Matthew 14:29-31 (English Standard Version)
He said, “Come.” So Peter got out of the boat and walked on the water and came to Jesus. But when he saw the wind, he was afraid, and beginning to sink he cried out, “Lord, save me.” Jesus immediately reached out his hand and took hold of him, saying to him, “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?”And when they got into the boat, the wind ceased. And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”
Watch this video clip on youtube entitled Dust (part 2) by Rob Bell from his Nooma video series (unfortunately this clip has been removed from youtube but the quotes below should be sufficient to give you a flavor of what the video communicated. Of course, I recommend watching the clip for yourselves to verify that the blasphemous quotes below are indeed what Rob Bell said).
Rob Bell’s interpretation of Matthew 14:29-31
“Peter doubts himself” “Peter loses faith in himself” “Jesus wouldn’t call him if he didn’t think he can be like him” “the rabbi choses you because he thinks that you can be like him”
“God believes in us, in you, in me. “Jesus must have faith in us.”
“God leaves it all in the hands of the disciples to make more disciples.”
“Jesus has faith that we can follow Him and be like Him” “God has faith in you!”
This is not Christianity, this is pure humanism. Many young people find this man’s books and video series engaging, relevant, and powerful however I am at a loss of words right now to explain my opinion about him. Rob Bell is in the spotlight as a professing Christian leader who has supposedly found new and effective ways to evangelize the unbeliever through his videos. Unbelievers watching this will not be converted to theism, they will continue in their man centered religion which is humanism.
The Gospel is not “have faith in yourself. You can do it if you just believe in yourself. God loves you and He is pulling for you, so you better believe that he has placed His faith and trust in you. In fact God the Son became a man in the incarnation and came to the world in order to nudge you on because Jesus believes in you too. Just keep your same beliefs and keep living your lives how you are because God has faith in you!”
Rob Bell pictures a Jesus who is weak and helpless. He views Jesus as sitting on the sidelines hoping and praying that the disciples will get people to become Christ followers. This is simply not the Jesus of Scripture. King Jesus is on the throne and can and will accomplish all that he sets out to accomplish. God the Son became a man in the incarnation in order to accomplish His Trinitarian mission of redeeming the elect of God. His death was for specific sinners and specific sins. Jesus’ death accomplished all that was necessary for the justification of sinners. We add nothing to God’s plan of salvation, not even by our evangelistic works. I am not saying that evangelism is unnecessary. In fact, it is the way that God has chosen to further the Gospel message. God has entrusted believers with the mission to preach and teach the Gospel to all men (Romans 10). however, we would be ignorant to believe that God who is the creator and sustainer of the world is not sovereignly involved in the evangelistic endeavor of “making disciples of all nations.” We must always remember that it is God who is doing the saving. We can put the Gospel into the ear, however God must apply it to the heart if there are going to be any converts. God the Father has elected those whom he will have mercy upon before the foundation of the world, God the Son accomplishes the work and redemption of the elect by His death, and God the Spirit regenerates the unbelieving sinner in order that the application of redemption may be applied by God’s grace through the sinners faith at the time of belief. You see, Jesus has not left it all in the hands of the sinful disciples. Jesus does not place the unbelievers eternal destiny in the hands of men. Jesus made sure that all that the father has given to Him will become His disciples (read John 6). We must put our faith in the almighty God three in one and not in man a sinner and finite creation.
{ 35 comments… read them below or add one }
Danny,
The video has been removed. Too bad, it was a doozie! Perhaps I shouldn’t have left those comments, maybe that’s what caused it to get removed…
Stephen,
You know, I think you might be right. It could be that you hit a nerve and revealed something that he didn’t want anyone to find out. He then removed the video before others could catch on (notice not all of his Nooma video’s were removed). As Dr. Bob points out, false teaching leads to corrupt living and vica versa. And as you have said elsewhere on this blog discussing orthodoxy and orthopraxy right thinking is right living. So, In light of the fact that Rob Bell has some seriously wrong thinking who is to tell how that emanates elsewhere.
I
In all seriousness, Rob Bell’s teaching is very deceiving, and thinking back to my heathen days prior to God saving me I would have loved this stuff because I definitely loved me and had faith in myself. Praise God for revealing to me the light of the Gospel found in Scripture and keeping me from buying into this nonsense. God willing people fond of Rob Bell will mosey on over to Biblical Thought while we show them what we think of man’s ability and most importantly what we think and know from Scripture about God’s effectual ability and plan to save sinners.
Matthew 1:21 (ESV) “She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.”
Who are his people? Could this verse be talking about every human being who ever lived? Should we think of people who die in unbelief and go to hell as His people?
