Hebrew scriptures, do you get a clear sense of what awaits people in the afterlife?

·      Rob says, “what happens after a person dies isn’t very articulated or defined” in the Old Testament.” If you were to explain what happens to a person after they die just based on these passages, what would you say?
 

“Next, then, the New Testament. The actual word ‘hell’ is used roughly twelve times in the New Testament, almost exclusively by Jesus himself. The Greek word that gets translated as ‘hell’ in English is the word ‘Gehenna.’ Ge means ‘valley,’ and henna means ‘Hinnom.’ Gehenna, the Valley of Hinnom, was an actual valley on the south and west side of the city of Jerusalem. Gehenna, in Jesus’s day, was the city dump. People tossed their garbage and waste into this valley. There was a fire there, burning constantly to consume the trash. Wild animals fought over the scaps of food along the edges of the heap. When they fought, their teeth would make a gnashing sound. Gehenna was the place with the gnasshing of teeth, where the fire never went out. Gehenna was an actual place that Jesus’s listeners would have been familiar with. So the next time someone asks you if you believe in an actual hell, you can always say, ‘Yes, I do believe that my garbage goes somewhere…’

“James uses the word ‘Gehenna’ once in his letter to refer to the power of the tongue (chap.3), but otherwise all of the mentions are from Jesus. Jesus says, in Matthew 5, ‘Anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell,’ and ‘It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.’ In Matthew 10 and Luke 12 he says, ‘Be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.’ and in Matthew 18 and Mark 9 he says, ‘It is better for you to enter life with one eye rather than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.’ In Matthew 23 he tells very committed religious leaders that they win converts and make them ‘twice as much a child of hell’ as they are, an then he asks them, ‘How will you escape being condemned to hell?’

“Gehenna, the town garbage pile. And that’s it. Those are all of the mentions of ‘hell’ in the Bible. There are two other words that occasionally mean something similar to hell. One is the word ‘Tartarus,’ which we find once in chapter 2 of Peter’s second letter. It’s a term Peter borrowed from Greek mythology, referring to the underworld, the place where the Greek demigods were judged in the ‘abyss.’ The other Greek word is ‘Hades.’ Obscure, dark, murky – Hades is essentially the Greek version of the Hebrew word ‘Sheol.’ We find the word ‘Hades’ in Revelation 1, 6, and 20 and in Acts 2, which is a quote from Psalm 16. Jesus uses the word in Matthew 11 and Luke 10: ‘You will go down to Hades;’ in Matthew 16: ‘The gates of Hades will not overcome it;’ and in the parable of the rich man and the beggar Lazarus in Luke 16. And that’s it. Anything you have ever heard people say about the actual word ‘hell’ in the Bible they got from those verses you just read.” (Pages 67-69)

·      This section of Rob’s book makes it sound like the Bible hardly speaks about hell and when it does it isn’t much more than a burning garbage dump. Actually, there are over 162 references in the New Testament that warn of Hell. Over 70 of these references are attributed to Jesus. According to the gospels, Jesus spoke more on Hell than on any other subject. Based on these statistics, do you think the topic of hell is of primary importance in the Bible?

·      Following are a few statements of Jesus made about hell:

o   “The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father.” (Matthew 13:41-43)

o   “If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.” (Matthew 18: 8-9)

o   “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” (Matthew 25: 41-46)

Based on these passages, do you Jesus gives a clear idea of what hell is? How would you describe it?

“For many in the modern world, the idea of hell is a holdover from primitive, mythic religion that uses fear and punishment to control people for all sorts of devious reasons. And so the logical conclusion is that we’ve evloved beyond all of that outdated belief, right? I get that. I understand that aversion, and I as well have a hard time believing that somewhere down below the earth’s crust is a really crafty figure in red tights holding a three-pointed spear, playing Pink Floyd records backward, and enjoying the hidden messages. So how should we think, or not think about hell?

·      Rob is having some fun with his description of Satan. How does the Bible actually describe him? (See Ezek. 28:13-17; 2 Corinthians 11:13-15; Revelation 12:9; 1 Peter 5:8).

