- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (2/28)
- Next Post »Biblical Intensive Counseling
At the Speed of the Web
- 02/28/11
- 24
Rob Bell may be a universalist. I don’t think this would prove surprising to too many people. Certainly his theological trajectory over the years has been concerning and it’s rare for a guy to suddenly and radically reverse that kind of a path.
Bell has a book coming out in the near future, one titled Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived. According to the publisher’s description, “Bell addresses one of the most controversial issues of faith--the afterlife--arguing that a loving God would never sentence human souls to eternal suffering. With searing insight, Bell puts hell on trial, and his message is decidedly optimistic--eternal life doesn't start when we die; it starts right now. And ultimately, Love Wins.” It needs to be noted that this kind of copy is typically written by the publisher rather than the author and that it is intended to sell the book rather than necessarily provide an accurate description of the book’s contents.
A few days ago a video appeared on YouTube and Vimeo and other sites. In that video Bell describes the topic of the book. Here it is: (people reading via RSS may need to click this link):
Over the weekend several bloggers wrote about this video: Josh Harris, Denny Burk, Kevin DeYoung, Justin Taylor, Phil Johnson, and Z among them. Some of those articles went viral, garnering thousands of comments between them, making a bit impact on Twitter, Facebook and other social media.
I am not going to comment on whether or not Bell is a universalist. To be honest, at this point I think it is a little bit too early to make that determination. I watch the video and read the marketing copy and think that it shows a very deliberate vagueness that is meant to raise questions but not answer questions, that is meant to generate controversy and sell books. And so far it’s succeeding admirably. My guess is that in the end Bell will take a vague universalist position—not outright universalism but still something that is still clearly unorthodox (as Brian McLaren did in his earlier days before he got into the kind of outright denial that has been the core of his more recent books).
My interest at this point is less in what Bell believes and what his book is going to say—that will be clear in March when the book begins to hit store shelves—but in the speed at which information and opinions have been disseminated. As someone who has spent a lot of time thinking about digital technologies, about how our lives have changed because of them, I see here a clear example of the ever-growing importance we place on speed, on immediacy. This is not to critique any of the people who have written about Bell over the past few days—much of what they have said has been thoughtful and accurate. But still, I see in this situation a clear example of how the news works today, of how information spreads at light speed through digital media. Which draws me to something I say in my book The Next Story:
For centuries, humans have been captivated by the possibility of a perpetual motion machine, an invention that could provide a never-ending source of motion or energy while requiring no external source of power. The principles of the laws of thermodynamics have since shown us that, as far as we understand the laws of nature, such machines are impossible. Yet inventors continue to try to create them; the allure and the potential reward are simply too great to ignore. But while perpetual motion machines may be only the stuff of fantasy, our technologies seem to be successful in making us perpetual motion people. While the Industrial Revolution turned man into a machine, digitization has imposed on him the identity of constant activity, of never-ending motion.
When we buy a new digital device, it is typically described in reference to speed and capacity. When I go shopping for a new laptop, I find that the processor operates at a certain clock speed, that faster is always better, and that this in turn will give me a greater capacity to perform complex operations. Never mind that most of us will never tap into all of that speed or even need more than a fraction of the capacity--more is simply better. With our increased speeds and capacities we know we are getting a better deal, earning more bang for our buck.
But what if this emphasis on speed and capacity has begun to shape us?
What if our consumption and use of these devices has trained us to assume that greater speed and greater capacity are universal virtues? What if we have transferred the virtues of digital devices to our own lives?
The new generation of any device will inevitably be faster than the ones that came before, and the promise is that this will empower us to accomplish more things in less time. The discerning consumer may wonder why, if computers are twice as fast as they used to be, he doesn't get his work finished in half the time! But it is difficult to stop to ask such questions. The pressure of life is such that if we don't embrace the newer and better, we will be left behind. Because of this, our devices are obsolete long before they stop working. Instead of asking thoughtful questions--exercising discernment over our use of digital technology--we press on, trying to match the speed of our new devices, absorbing into our consciousness the idea that speed itself is a virtue, that fast is always good. We recreate ourselves in the image of our devices, through the ideologies they contain within them.