May it never be!
John 6:37-40 (ESV)
“All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
The people whom Christ will save from their sins (Mt.1:21) are the one’s whom the father gives to Christ (the elect). God does not have faith in us! If that were so then it would imply that we had the ability to save ourselves and take care of the problem of our sinfulness and guilt. Praise be to God that He did not leave redemption in the hands of spiritually dead sinners because if God had left it in the hands of humans and simply did nothing because he supposedly had “faith in us” then all of mankind would have a one way ticket to hell because that’s what we all deserve apart from the substitutionary death of Christ on behalf of His people who will be raised up on the last day because of Christ!
John 6:44 (ESV)
“no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.”
If you are reading this and you trust in Christ alone for salvation, have repented of your sins and believed in the Gospel then as you know you may rest in Christ for He hath done everything necessary for your being made right before God. Let us then serve God with our lives and put to death the sin that remains daily.
If you are reading this and you are a Christian humanist like Rob Bell and have faith in yourself repent of your childish ways and sinful idolatrous thoughts about yourself and cling to Christ alone who is the strong savior who saves His people effectually from their sins!
“the rabbi choses you because he thinks that you can be like him”
Obviously contrary to everything written in the book of Romans about election.
“God believes in us, in you, in me. “Jesus must have faith in us”
Yes, I see the new translation now. The rich man comes to Jesus and says how can I get to heaven. Jesus responds, obey the commandments. The rich says, I’ve done it already. Jesus responds, I knew you could do it, but there’s one more thing. You’ll need to sell all your possessions. Rich man says, I can’t do it. Jesus responds, it’s tough for rich people. The disciples ask, how can anybody do it then. Jesus says, I believe man can do it. I have faith that man will choose to be like me. You can do it!
Hi Danny~
Just yesterday I heard Hank Hanegraff comment on Rob Bell’s view of the incarnation, here is a quote from an article Hank wrote:
“Many other chilling things in this new article, including this notion by Rob Bell, again one of the liberal emergent church leaders, he speculates that if “Jesus had a real, earthly, biological father named Larry, and archeologists find Larry’s tomb and do DNA samples and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the virgin birth was really just a bit of mythologizing” that we would not lose any significant part of our faith because it more about how we live.[1] To be fair, Bell does not overtly deny the virgin conception of Jesus, but he does deny that it is of any notable theological importance.
What’s the alternative? If this is not significant, you’re saying that infallible Scriptures are not significant, that it wouldn’t be a big deal if Matthew was mythologizing a little bit. It wouldn’t be a big deal if we discovered that Mary was a sexually sinful woman who conceived Jesus illegitimately. That is the conclusion”…
Apostate anyone?
Reformed:
You promised some info on your AIG seminar…..
Obviously apostate. Next he’ll being telling us that it didn’t matter if Jesus rose from the dead (a fact we’d come to question if you don’t think Jesus was God).
Rob Bell might have removed his stuff from youtube, but others have not. If you search for it you’ll find it. I listened to all I could stand before I felt like my coffee would come up. This man will be at the lead of many who will not be following Christ.
Since Rob Bell is not Christian but pagan, that automatically disqualifies him from authoritatively speaking on the subject. Christianity is not like the NFL where non-NFL players have authoritative commentary having never suited up and played in the pros. From the Christian perspective, Rob Bell is no mystery at all. In fact, Christians have an infallible interpretation of Rob Bell that can be used to strengthen the faith of the child of God. According to the Christian worldview,
The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Cor. 2:14)
So it is no shock or wonder as to why Rob Bell doesn’t get it. He is the idealized logical conclusion of the liberal moralism to which he ascribes. Being still in bondage having never been set free, Rob Bell opens his mouth and speaks about things he knows nothing about (Rom. 10:2; 1 Cor. 15:34; 1 Tim. 6:20; 2 Tim. 3:6-7…).
I wonder if anyone can tell me who these quotes are attributed to:
“I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
“I have come into the world as light, so that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness.”
These are weighty quotes, unlike any of the sages or philosophers!
I have a side question. Is the ESV becoming more popular in reformed circles than the NASB?
It’s the English version I carry around, and has been for about 4 years, but my reasons are subjective. For the most part I like the readability of it. I find it smoother if that means anything. I have a few complaints, but I’ve noted them in the margins, etc.
But I have noticed its popularity growing in the “Reformed” circles. John Piper uses it and endorses it, the Reformation Study Bible has an ESV edition that R.C. Sproul edited, endorsed, and advertised & promoted quite heavily on his radio program, the Good News Publications website is linked to on many “Reformed” websites, etc. And since the translation committee was basically purely Reformed-friendly, it has captured the attention of many “Reformed” folks.
