You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.79 AVERAGE
3.79 AVERAGE
I read this book on the recommendation of a friend and because I just finished reading Raising Critical Thinkers by Julie Bogart, which encouraged readers to read a variety of perspectives, even those with which you think you might disagree.
While this book had aspects with which I agreed (e.g., that God's love is BIG, that believing in the God of the Bible has implications for how we should live on Earth), there were many aspects that I found to be confusing and at points even heretical. It's good to ask questions and to think critically about our world and our beliefs, I will be the first to champion that, but Bell seems to raise questions without providing answers. He doesn't discuss or refute thinkers that would disagree with his perspectives, which should be the first red flag to readers.
He takes scripture passages out of context (often citing a peppering of single verses without explaining the context behind them) and applies questionable hermeneutics to them in order to fit his point. For example, Bell discusses Matthew 25 and says that instead of using the word that we now use as "eternal" (i.e., “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” v. 46) was used in the Bible to mean eternity/forever when talking about God in some passages while meaning "an age/time period" when talking about human things in other passages. For no explained reason other than to force the definitions to fit into his conclusions, he concludes that this passage about the kingdom of God isn't the "eternity/forever" meaning, but is actually the human "age/time period" one and would indicate that humans might spend a time in their mindset of hell before accepting Christ and being allowed to eventually go to heaven.
There are other questionable aspects of this book that I think Randy Alcorn's review and others covers well, so I won't rehash them here.
I will say that this book had me embodying the "put that thing back where it came from or so help me" gif from Monster's Inc. (see below) with regards to the way that Bell twists some scripture to fit his intended thesis while completely ignoring other passages that would indicate that his conclusions are faulty. I could go on, but you, the reader, can conclude based on what's been said that I think this book was useful as an exercise in critical thinking, but not much more. I don't think it's something that should be fully relied on from a theological perspective, that's for sure.
While this book had aspects with which I agreed (e.g., that God's love is BIG, that believing in the God of the Bible has implications for how we should live on Earth), there were many aspects that I found to be confusing and at points even heretical. It's good to ask questions and to think critically about our world and our beliefs, I will be the first to champion that, but Bell seems to raise questions without providing answers. He doesn't discuss or refute thinkers that would disagree with his perspectives, which should be the first red flag to readers.
He takes scripture passages out of context (often citing a peppering of single verses without explaining the context behind them) and applies questionable hermeneutics to them in order to fit his point. For example, Bell discusses Matthew 25 and says that instead of using the word that we now use as "eternal" (i.e., “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” v. 46) was used in the Bible to mean eternity/forever when talking about God in some passages while meaning "an age/time period" when talking about human things in other passages. For no explained reason other than to force the definitions to fit into his conclusions, he concludes that this passage about the kingdom of God isn't the "eternity/forever" meaning, but is actually the human "age/time period" one and would indicate that humans might spend a time in their mindset of hell before accepting Christ and being allowed to eventually go to heaven.
There are other questionable aspects of this book that I think Randy Alcorn's review and others covers well, so I won't rehash them here.
I will say that this book had me embodying the "put that thing back where it came from or so help me" gif from Monster's Inc. (see below) with regards to the way that Bell twists some scripture to fit his intended thesis while completely ignoring other passages that would indicate that his conclusions are faulty. I could go on, but you, the reader, can conclude based on what's been said that I think this book was useful as an exercise in critical thinking, but not much more. I don't think it's something that should be fully relied on from a theological perspective, that's for sure.
I feel like Rob Bell stumbled upon Reformed theology and decided to declare it groundbreaking, new theology. That is to say, I was not overly impressed by the book, mostly because it didn't feel like I was hit over the head with a 2x4 in the same way a lot of people who read this book felt.
But let me step down off my pretentious Reformed soapbox and say that this book is good. It is approachable to folks who would be intimidated by the writings of Calvin or Barth. I'm not a fan of the sermon-style of writing because I found myself skimming and missing the points he was trying to make. I do like how much he weaves Scripture into his narrative - that's something we Reformed theologians sometimes leave out. I am glad he approached this topic and opened up dialogue between the Evangelical world and the mainlineish world. That's always a healthy activity.