The speed of digital life, the understanding that e-mails grow stale if they are not responded to immediately, the knowledge that a text message that is a few hours old is already ancient, increases the pace of our lives. Eventually we begin trying to make everything faster. We try to speed up our families, our worship, our eating. We begin to race through life, unwilling or perhaps unable to slow down, to pause, and to reflect.
And yet when we turn to the Bible, when we turn to the source of divine wisdom, we see very little about a life dominated by more, dominated by speed. On the contrary, we look to our heroes--we look to our Savior--and see a life that is contemplative, a life that takes time to ponder the deep things.
King Solomon was the wisest man who ever lived, and his life gave little indication of speed. Rather, his life showed the virtue of deliberate meditation, deliberate slowness. He knew 3,000 proverbs, each of which took time to commit to memory and each of which only had value in the time taken to ponder it. Here is just one example of how Solomon grew in wisdom and understanding:
I passed by the field of a sluggard,
by the vineyard of a man lacking sense,
and behold, it was all overgrown with thorns;
the ground was covered with nettles,
and its stone wall was broken down .
Then I saw and considered it;
I looked and received instruction.
A little sleep, a little slumber,
a little folding of the hands to rest,
and poverty will come upon you like a robber,
and want like an armed man.
(Proverbs 24:30 - 34)
Here Solomon walks by a field and pauses to observe that it has become overgrown with thorns and that the wall surrounding it has fallen into decay. He sees that only a lazy man, a sluggard, a fool, would allow his land to fall into such a state. Even in the midst of his busy life as king, Solomon responds by taking the time to meditate on this, to consider it. And having done so, he receives divine instruction: "A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest, and poverty will come upon you like a robber, and want like an armed man." It was only through his willingness to slow down, to take time, that he drew a lesson from this foolish man and his misused land. Virtue was found not in hastening by but in taking time to slow down, to pause, to think. He did not immediately dash off a Twitter update or snap a photo to post to Facebook. He stopped; he watched; he learned.

I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Comments (24)
Tim…we do “rush to judgement’ in this world. A few negative words can doom a book, an album, … or a career.I guess we need to be more patient. To carefully sort out the wheat from the chaff..David, www.RedLetterBelievers.com, “Salt and Light”
Thanks for this really interesting reflection on the comments that have been flying about this weekend. It has been an amazing rush of tweets, blog posts etc I agree it’s best to wait for the book to actually be published.
p.s. I find it interesting too that many of the people coming out in criticism of the book are also linking to it at Amazon with an affiliate link and stand to profit from its sale!
Good reflections Tim. Regarding Solomon’s observation, I wonder how long he meditated on it before he learned from it? Minutes, days, weeks?
It’s interesting that Solomon did learn from the state of the sluggard’s property. He felt confident he could make a judgment as to the person’s laziness. He didn’t need to speak with the sluggard first or wait until the sluggard’s next project “came out”.
Thanks for sharing this, I think we came to somewhat similar conclusions on the weekend’s events. Looking forward to reading the rest of your book when its available!
More wisdom from Solomon: On Rob Bell: “there is nothing new under the sun.”- Ecclesiastes 1:9 On the speed of life as reflection of our technology: “the race is not to the swift” - Ecclesiastes 9:11
Good thoughts, indeed.
I just hate the methodical vagueness and intentional ambiguity of the Emergent-type movement. Jesus was only vague sometimes because he knew perfectly the hardness of some hearer’s hearts and some “were not ready”. You never see the same Emergent false humility in the likes of Peter and Paul’s writings or John the Baptist’s sermons. Clarity of God honoring truth mattered too much to them.