I rarely use it for study though. Usually it is at the end of my study from the original languages in a process where I check how other English speaking translators have rendered. I sometimes use it as an English outline when examining author thought units and arguments. But it’s always in my backpack or sitting on the clipboard in my lap whenever sitting under the preaching of the Word.
For the most part I like the readability of it. I find it smoother if that means anything.
Actually, I do exactly the same thing. I’ve been using the NIV for the same reason. (I know, nobody likes the NIV). Whenever I need to look up or study certain passages I use e-sword with my hundred Bible versions (and Greek/Hebrew references).
Some of the men at my church have been carrying the ESV and my Pastor said that a church that we consider a sister church replaced the pew Bibles with ESV.
No mention of the Comma in 1 Jn. 5 though, I still don’t understand that one…
Hello,
According to Morey, zero manuscripts have commas. While I disagree (Codex B), it’s worth clarifying as to the justification of translation of commas in various texts if non-exist.
The issue of comma is a textual critical question of uncial or miniscule.
Respectfully,
Jean Cauvin (Jude 3).
Jean Cauvin,
Very funny. But that’s my fault for not being clear ENOUGH. I thought that by capitalizing the “c” in Comma that folks would know I’m talking about the Comma Johanneum, not the “punctuation device that separates the structural elements of sentences into manageable segments.”
Not even a footnote is provided. I find it odd because they note the Mark 16 and John 7-8 variants, but not the “most famous” textual variant in 1 Jn. 5…
STEPHEN SAID: “Since Rob Bell is not Christian but pagan, that automatically disqualifies him from authoritatively speaking on the subject. Christianity is not like the NFL where non-NFL players have authoritative commentary having never suited up and played in the pros. From the Christian perspective, Rob Bell is no mystery at all. In fact, Christians have an infallible interpretation of Rob Bell that can be used to strengthen the faith of the child of God. According to the Christian worldview,”
True Stephen. But, not everyone sees Bell the way you do. Some Believers do consider him authoritative and they are listening to him and reading his books, even in “reformed” circles. One I know of in particular. I offered the above quote so that perhaps it may be used to shine some light on Bell’s unbiblical teachings. Just saying he’s “pagan” doesn’t help everyone understand why. Let’s not forget our brothers and sisters who are younger in the Faith.
Hello,
It’s not relevant how somebody “sees” anything. The issue is the reality of the case.
Since Rob Bell is a pagan, Stephen is correct in saying he has no authority to speak on the subject. For the natural man is a stupid moron (according to Scripture) and cannot comprehend ANYTHING spiritual.
Thus, logically speaking, one who cannot comprehend a subject is then by definition not an authority of that subject.
This rule especially applies to textual criticism even though NOBODY, to my knowledge practices this science with Calvin’s understanding of the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit in the 21st century.
On a side note. I know Morey doesn’t believe Mark 16 (starting with vs.
was not included in the canon. I highly disagree with him.
I get the “feeling” that Morey has this view because of a REACTION towards the Oneness People (among others) in quoting Mark 16:16. Some may say I’m being unfair, and I may be, but It seems to be the case.
As a partial dispensationalist, I have absolutely no problem in interpreting Mark 16:16. Those who are dead, die hard, hard core reformed have a problem. But Morey is not hard core die hard Reformed. He too is partially dispensational.
But that’s not even the issue. The issue is regarding it as part of the canon (for those apologists out there, part of the cannon).
So instead of reacting to the text via apologetical means against the cults, a textual analysis should be justified separate from apologetics upon its own grounds.
However, I take this position from a textual perspective first and foremost. We should not allow our theology to FORCE segments as not part of the canon just because the cults use it and its part of the modern “band wagon.”
A side note since Stephen mentioned Mark 16 in passing.
Respectfully,
Jean Cauvin (Jude 3).
As usual Jean you have butted in where you are not welcome.
I completely understand the authority issue! Some of us regular people work and interact with other regular people (those who do not know all the rules of logic,etc) who have different thoughts and ideas about things. By God’s grace, I am willing to talk with them where they “live” and concrete things like the Bell quote above may help them see their error in following him, if God allows.
Do you watch the show TV “House”? Geez…you are like a religious version of him! That is not a complement….
Reformed Mama said: But, not everyone sees Bell the way you do. Some Believers do consider him authoritative and they are listening to him and reading his books, even in “reformed” circles. One I know of in particular. I offered the above quote so that perhaps it may be used to shine some light on Bell’s unbiblical teachings. Just saying he’s “pagan” doesn’t help everyone understand why. Let’s not forget our brothers and sisters who are younger in the Faith.
