Heaven, Hell and the fate of everyones earthly life if you miss the point.


So Rob Bell writes a book, loads of people attack him, another load of people attack the people attacking him, then another load of people choose to join in on the side of which they are most comfortable; and then a smaller group of people sit in the middle of the two camps and try to draw on the different points being made by the different camps of thought, whilst trying to remind the people in the camps that whether you agree or not with the different thoughts, disagree in love (I love these people so much, because of them we are avoiding some pointless divisions based of theological preference).

On ‘Love Wins’ and the ‘responses’
I’ve read the book, I don’t agree with everything written. I’ve read the arguments for and against, I don’t agree with everything written. However I must admit I am drawn to support team ‘Bell’ more then team ‘Hell’ (see what I did there?). Not on the basis of what is being said by that camp, but on the way in which it is being said. It would seem that the biggest issue of the people against Bell, is based around the fact that without Medieval interpretation on Hell there is nothing to fear. I may be wrong here, but the responses to Bell seem to be so focused around the need to keep an image of Hell that is fire filled and full of suffering in a human understanding of the word, for the ‘naughty people’ who don’t say ‘I accept Jesus into my heart’, come to church and tithe etc. What would we do if we couldn’t scare people to love God?!

I joke. sort of. The problem is both camps use the bible, both think the bible has all the answers (to varying degrees) yet they don’t agree. I wonder if this is what happens when we forget the Bible is a book of God’s interaction with HUMAN people, whom are trying to interpret the ‘unfathomable creator’ to the creation. Here I would like to point to revelation where John is basically struggling to describe what he sees… Maybe the answers we are looking for on Hell, are not as important as the mission that God, in my opinion, is calling us into.

Whats really important?
So Hell, eternal (literal medieval, dante stuff) or not (literal Gehenna), there is a choice. To step into the story of God in which we were created for, which is about the way we live and the way we speak and most importantly the way we love, or to reject it which is to live in Hell, now and until who knows (because we don’t fully know, sort of like a cloudy picture in a mirror…hmm I’ve heard that before). And as Bell says:

‘We are free to resist, reject, and rebel against God’s ways for us. We can have all the hell we want’

So what should we really focus on?
Good question. How about following Jesus. Living a life in which all our ways reflect Jesus to the best of our abilities. Speaking truth over people. That God is Love, that God wants to spend this life and forever with us, bringing out of us the potential He put in us, and that we can reject it, but we will regret it, because this God made us and our very being is from him, to reject it is to reject life.

Does that sound ok? I think that if we (regardless of what camp we sit in) would just focus on the above, maybe the world wouldn’t see such an ‘ugly bride’, but the Church of Jesus. I often think we like to talk about this stuff more then do it and it often feels like people talk about it instead of doing it. The Church is Gods best plan for the world. 2 Billion people claim to follow Jesus in this world. Thats 1/3 of the world. 1/3 of the world believes Jesus is the answer to all that is wrong in the world; like poverty, like injustice, like rape, like cheating, like unethical banking, like debt, like abuse, like living for money, like consumerism, like dodgy politics, like selfish gain….thats just a rant list, you know all the rest. There is 1/3 of the world’s population, who if they really practiced what they preached, we would see more then a few charities doing good, we would see every person get the chance to have the best life God wants to give us all, BECAUSE the CHURCH would not spend so much time huddled in the changing rooms chatting about it.

I know this isn’t easy and I fail at this because I am selfish, I am lazy, I like the easy way, but thats not what we are called to, we are called to carry our cross, which I would argue isn’t just our failures, its the failures we see and can change. I want to take this challenge seriously and although it is hard, it is our role on earth. Not to scare people away from Hell but invite them into the life of Heaven, through our actions and then words, through seeking where the spirit is at work and stepping into it.


So if you disagree, bless you and I want to say I love you anyway and I will encourage you to use whatever understanding you have of Heaven and Hell etc, to love this world into the new one, the revelation 21 stuff!



Blogging, how I fail at it and those that do not…

I’m not going to lie, I ain’t to0 good at the blogging thing…

Going by the blogs I dip into, it would seem, that to be a good blogger you must commit to at least one blogging session a week. It is fundamental to have a blogtastic timeout in the week to share with the world all the important things you are currently thinking about. Using this as a template…I am a pretty crap blogger.