I guess even if RB forsakes his past theological stammerings and does a bait and switch with this book and upholds biblical theology about heaven hell, it doesn’t bode well for him. It is neither courageous nor nice to be crafty and cute to promote book sells where the biblical gospel is simple and heart rending…
Jesus (and the prophets and apostles) did have some pretty snappy answers for the Pharisees and other religious charlatans. I think He could answer quickly and appropriately because His responses were rooted in a strong familiarity with God’s Word.
So I do not think that the problem lies with the speed with which we reply, but rather with the wisdom and truthfulness and discretion of our reply.
Without having read the book, the question for me would be, “Love wins…over what?”
Bell is a product of the old-model, top-down-push corporate media machine. He’s a media created celebrity, similar to our current commander-in-chief.
This might turn out to be his “Rathergate” moment.
Tim, I think what you’ve nailed here is that in an age where we are so quick to be the first ones to have an opinion and report on something, we end up making uninformed statements.
The video is incredibly vague and doesn’t really make any statement as to what the winning ‘Love’ actually refers. That ‘Love’ is not defined. Is it God’s objective love? Is it our love of God? Is it love through a universal perspective? You can’t tell from what is said here.
James tells us to be ‘Quick to listen, and slow to speak’. (1:19)That clearly is not the case throughout the web and social media. We’re quick to give our uneducated thoughts in 140 characters or less.
After watching the video, the main thing that comes to the surface for me is Rob’s statement of perception (not necessarily HIS belief) that Christ rescues us from God. But, I think he knows that that isn’t the case. The truth is that Christ rescues us from ourselves. And, based on my interaction with Bell’s work in the past, that’s an area that he will address.
Frankly, I think you’re stretching this passage a bit. It only says Solomon “saw and considered it…looked and received instruction.” This doesn’t imply any long period of time, unless i’m missing some nuance in Hebrew. He could have looked at it for 5 seconds and come to the conclusion that laziness leads to poverty and want.
The Great Stereopticon is what made Bell’s books bestsellers from 2000-2009.
The Great Stereopticon is what kept Honsi Mubarek in power.
Social media are/were a direct threat to both.
(Don’t know what I mean by the “Great Stereopticon” - google it and find out!)
If it takes us more than a minute or two, having watched Bell’s video or seeing the publisher’s summary, to see or say that his theology is anti or sub-Biblical, then perhaps we are not grounded in truth or Scripture.
That doesn’t mean we are free to answer in harshness, but we need to forcefully speak out against this kind of false and dangerous doctrine. I agree with Piper’s response, in light of I John 2:19. There was already pretty good evidence that Bell was not committed to the Gospel, I think this pretty much settles it.
Isn’t it a little ironic that the point of the actual proverb is that slowing down leads to poverty?
Tim,
Astute observations about speed and it detriment to the soul and to gaining wisdom. It only makes us shallower and less able to identify with others.
I’m perfectly willing to believe that the worst criticisms of Bell will be justified when we see what he actually has written.
However, what entirely eludes me is what is to be gained by not waiting and taking time — why people are defending lightning reactions based on half-information in the first place, even if their defenses are reasonable. As far as I can tell, there is nothing to be lost by the circumspection of answering slowly (which is what scripture recommends, and much more clearly in other places than by means of the “sluggard” passage) and much credibility to be gained by interacting with the actual arguments that Bell makes. No one is going to be led astray because someone deemed it better not to answer hastily a book that hasn’t even been released yet!
“why people are defending lightning reactions based on half-information in the first place, even if their defenses are reasonable….”
This is a good question, along with why we are so quick to gravitate to controversy.
Dear Tim
Sounds like the unionists cry.. “What do we want?” (Information, speed) ; “When do we want it?” (Now).
You critiquee here the speed at which news gets dissiminated across the internet, of our hunger for immediacy and so on. Brother you seem about as trapped as the next man to gather this information and if I may humbly say you seem trapped in acquiring volumes of information to put into this, your blogg. Slow down! Less volume, less tweets, less a la carte… What would happen if you spent more time with your wife, children, congregation, rather than browsing the net? Yes, some of us too have an addiction for information. Help dry us up too so we can stop to smell the roses. What do you reckon??
