Rob Bell, "Love Wins," and the Universalist

Let me start out by saying that I have not read Rob Bell's book "Love Wins." Let me also say that it is my intention to read Rob Bell's book "Love Wins." I have, however, been reading a lot of articles about Rob Bell and his recent book in which he argues against the existence of a hell, stating basically that the idea of a loving, caring, Father God, precludes the idea that a place of eternal punishment exists. For a good explanation of Bell's book, see the blogs at the end of my article. Many are crying that Rob Bell is a heretic, that he is a universalist, and that he needs to be excommunicated from the Church. Those who argue for excommunication apparently do not realize Bell is not a Catholic and therefore cannot be excommunicated. Bell denies being a universalist (the belief that all dogs, and all people, go to heaven regardless of their religion). Whether his argument implies universalism or not, I cannot say, only Bell can. And if he denies being a universalist, I have to accept him for his word. He is probably like me in saying that we really cannot say who God does and does not save. That he is a heretic, is what I here plan on disproving.
Bell is doing what more Christians need to do, he is emphasizing love over hate, grace over judgment. Bell believes that the idea of God's unconditional love contradicts the kind of hell we have come to believe in, a place of eternal, never ending punishment for those who deny Christ. How can an all-loving, merciful God send anyone to such a place? How can a Father do such a thing to His child? What if someone never had the opportunity to hear about Jesus? Do they go to hell? What if someone was horribly abused by a Christian who claimed to be abusing in the name of Christ? Does such a person go to hell? If we can argue that hell does not exist, the problem goes away.
We also have the problem of many evangelicals going around and using hell as a motivator to join the Body of Christ. "If you do not believe in Jesus, you're going to hell," they say. "If you continue in your sin, you won't make it into heaven, but will be punished forever, others say." Jesus says, "love your neighbor as yourself." God says, "I desire that all will be saved." Paul says, "there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." So as you can see, our current language does not match up with the love language of Scripture. If we can disprove the existence of hell, then maybe we can get Christians to stop abusing hell for their own gain. When Jesus spoke, love was always his first and foremost concern. The biggest thing Jesus wanted his followers to understand was the importance of showing love and compassion towards others, not hate. What is happening today, however, is that love has been placed in the background so a message of hellfire and brimstone can scare people into becoming Christians. I've said it once and I'll say it again, when Jesus spoke to people, it was out of love and concern for them, not so he could convince them to follow him. If Jesus left an encounter and the person did not want to follow Jesus, or believe in him, that was ok with Jesus. Their freedom was more important to Jesus than getting them "saved."
So what about hell? What are we to believe? Certainly the bible speaks of such a place, doesn't it? There is the parable of Lazarus and the rich man in which, upon dying, the rich man sees Lazarus across a vast space and resting in Abraham's bosom. The rich man is obviously suffering and Lazarus is obviously in bliss. Jesus speaks of a place where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. And of course there is the imagery in the Revelation. So what are we to think? Let me first say that in the Old Testament, there is no talk of hell. There is talk of "Sheol" which just means the grave and was not a location of the afterlife. There is talk of "Abaddon" which can be interpreted in multiple ways, and is traditionally interpreted as a place of suffering, but without necessary connection to the afterlife. So, the idea of hell (as well as the Devil) was a much later idea and did not start developing until the Jews were exiled in Babylon where they were influenced by the pagan beliefs.
Later on we have 7 passages where Jesus speaks of the children of the Kingdom being exiled to a place where there will be "weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 8:11-12; 13:41-42, 49-50; 22:12-13; 24:50-51; 25:29-30; and Luke 13:27-28). First, let me point out that none of these passages refers to this place as being eternal. So, whatever this place may be, it may simply be a temporary thing. One of the problems with the idea of a place of eternal punishment is that punishment is a corrective thing. What is the point of correcting someone, if there is no chance to be restored. When a parent punishes their child, the intention is to correct a behavior so they no longer behave in that way. It seems to me that eternal "punishment," therefore, cannot truly serve its purpose and is just cruel. What we know about God is that is not a God of cruelty, but a God of love. If God is love, how can He eternally punish someone. Perhaps, then, this place of weeping and gnashing of teeth is a temporary place to punish person, making them ready for heaven. From my studies, I have not yet found a reference to this place we call hell, being eternal. And Jesus does not use this language to scare just anyone. Again, if you look carefully, these speeches are directed at those who should know better, the religious authorities of Israel. Those were the people Jesus was always fighting with, those were the people that were oppressive and misused the Word of God. These verses are directed at those who should know better than to teach and preach what they are teaching and preaching.
Finally, let me direct you to Jesus' actions. His actions were far from condemning of people. Jesus showed nothing but grace and love to others. A good example of this was to the Roman centurion who asked Jesus to heal his servant who was deathly sick. Jesus immediately obliged and even attempted to go with the centurion to help him. He declined having Jesus come into his home because he felt unworthy. Instead he told Jesus that he knew he could heal the servant without setting foot in the home. Jesus said this Roman had a stronger faith than any he had ever known, even within Israel. What is remarkable about this story is that this Roman centurion, would have been a follower of Mithras, a pagan god. He wasn't even a Jew, let alone a follower of Jesus. And yet this man had more faith than Jesus had ever seen. Who are we, as Christians, to say who can and cannot be saved, who goes to hell and who does not? If God desires all to be saved, if God wants none to suffer, why is it so bad saying that either there is no hell and those who do not want to spend eternity with God simply cease to exist, or to say that hell is a place of temporary punishment to prepare the worst of sinners to see God face to face. What is most important is that we stop using hell as a scare tactic and start showing the kind of love for others Jesus has for them. My prayer is that everyone I encounter may know the love of Christ from being with me.
Blessings,
-Brandon

Is Bell Into Hell, a Review of "Love Wins"
The Rob Bell Controversy: Does Anyone Go To Hell?
The Heretical Rob Bell and Why Love Wins