This is a good point, and it helps reel me in from where I sometimes drift. So thanks. But there is a serious problem if a “Believer” reads and listens to Rob Bell and still considers him authoritative. Even more serious a problem exists within whatever “Reformed” circle condones such materials among their fledgling. To the young in faith that accepts Bell as authoritative, I would first ask the question: “Have you met the Savior, Jesus the Christ?” To the answer “yes” I would proceed in asking them to tell me about Him. I’d say: “Tell me about Him. What do you know so far about Him?” The answer to this question will reveal 1) what they know, 2) whether what they know is correct, 3) the method of how they think they know what they know, and 4) how to proceed in the discipleship process.
The seed planted in good soil would most likely reply by relaying what they know about the Savior from what they’ve learned about Him in Scripture. They may say, “Well, the Bible says He is Perfect,” or “The Bible says He was raised from the dead,” etc. We shouldn’t expect a young believer to articulate doctrine systematically, but since they’re a Believer they should be able to at least articulate the “faith,” the body of propositions necessary to believe for saving faith. And if one is able to do that, then they should immediately discern the great chasm between the truth and what Rob Bell says.
But this raises another issue: Christians don’t read their Bibles! Young believers should be exhorted to read the Bible first and know what it says so that they can have a foundation upon which to stand. Otherwise, they’ll easily be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine. They should not read Rob Bell until they have a comprehensive knowledge of God’s special revelation. And anyone that allows the reading of Rob Bell by a young believer is not showing them love but the yellow-bellied coward that they really are. If an intellectual enterprise is not according to Christ then it is to be rejected, that is, unless the deception that follows has already sunk in leaving the fellow blind and unable to discern…
And since “Reformed” means many things these days (Robert Schuller is Reformed), the Reformed circle that permits Bell in their midst might not be “REFORMED,” as historically defined. And if so, then there probably isn’t a proper view of Scripture which is probably why Rob Bell is alive in them.
This just shows the need for us biblie believing christians be like the salmon and swim upsteam. Not down the slippery slope. Again standing on the promises of our God found in His Word!!!
Hey Joey…how are you?? It’s been forever!!
” preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.”
I think we sometimes forget that last part.
Dan, great stuff…it’s sad that there are so many out there who want to take Jesus out and insert themselves. I’m so glad that my faith is in Him alone!!!
Why does the term “inoculated” come to my mind?
I found the video that inspired the above post. Now you can see for yourselves that he actually said the things that I quoted him saying. You will just have to bear with the audio not matching the video, I suggest just listening to it without watching it because its going to fire you up enough simply hearing this nonsense.
So does God have faith in us or not? Someone give me a one word answer! And did Jesus have faith in Peter when he got out of the boat?
Hi Mike,
You wrote: “So does God have faith in us or not? Someone give me a one word answer!”
No.
“And did Jesus have faith in Peter when he got out of the boat?”
No.
I hope this helps.
Question for Danny :
You said,
“His Trinitarian mission of redeeming the elect of God. His death was for specific sinners and specific sins”
I get the doctrine of election, but what “specific sins” are you sayng Jesus died for? Stealing, lying, adultery, blasphamy? Seems to me Jesus died for all sins. 1John 1:9
“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” ESV
Thanks for clearing that up Stephen. I guess I wasn’t clear in my post. Just to be clear (if you didn’t gather from the post), I am on board with Stephens above two short one word answers. Any opposed?
Tom N-U, specific people implies a particular redemption or the L (limited atonement) in TULIP. Moreover, specific sins implies the fact that if you are apart of the elect of God (if you are a believer) then Christ died for all of your specific sins committed prior to your conversion, as well as any sins that are being committed currently, as well as the sins that will be committed in the future. In short Jesus paid it all for his people. I believe in a substitutionary atonement which means that our (believers) due punishment was placed on Christ as he suffered and died on the cross.
I affirm the three acts of imputation:
1st Adams guilt and sin (original sin) to all of mankind.
2nd The sins of the elect being imputed to Christ meaning that He atoned for their specific sins dying the criminals death that they should have died.
3rd Lastly, Christ’s righteousness being imputed to or transferred to our account so that God views us in the righteousness and perfection of Christ.