From page 74 to 79, Rob refers to the following story Jesus told about hell:

·       “There was a certain rich man who clothed himself in purple and fine linen, and who feasted luxuriously every day. At his gate lay a certain poor man named Lazarus who was covered with sores. Lazarus longed to eat the crumbs that fell from the rich man’s table. Instead, dogs would come and lick his sores. The poor man died and was carried by angels to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. While being tormented in the place of the dead, he looked up and saw Abraham at a distance with Lazarus at his side. He shouted, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me. Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue because I’m suffering in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that during your lifetime you received good things whereas Lazarus received terrible things. Now Lazarus is being comforted and you are in great pain. Moreover, a great crevasse has been fixed between us and you. Those who wish to cross over from here to you cannot. Neither can anyone cross from there to us.’ The rich man said, ‘Then I beg you, Father, send Lazarus to my father’s house. I have five brothers. He needs to warn them so that they don’t come to this place of agony.’ Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets. They must listen to them.’ The rich man said, ‘No, Father Abraham! But if someone from the dead goes to them, they will change their hearts and lives.’ Abraham said, ‘If they don’t listen to Moses and the Prophets, then neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead.’” (Luke 16:19-31 CEB)

·      According to this story, do you think there is a place of torment that a person who is not ‘right with God’ will go to? Does it sound like a person can escape from this place of torment if they repent? In your opinion, should pastors and Bible teachers be “warn (people) so that they don’t come to this place of agony?”

·      Rob observes that those who are “most concerned about others going to hell when they die seem less concerned about the hells on earth right now, while the people most concerned with the hells on earth right now seem the least concerned about hell after death.” (Pages 78-79) While no one would deny the need to relieve the torment of people on earth, do you think it is still appropriate to warn people of a future tormet after death? Why or why not?

·      Rob continures, “What we see in Jesus’s story about the rich man and Lazarus is an affirmation that there are all kinds of hells, because there are all kinds of ways to resist and reject all that is good and true and beautiful and human now, in this life, and so we can only assume we can do the same in the next. There are individual hells, and communal, society-wide hells, and Jesus teaches us to take both seriously. There is hell now, and there is hell later, and Jesus teaches us to take both seriously.” (Page 79) After reading this story in the Bible, what do you think Jesus’s main point was?

“Now, on to the passages that seem to be talking about hell, but don’t mention it specifically. Let’s start with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the poster cities for deviant sinfulness run amok.” (page 83) Rob goes on to describe the severe judgment that resulted in total destruction of the two cities with fire and brimstone. “But that isn’t the last we read of Sodom and Gomorrah. The prophet Ezekiel had a series of visions in which God shows him what’s coming, including the promise that God will ‘restore the fortunes of Sodom and her daughters’ and they will ‘return to what they were before’ (chapter 16). Restore the fortunes of Sodom? The story isn’t over for Sodom and Gomorrah? What appeared to be a final, forever, smoldering, smoking verdict regarding their destiny…wasn’t” What appeared to be over, isn’t. Ezekiel says that where there was destruction there will be restoration. But that still isn’t the last we hear of these two cities. As Jesus travels from village to village in Galilee, calling people to see things in a whole new way, he encounters great resistance in some areas, especially among the more religious and devout. In Matthew 10, he warns the people living in the village of Capernaum, ‘it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for you.’ …There’s still hope? And if there’s still hope for Sodom and Gomorrah, what does that say about all of the other Sodoms and Gomorrahs?” (Pages 83-85)

·      Another pastor and author, Kevin DeYoung, writes, “In one place, Bell argues from Ezekiel 16 that because the fortunes of Sodom will be restored (Ezek. 16:53), this suggests that the forever destiny of others might end in restoration (page 84). But it should be obvious that the restoration of Sodom in Ezekiel is about the city, not about the individual inhabitants of the town who were already judged in Genesis 19. The people condemned by sulfur and fire 1,500 years earlier were not getting a second lease on postmortem life. The current city would be restored. And besides, the whole point of Sodom’s restoration is to shame wicked Samaria (Ezek. 16:54) so that they might bear the penalty of their lewdness and abominations (Ezek. 16:58). This hardly fits with Bell’s view of God and judgment. If that weren’t bad enough, the other discussion on Sodom is even worse. Because Jesus says it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for Capernaum (Matt. 11:23–24), Bell concludes that there is hope for all the other Sodoms and Gomorrahs (85). Bell takes a passage about judgment—judgment that will be so bad for Capernaum it’s even worse than God’s judgment on Sodom—and turns it into tacit support for ultimate universalism. Jesus’ warning says nothing about new hope for Sodom. It says everything about the hopelessness of unbelieving Capernaum.”