My guess it is that people are jumping on this for the same reason that the publicity machine for the book has already started. There is already a push from one party and now there is a pushback saying “if this is what is going on, we need to be careful.” I am looking forward to Tim’s book about media and its effect on us because this campaign typifies what happens. We don’t think about the whole thing. Calling the book the “product” in this dizzying age is not comprehensive enough. The product itself is the whole campaign, before, during and after, not less than the book but much more than the book. Those writers blogging about the ideas that have already been presented as teasers, as part of the campaign are vilified for responding to what these say and what they don’t say. Maybe these bloggers will be proved wrong. But the “book” has already begun. So I wonder what gun we are jumping. The race for men’s hearts and minds is not just in ideas of the book, it is in the ideas of the whole publicity campaign. When we wait for the book, are we already behind the curve?
At the Speed of the Web? I wonder how long it will take for every blogger and tweeter to be up in arms over Piper holding the next Desiring God at Warren’s Saddleback Church?
Another interesting blog about this very interesting topic.
I think your comments reflect where most people stand or more specifically: “Rob Bell will probably give some vague uncertain answer that leans heavily towards universalism without specifically calling it that, but it’s too early to tell.”
however, the questions I am asking are these:
Are Bell’s questions irresponsible? Not that they are questions that shouldn’t be asked, millions ask them every day, but as a pastor and preacher of the gospel shouldn’t bell have answers to these things?
Maybe a book promo shouldn’t garner so much attention. Maybe it’s okay to lead people in a certain direction when reading a book. But in my own discussions of God, theology, and the Bible I work very hard to be clear where I stand and how I got there. Rob doesn’t seem to ever do that; not that I’ve seen anyway.
I don’t know if this question has a hard answer, but it’s the kind of thing I have been thinking about since all of this blew up Saturday.
“I am not going to comment on whether or not Bell is a universalist. To be honest, at this point I think it is a little bit too early to make that determination. I watch the video and read the marketing copy and think that it shows a very deliberate vagueness that is meant to raise questions but not answer questions, that is meant to generate controversy and sell books. And so far it’s succeeding admirably.”
I totally agree!
KateG, the question I’d ask is whether considering this a race is, in fact, a biblical perspective. Scripture talks a lot more about patience and slowness in this sort of thing, than about an urgent need to correct problems yesterday. When you consider that the apostles wrote letters correcting horrendous errors of practice and theology, that took weeks or months to travel by boat, I really think this breathless “every minute counts” attitude is missing something important. God is apparently just fine with taking our time to get things right, as long as we are not dawdling.
I’m not saying there’s nothing to be said on the basis of what we know Rob Bell HAS said. There’s much to be said on that topic, and we certainly don’t need to wait for this particular book to see that there is a bad trajectory there and things that need to be addressed. I’m just wondering about the insistence on correcting a *forthcoming* book before it comes out, as though letting something go uncorrected for a week is worse than speaking out of ignorance on a particular matter.
It’s important to keep in mind that the goal of the video, created by a publishing company, was to create interest in (and sell) Rob’s new book. They are counting on the speed of the internet to help them create a “buzz” about the book and get people talking about it. Which they did!Rob is provocative, he always has been. But he raises some interesting questions. An important step in clarifying your beliefs is to talk about and even defend them. So the fact that the publicity campaign for Rob Bell’s book has provided an impetus for Christians to actually do theology (to figure out what they think about God) is a positive thing. Even if you disagree with Bell, it’s important for Christians to wrestle with what they believe. Another great resource on heaven, what it’s like and who will be there is “Heaven Revealed” by Dr. Paul Enns, released this month by Moody Publishers. I recommend it. Here’s the amazon page: http://dld.bz/P8sz