But let me step down off my pretentious Reformed soapbox and say that this book is good. It is approachable to folks who would be intimidated by the writings of Calvin or Barth. I'm not a fan of the sermon-style of writing because I found myself skimming and missing the points he was trying to make. I do like how much he weaves Scripture into his narrative - that's something we Reformed theologians sometimes leave out. I am glad he approached this topic and opened up dialogue between the Evangelical world and the mainlineish world. That's always a healthy activity.
I thought this was a fun book. It took a little while for me to get used to the formatting, but then I realized that it made me read at a different pace, more like listening to a speaker than reading a book. It's pretty light fare, although it was awfully controversial in some circles; it's not new material, either. Bell takes what had previously been fairly inaccessible theology and lays it out for Everyman.
I grew up in the evangelical church and left over a decade ago, in my early twenties. I was struggling with the idea of a loving God banishing His children got hell. I could no longer love the sinner and hate the sin. I no longer aligned with evangelical politics. I couldn’t take the Bible so literally. In this book Rob Bell answers the questions I struggled so hard with. I’ve spent all these years struggling with my faith. Calling myself an agnostic, studying astrology and paganism and mysticism. My answers were right in this book all along. Please, please read this.
This was very good as an audiobook. It needs a few hundred more pages to complete the argument and give the other side a fair treatment.
Read on audio through Hoopla
I appreciate that this was a groundbreaking work for Rob, and there are certainly valuable pieces that provoke thought and conversation. For example, I was interested in the idea that we create our own hells and heaven is always accessible, even in the afterlife. Rob's God seems to align well with my own.
I would like to explore these idea in more depth, within more philosophical contexts. Reading this on audio felt like a very long podcast, where ideas are presented but there is no central argument. Since I already question everything at this point in my faith walk, this wasn't quite radical enough to shake me in any one way.
It is a quick read, and I recommend it to any who are beginning to question Christian beliefs that they have long held to be true without a second thought.
I appreciate that this was a groundbreaking work for Rob, and there are certainly valuable pieces that provoke thought and conversation. For example, I was interested in the idea that we create our own hells and heaven is always accessible, even in the afterlife. Rob's God seems to align well with my own.
I would like to explore these idea in more depth, within more philosophical contexts. Reading this on audio felt like a very long podcast, where ideas are presented but there is no central argument. Since I already question everything at this point in my faith walk, this wasn't quite radical enough to shake me in any one way.
It is a quick read, and I recommend it to any who are beginning to question Christian beliefs that they have long held to be true without a second thought.
Rob Bell is very honest in his book. He says that he is not the first person to read the scriptures and see that Jesus' message of love is for everyone. He is not the only one to say that hell is not God's choice. All that doesn't really matter. Bell is being browbeat because he is not following the "party line".
This really is a very short book that guides the reader through the process that Bell himself went through. Bell was exploring the Biblical message and this book explains how he reads scripture.
I believe that God is love and that hate is not part of the message of Christianity. So I had no trouble with Love Wins - it fits my theology. I think Rob Bell articulates his position very well. But it is always easier to read a book that fits your own beliefs.
I recommend this book to those who want to be open to all aspects of Christian belief; to those who also believe that love wins and to people who want to explore religion ideas.
This really is a very short book that guides the reader through the process that Bell himself went through. Bell was exploring the Biblical message and this book explains how he reads scripture.
I believe that God is love and that hate is not part of the message of Christianity. So I had no trouble with Love Wins - it fits my theology. I think Rob Bell articulates his position very well. But it is always easier to read a book that fits your own beliefs.
I recommend this book to those who want to be open to all aspects of Christian belief; to those who also believe that love wins and to people who want to explore religion ideas.
Aside from my opinions on the content, this was an interesting read. Some of his references and examples felt a little forced and his writing style is not for everyone, but I found it thought provoking.
Great read. However, whomever decided to cut the pages to alternating sizes should have to listen to me vent about it.