·      After reading the passages in Ezekiel 16 and Matthew 11, do you think they express hope for second chances? Why or why not?

“This story, the one about Sodom and Gomorrah, isn’t the only place we find this movement from judgment to restoration, from punishment to new life. (Page 85) Rob points to Jeremiah 32 and 5 to show that “God crushes, refines, tests, corrects, chastens, and rebukes – but always with a purpose. No matter how painful, brutal, oppressive, no matter how far people find themselves from home because of their sin, indifferece, and rejection, there’s always the assurance that it won’t be this way forever.” Rob cites a number of Bible passages about restoration (Pages 86-87) and then concludes, “I realize that’s a lot of Bible verses, but I list them simply to show how dominant a theme restoration is in the Hebrew scriptures. It comes up again and again and again. Sins trodden underfoot, iniquities hurled into the depths of the sea. God always has an intention. Healing. Redemption. Love. Bringing people home and rejoicing over them with singing… Failure, we see again and again, isn’t final, judgment has a point, and consequences are for correction.

“We see this same impulse in the story Jesus tells in Matthew 25 about the sheep and goats being judged and separated. The sheep are sent to one place, while the goats go to another place because of their failure to see Jesus in the hungry and thirsty and naked. The goats are sent, in the Greek language, to an anion of kolazo. Aion, we know, has several meanings. One is ‘age’ or ‘period of time;’ another refers to intensity of experience. The word kolazo is a term from horticulture. It refers to the pruning and trimming of the branches of a plant so it can flourish. An aion of kolazo. Depending on how you translate aion and kolazo, then, the phrase can mean ‘a period of pruning’ or ‘a time of trimming,’ or an intense experience of correction. In a good number of English translations of the Bible, the phrase ‘aion of kolazo’ gets translated as ‘eternal punishment,’ which many read to mean ‘punishment forever,’ as in never going to end. But ‘forever’ is not really a category the biblical writers used.

“The closest the Hebrew writers come to a word for ‘forever’ is the word olam. Olam can be translated as ‘to the vanishing point, in the far distance, a long time, long lasting, or that which is at or beyond the horizon.’ When olam refers to God as in Psalm 90 (‘from everlasting to everlasting you are God’), it’s much closer to the word ‘forever’ as we think of it, time without beginning or end. But then in the other passages, when it’s not describing God, it has very different meanings, as when Jonah prays to God, who let him go down into the belly of a fish ‘forever’ (olam) and then, three days later, brought him out of the belling of the fish. Olam, in this instance, turns out to be three days. It’s a versatile, pliable word, in most occurrences referring to a particular period of time.

“So when we read ‘eternal punishment,’ it’s important that we don’t read categories and concepts into a phrase that aren’t there. Jesus isn’t talking about forever as we think of forever. jesus may be talking about something else, which has all sorts of implications for our understandings of what happens after we die, which we’ll spend the next chapter sorting through. To summarize, then, we need a loaded, volatile, adequately violent, dramatic, serious word to describe the very real consequences we experience when we reject the good and gtrue and beautiful life that God has for us. We need a word that refers to the big, wide, terrible evil that comes from the secrets hidden deep within our hearts all the way to the massive, society-wide collapse and chaos that come when we fail to live in God’s world God’s way. And for that, the word ‘hell’ works quite well. Let’s keep it.” (Pages 85-93)

·      Rob is revisiting some of the same discussion of original languages. I’m not an expert in the original languages of the Bible, so for this section, I’ll cite again the comments made by Dr. Jim Samra, the pastor of Calvary Church in Grand Rapids, MI. “A central point Rob makes throughout the book centers on what he identifies as the Greek word aion. He writes that the word can mean “age” (which is true), but implies that aion cannot mean “forever” as in the sense of eternity. However, more than 50 times in the New Testament, an throughout ancient Greek literature, aion does refer to “a time to come of which, if there is no end, is known as eternity” according to the standard Greek lexicon in use today (known by the initials BDAG).