I deny any universal atonement views or that Christ died for sin in general or sins like lying, stealing, murder themselves generally. If Christ died to atone for all sin in general of all people universally then all men would be saved. Since all men do not have faith in Christ it is clear that not all are saved. If it is true that Christ died for all sin universally and all men are not believers then either you will move to universalism which teaches that everyone will in fact go to heaven regardless of religion or belief or you end up having an atonement for sins that fails. It fails because IF Christ came to the earth to die for sin in general and people go to hell then there are people in hell that Christ died for, hence His mission in the atonement failed. I deny this view and hold to the historic Calvinist interpretation of the atonement. Read my paper entitled For Whom did Christ die for more on this if you are interested as well as my second post above discussing John 6.
Danny –
To make sure I understand what you are saying. By “specific sins” you are saying all sins committed by “specific people”, right? Christ died for all the sins, past, present and future, of the specific people given to Him by the Father, the elect.
Tom N-U,
That’s exactly what I meant. And notice the wonder of the atonement, if you are a true believer all of your sins have been atoned for by Christ. And to be clear, the objects of God’s mercy and grace (the elect) by no means deserve to be given the favor of God. I am a saved sinner who did not in the past, does not currently, and will never in the future deserve the grace of God. Praise God from whom all blessing flow, praise Him all creatures here below, praise Him above ye heavenly hosts, praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Amen!
“The three great acts of the Holy Trinity for the recovering of lost mankind are-election by the Father, redemption by the Son, calling by the Spirit-as directed towards the same persons, and as securing their salvation infallibly.”
-J.I. Packer, Introduction to John Owens the Death of Death and the Death of Christ.
Hey guys and girls,
I have a friend at work, (He is a genius, literally) but he follows Rob Bell, not to the “T” but enough to where I see the “fruit of the Bell” coming out of him.
In my dealings with him I tried to get him to understand there is essential beliefs that make a Christian a Christian, and that there is absolute truth, I pulled from Keller on a couple of instances, about his core beliefs, mainly about judging others beliefs and as long as one believes in Christ then he is a Christian. I also corrected him for certain beliefs, and asked how he came to those conclusions, was it form scripture or was it from himself? It blows my mind how people that are very intellectual, do not research there own religious beliefs, ie, both major news network anchors, they spend all there time researching gossip and news but forget about what the scripture says.
I was hoping you could shed a little light on how I can approach some one like Rob Bell.
You should hear Dennis Prager’s satire on “intellectuals.” He describes intellectuals just like you did…LOL.
Keep pointing to Scripture.
Travis,
If you really want to give a thoughtful response to your friend (given you have the time), then I would recommend you read Bell’s Velvet Elvis, which breaks down his “repainting of Christianity.” Bell calls himself a reformer–in line with the spirit of Luther and Calvin–but denies everything they stand for. Bell is not reforming anything, rather, he is reconstructing something that looks nothing like the historic Christian confession we hold dear. Mark Driscoll (who is a Reformed believer inside the emerging movement) summarizes nicely what is at stake: “What is at stake is nothing less than the gospel of Jesus Christ and people’s eternal destinies. If in our day culture rises up in authority over Scripture in the church, any god rises up other than the Trinity, and any gospel is preached other than the death and resurrection of Jesus for our sins, then we literally have hell to pay for emerging into false teachers with false doctrines, false gods, and false gospels that assure false hope.”
Driscoll sees the main problem with Bell and others like him, which is just about everything they teach. They are overreacting to a notable problem in many evangelical churches, which is basically, that many who profess the faith, lack the authentic Christian lifestyle in keeping with their confession. But, most of the Emerging Church neither deals with the problem or confesses the orthodox doctrine of the faith. Also, the EC sells out the historic Christian confession in the name of being relevant to our culture.
If you read Bell, it won’t be that hard to critique his views. Just keep a Bible handy.
Great questions Travis, I am glad to hear about your witnessing opportunity and your desire to defend the faith.
Travis said…”I also corrected him for certain beliefs, and asked how he came to those conclusions, was it form scripture or was it from himself?”
I think you are definitely on the right track man. Just watch the video clip above where Rob Bell talks about Jesus having faith in us because he trusts that we can do it. This whole humanistic worldview is nowhere found in the Bible and I think this is the question that is going to get at the heart of the errors of the emergent church. “Where is your humanistic worldview supported in the Bible?” The answer is nowhere as you have noted Travis. We will be praying for you and look forward to hearing specific rebuttals made by your friend. Come to think of it, why don’t you send him a link to this article and we can discuss these issue together. God bless brother.
Peter, I have been bugging you for a review of Bell’s Velvet Elvis ever since you read it! I think now is the time brother. I will thank you ahead of time for the time you put into a review. God bless your studies in seminary brother and when you get some time, write that review!!!