I am joking of course, blogging shouldn’t be become a job – unless it is a job. Blogging is about expressing yourself, your thoughts when you want to, not because you have to! But as I haven’t written a blog in ages, I thought I would drop you some links of people I have been following (not literally) so that you too can enjoy their musings like I have. So here’s a few:
Continue reading

Lunch time snack – Pete Rollins

Hi Friends,

A good mate of mine posted this video on his facebook account and I wanted to share it all with you as I have a lot of time for this philosopher and enjoy his books. So if you have a break, have a watch and have a think.

Pete Rollins at Calvin College

I welcome your comments but please be integral 🙂

‘Absolutism (the idea that something has all the answers) and Relativism (all answers are valid) have one thing in common. They stop us thinking for ourselves’ Rollins

A ‘not to bad a read’ Book – The Case for the REAL JESUS

So who is this Jesus then?
Is he a softy, a nice guy, a buddy, a bully, a racist, White, Black, Asian, Hispanic… Is he on my side, or holding a knife to my back?Is he the guy from the bible or whatever I want him to be??

The Journey
A couple of the young people and I decided to venture into this challenging question and to do it with some confidence we read through a book together that actually turned out to be really helpful for them…and even me. Now we have finished it and although, no scrap that, BECAUSE I don’t agree with everything in the book I thought I’d offer it out to you all to have a read yourselves and chew on!

Here are some good quotes

On the Gnostics (like Gospel of Thomas)‘The new portrait of Gnosticism is profoundly attractive for modern seekers, that large constituency interested in spirituality without the trappings of organized religion or dogma.’ p.30

On the Gospels”They’re early enough, they’re rooted into the right streams that go back to Jesus and the original people, there’s continuity, there’s proximity, there’s verification of certain distinct documents with archaeology and other documents, and then there’s the inner logic. That’s what pulls it all together.” p.39

”For us to come along and say, ‘Unless we can explain it scientifically, metaphysically, and philosophically, we should just reject it,’ is high-handed arrogance.” p.39

On true definition of Inerrancy and Infallibility of the Bible ‘Inerrancy: The Bible is true in what it touches. Infallibility: The Bible is true in what it teaches.’ p.51

On the reliability of the Disciples ‘They didn’t willfully lie about this. Liars make poor martyrs.’ p.87

On the resurrection – “even the atheist Gerd Ludemann conceded: ‘it may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ’…” p.87

On reliability of a genuine resurrection ‘…the idea that the disciples stole the body is a lame explanation. Are we supposed to believe they conspired to steal the body, pulled it off, and then were willing to suffer continuously and even die for what they knew was a lie? That’s such an absurd idea that scholars universally reject it today.’ p.92

On historical views of Jesus ‘…If for no other reason than the books late dating. Scholars quibble over a difference of just a few years in the dating of the New Testament, whereas the Qur’an didn’t come until six centuries after the life of Christ.’ p.98

On Jewish perspectives of Jesus – ‘So Jesus was like a walking Shekinah?’ p.145

On Evangelical Christianity – ‘Many Christians today, especially evangelicals, don’t have a sense of history. They’ll quote Martin Luther left and right, but they won’t talk about the horrific things he wrote that Adolph Hitler adopted, like when Luther recommended, among other things, that synagogues be burned, Jewish homes destroyed, and rabbis forbidden to teach under the threat of death.’ p.163

on Postmodern thinking – ‘Relativism falls apart logically when you examine it. As a worldview, it simply doesn’t work.’…”For instance, relativists believe that relativism is true not just for them but for every person. They believe that relativism applies to nonrelativists (‘true for you’), not just to themselves (‘true for me’). The relativists find themselves in a bind if we ask them, ‘Is relativism absolutely true for everyone?’ To be consistant, the relativist must say, ‘There is no reason to take seriously the claim that every belief is as good as every other belief, since this belief itself would be no better than any other.”‘ p.170

OK. Getting carried away now… Just check it out for yourself!