Also, Rob seems to confuse aion with a different, though related Greek word, aionios. Although they look similar, aion is a noun and aionios is an adjective. This makes quite a difference. For example, in English we could say of someone, ‘it seems like he’s been a pastor for an eternity.’ But we would never say ‘it seems like that pastor is eternal.’ The same is true in Greek. While the noun aion can refer to a fixed period of time, aionios is never used that way in all the New Testament. Aionios always means ‘unending’ or ‘without duration’ (from BDAG). So English translations are right to use the words ‘eternal life’ because the word is aionios, not aion, as Rob would have us believe.

“Rob’s confusion of these two different words contributes to an unusual interpretation of Matthew 25:46 in the third chapter (of Love Wins). In the passage about the sheep and the goats, Rob tells us the goats are sent to ‘an aion of kolazo.’ By saying it in this way, Rob is claiming that Matthew uses the word aion in this passage. He does not. Matthew uses aionios. Compounding the confusion, Rob writes kolazo (which is a verb) instead of kolasis (which is the noun that Matthew actually uses). Rob implies that this word is in the genitive case. It is not.

“So, when Rob tries to tell us that Matthew wrote ‘an aion of kolazo,’ which might mean ‘an age of pruning,’ he has not correctly told us what Matthew wrote in the Greek. What Matthew actually wrote is ‘into aionios kolasis,’ which cannot mean an age of pruning’ but ‘eternal punishment.’ The reason why no English translation has ‘an age of pruning’ is not because the translators didn’t know what they were doing. It is because this is not what the Greek text actually says. Even a non-Greek reader can figure out that Matthew cannot be talking about ‘an age of pruning’ in this lifetime because five verses earlier Jesus says to the same people, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire (aionios pur) prepared for the devil and his angels.’ Matthew 25:46 cannot be referring to something that is currently happening, ‘hell now,’ even if Rob was reading the Greek correctly, because the devil and his angels are not experiencing eternal fire during this age. This is a significant problem in Love Wins. Rob makes authoritative statements and tries to use Greek to support his ideas; however, I found his use of Greek to be dangerously misleading.”

·      Apparently Rob’s use of the Greek to support his view is not consistent with the views of most Bible translation scholars. When authors or pastors tell us that the words in our Bible are not accurately translated from the original languages, it always raises a question in my mind. Who should we trust, a group of translation scholars who have devoted their lives to understanding original languages, or a pastor who has spent a few years in seminary? The fact that all of the English translations of the Bible translate the word “Aion” as “eternal” makes me think it must be the more accurate meaning. Do you agree? Why or why not?

·      Rob is building toward one of his primary points in Love Wins, that God’s punishment of humans is always with the intention of restoration and that, therefore, hell is not forever. He wants us to think about the word hell as a description of the consequences people receive for actions on this earth and as a temporary punishment with the view toward repentance and restoration. Are you following his logic? Do you agree with his conclusions? Why or why not?

Chapter One: What about the flat tire?

“Several years ago we had an art show at our church. I had been giving a series of teachings on peacemaking and we invited artists to display their paintings, poems, and sculptures that reflected their understanding of what it means to be a peacemaker. One woman included in her work a quote from Mahatma Gandhi, which a number of people found quite compelling. But not everyone. Someone attached a piece of paper to it. On the piece of paper was written: ‘Reality check: He’s in hell.’ Really? Ghandhi’s in hell? He is? We have confirmation of this? Somebody knows this? Without a doubt? And that somebody decided to take on the responsibility of letting the rest of us know?” (page 1-2)

·      Gandhi was born a Hindu and practiced Hinduism all his life. As a common Hindu, he believed all religions to be equal, and rejected all efforts to convert him to a different faith. He was an avid theologian and read extensively about all major religions. He once said, “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Later in his life, when he was asked whether he was a Hindu, he replied, "Yes I am. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew." Based on what we know of Gandhi’s life, do you think we can we determine his eternal destiny? How would you respond to the person who wrote the note?

·      Many people criticized Rob Bell, even before his book was released, due to a video based on this statement about Gandhi. They called him a “universalist” – a person who believes that all people will be eventually saved. Rob denies this and claims that his views are within orthodox Christianity. After reading “Love Wins,” in your opinion is Rob teaching universalism? Why or why not?

·      When Jesus’s disciple, Thomas, asked about the way to heaven, he answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6) In a message preached after Jesus’ resurrection, the Apostle Peter said, “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12) Based on these verses, what do you think of the Universalist’s claim that all people will be saved?

“Of all the billions of people who have ever lived, will only a select number ‘make it to a better place’ and every single other person suffer in torment and punishment forever? Is this acceptable to God? Has God created millions of people over tens of thousands of years who are going to spend eternity in anguish? Can God do this, or even allow this, and still claim to be a loving God? Does God punish people for thousands of years with infinite, eternal torment for things they did in their few finite years of life?” (page 2)

·      The Population Reference Bureau estimates that 106,456,367,669 have lived on the earth since the beginning of time (http://goo.gl/K9V3). How do you respond to Rob’s questions? Do you think only a “select number” will be in heaven? Will most spend eternity in anguish?

·      Jesus said, ““Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.” (Matthew 7:13-14) But in Revelation 7:9-10, the Apostle John writes, “After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb.” How do you reconcile these two extremes – that only a few find the narrow road to heaven and yet a great multitude is there at the end?

·      The Apostle Paul wrote, “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” (Romans 1:18-20) Based on this passage, do you think God is unfair to judge those who reject the “light” or understanding of God they have through creation?

·      The Apostle Paul continues, “When Gentiles (non-Jews, pagans), who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them. This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.” Apparently another aspect of God’s judgment is based on how people respond to their conscience, which is God’s law written on their hearts. If a person who has never heard the story of the Bible obeys this “inner voice,” do you think they will be okay when “God judges people’s secrets?” Why or why not?

·      To religious Jews, Paul writes, “Do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance? But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. God ‘will repay each person according to what they have done.’” (Romans 2:4-6) Do you think God is unfair in judging humans for their behavior? Think about Hitler and others throughout history who have severely violated what our consciences tell us is right. Do you think it is just for God to punish them? Is it fair for all people to be punished for their actions? Why or why not?

·      “Retributive justice” is the theory that the punishment should fit the crime. Do you think it is unfair for a person to suffer for eternity for sins they have committed during their relatively short lifetime? Is the amount of time the issue or is it the seriousness of the offense? Do you think a crime against God is in a different category than the crimes we commit against other humans? (See http://goo.gl/Z7p8Y for a perspective on this topic.)

“If there are only a select few who go to heaven, which is more terrifying to fathom: the billions who burn forever or the few who escape this fate? How does a person end up being one of the few? Chance? Luck? Random selection? Being born in the right place, family, or country? Having a youth pastor who ‘relates better with the kids?’ God choosing you instead of others? What kind of faith is that? Or more important: What kind of God is that?”

·      Based on these and other questions in the book, do you think Rob finds the biblical teaching of hell incompatible with our human concepts of justice and understanding of what it means to be loving? If so, what do you think his primary basis for questioning it is?

·      Rob isn’t the only person who has struggled with God’s justice. God told Abraham, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.” Abraham’s nephew, Lot, and his family lived there, so Abraham said, “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Genesis 18: 20-21, 23-25) How does this story end? (See Genesis 19:1-29) What does this story tell us about God as the judge? Was it unfair of God to allow a few to escape (Lot and his daughters)? Do you believe “the Judge of all the earth” will do right? Why or why not?

·      Paul writes, “Let God be true, and every human being a liar. As it is written: “So that you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge.” But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world?” (Romans 3:3-6) What gives God the “right” to judge the human race?

·      Rob asks what the criteria is for God’s selection of some to be saved and other to be damned. Jesus said, “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” (Matthew 25:31-33, 41,46) When you read this entire passage, you’ll see that this separation is based on people’s actions. The Bible teaches that we are saved by faith (Romans 3:21-31) but that true faith shows itself by actions (James 2:14-26). Based on this passage, do you think God’s selection is “random” or unfair? Why or why not?

“Some Christians believe that up to a certain age children aren’t held accountable for what they believe or who they believe in, so if they die during those years, they go to be with God. But then when they reach a certain age, they become accountable for their beliefs, and if they die, they go to be with God only if they have said or done or believed the ‘right’ things. Among those who believe this, this age of accountability is generally considered to be sometime around the age of twelve. This belief raises a number of issues, one of them being the risk each new life faces. If every new baby being born could grow up to not believe the right things and go to hell forever, then prematurely terminating a child’s life anytime from conception to twelve years of age would actually be the loving thing to do, guaranteeing that the child ends up in heaven, and not hell, forever. Why run the risk?” (page 4)

·      First question, is there a biblical basis for the belief that children go to heaven if they die before the age of twelve? Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.” (Luke 18:16) Another passage that  supports this idea is 2 Samuel 12:22-23. When David’s child died, he said, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept. I thought, ‘Who knows? The LORD may be gracious to me and let the child live.’ But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.” Since we know that David is in heaven, it makes sense to assume that his child is there too. Another passage is 1 Corinthians 7:14. Paul is writing to encourage Christians to stay with their unbelieving spouse. “For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.” (See also Deuteronomy 1:39.) Do you believe that children go to heaven if they die before they are old enough to understand the gospel? Why or why not?

·      Rob says that, given the horror of eternity in hell, you could build the case that it would be better to terminate a child’s life before they become old enough to understand the gospel than risk their rejection of Christ and eternal judgment. How do you respond to the idea of killing children to save them from hell? In your opinion, what are the flawed assumptions in this argument? In your opinion, what is Rob’s reason for bringing up this “thorny” emotional issue?

One of the primary questions Rob asks in Love Wins is about the basis for salvation. He tells the story of a atheist high school student who was killed in a car accident (page 3). He writes, “And that raises another question about this high school student’s death… what exactly would have to happen in that three-year window (between the age of accountability and his accident) to change his future? Would he have had to perform a specific rite or ritual? Or take a class? Or be baptized? Or join a church? Or have something happen somewhere in his heart? Some believe he would have had to say a specific prayer. Christians don’t agree on exactly what this prayer is, but for many the essential idea is that the only way to get into heaven is to pray at some point in your life, asking God to forgive you and telling God that you accept Jesus, you believe Jesus died on the cross to pay the price for your sins, and you want to go to heaven when you die. Some call this ‘accepting Christ,’ other call it the ‘sinner’s prayer,’ and still others call it ‘getting saved,’ being ‘born again,’ or being ‘converted.’” (page 4-5)

Rob returns to this question again on pages 10 through 18. “Is it what you say, or who you are, or what you do, or what you say you’re going to do, or who your friends are, or who you’re married to, or whether you give birth to children? Or is it what questions you’re asked? Or is it what questions you ask in return? Or is it whether you do what you’re told and go into the city?” (page 16-17)

·      Since our eternal future is at stake, doesn’t it seem that the Bible would be very clear about how a person can be saved from God’s judgment? The Apostle John writes, “And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.” (1 John 5:11-13) Based on this passage, how can a person “know that they have eternal life?”

·      Paul expressed it this way: "If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation." (Romans 10:9-10) Many of the other things Rob mentions in the book are outward indications that a person has “confessed Jesus as Lord” – not the way to receive salvation. Later in Ephesians 2:8-9, Paul clarifies this issue, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.” Do you think Paul makes the way of salvation clear? How would you explain it in your own words?

·      When Nicodemus asked Jesus how a person could be enter God’s kingdom, Jesus replied, “You are Israel’s teacher and do you not understand these things?” (John 3: 10) Then he explains it: For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.” (John 3:16-18) Later, in a different passage he adds, “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.” (John 5:24) There are many other similar passages in the Bible about the way of salvation. Why do you think Rob is making it seem unclear? In your opinion, how is his argument in this book served by the assumption that the way of salvation is confusing?

“If the message of Jesus is that God is offering the free gift of eternal life through him – a gift we cannot earn by our own efforts, works, or good deeds – and all we have to do is accept and confess and believe, aren’t those verbs? And aren’t verbs actions? Accepting, confessing, believing – those are things we do. Does that mean, then, that going to heaven is dependent on something I do? How is any of that grace? How is that a gift? How is that good news? Isn’t that what Christians have always claimed set their religion apart – that it wasn’t, in the end, a religion at all – that you don’t have to do anything, because God has already done it through Jesus?” (page 11)

·      The Apostle Paul wrote, “We maintain that a person is justified (declared righteous) by faith apart from the works of the law.” (Romans 2:28) “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.” (Romans 3:23-24) Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.” (Romans 4:4-5) Paul contrasts salvation by faith and salvation by “the works of the law.” Do you think Rob is implying that the process of faith – the repentance of sin, acceptance of Christ as our Savior, and confession of our faith to others – is a “work” and therefore negates the idea that it is a gift based on the grace of God? If so, do you agree? Why or why not?

“One way to respond to these questions is with the clear, helpful answer: all that matters is how you respond to Jesus. And that answer totally resonates with me; it is about how you respond to Jesus. But it raises another important question: Which Jesus?” Rob tells about Renee Altson’s experience with an abusive father who raped her while reciting the Lord’s Prayer. And of a Muslim who won’t go to Mars Hill Bible Church because he had seen “Christians” murder Muslims. And the televangelists who portray Jesus as “anti-science, anti-gay, standing out on the sidewalk with his bullhorn, telling people that they’re going to burn for ever.” He goes on to say, “Do you know any individuals who grew up in a Christian church and then walked away when they got older? Often pastors and parents and brothers and sisters are concerned about them and their spirituality – and often they should be. But sometimes those individuals’ rejection of church and the Christian faith they were presented with as the only possible interpretation of what it means to follow Jesus may in fact be a sign of spiritual health. They may be resisting behaviors, interpretations, and attitudes that should be rejected. Perhaps they simply came to a point where they refused to accept the very sorts of things that Jesus would refuse to accept. Some Jesuses should be rejected.” (pages 6-8)

·      According to Jesus, one of the signs of the end of the world is an increase of “false prophets.” (Matthew 24:11, 24) Paul also warns us about Christian imposters. “For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.” (2 Corinthians 11: 13-15) Can you think of example of people or organizations that say they represent Jesus but don’t speak or act in a Christ-like way?

·      The Apostle Paul wrote about his own ministry, “Therefore, since through God’s mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart. Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.” (2 Corinthians 4:1-2. How can you tell if someone is misrepresenting Jesus or his message? (See also  Matthew 7:15-20, Luke 6:26, and John 10:11-13.)

“Many would respond to the question, ‘Which Jesus?’ by saying that we have to trust that God will bring those who authentically represent the real Jesus into people’s lives to show them the transforming truths of Jesus’ life and message. A passage from Romans 10 is often quoted to explain this trust: ‘How can they hear without someone preaching to them?’ And I wholeheartedly agree, but that raises another question. If our salvation, our future, our destiny is dependent on others bringing the message to us, teaching us, showing us – what happens if they don’t do their part? What if the missionary gets a flat tire? This raises another, far more disturbing question: Is your future in someone else’s hands? Which raises another question: Is someone else’s eternity resting in your hands? So it is not only that a person has to respond, pray, accept, believe, trust, confess, and do – but also that someone else has to act, teach, travel, organize, fundraise, and build so that the person can know what to respond, pray, accept, believe, trust, confess, and do? At this point some would step in and remind us in the midst of all of these questions that it’s not that complicated, and we have to remember that God has lots of ways of communicating apart from people speaking to each other face to face…” (pages 9-10)

·      This section is the basis of the title of chapter one, “What about the flat tire?” Basically Rob is asking if we can trust God to get the message of the gospel to people in danger of eternal judgment. Aren’t the stakes too high to rely on humans who are easily confused, distracted, and can be delayed by something like a flat tire? What do you think about this issue? As you think about the bigger message of the book, why do you think Rob is raising this issue?

·      Rob quotes from Romans 10. The entire passage reads, “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news! But I ask: Did they not hear? Of course they did: ‘Their voice has gone out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.’” (Romans 10: 14-15,18) Paul is saying that God is allowing humans to be part of preaching the message, but in verse 18, he makes it clear that this isn’t God’s only method. He quotes from Psalm 19 where David writes, “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. Yet their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.” (Psalm 19:1-4) Based on this, do you think God has other ways of getting his message to everyone around the world? What are some examples of the way God speaks without using humans?

·      Before Jesus left this earth, he said to his disciples, ““All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (Matthew 28:18-20) Statisticians say that there are about 2.1 billion Christians in the world today – about one-third of the world’s population. Most people have a Bible in their own language. There are over 1.3 million full-time missionaries. Do you think the church has been an effective witness? In what ways could we improve as God’s messengers? What are you doing personally to make sure the gospel message is delivered to this generation?

·      Jesus said, “My Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.” (John 6:40)