I'm a Pastor

Rob Bell is not a person I know a lot about. Most of what I have heard suggests his theology has engendered lots of controversy. His latest book, Love Wins: Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, has stoked the fires to new intensity. In an interview on MSNBC, anchor Martin Bashir challenged Bell on key points made in Love Wins. Bell’s inability to answer Bahir’s questions (Some were, quite frankly, loaded: Bashir, with reference to the earthquake in Japan, asked whether Bell thought God was all-powerful but did not care about people, or God cares but is not all-powerful.). When the subject of Bell’s own stated beliefs came to the fore, Bashir’s questions really made Bell squirm. He could not defend at all his view God’s love would prevail ultimately and all people would be saved.

Now, I have not read his book, so in fairness to Bell, I’ll not make any comments one way or the other about what he has written. In the interview, though, Bell made a telling comment in the context of his defense of his book. When asked why he might choose the theology of Origen over Arius’s, Rob Bell made a curious statement. He said, “Because first and foremost, I’m a pastor, so I deal with real people in a real world asking and wrestling with these issues of faith. And what I have discovered over and over is there are people who have questions and hunches, sort of, ‘I’m struggling with this,’ and you can simply give them the gift of ‘by the way, in the Christian tradition there are scholars and theologians, and there are other people who have had the same questions.”

Bashir interrupted Bell at that point to say he, Bell, was creating a Christian message that was warm, kind and popular. Bashir went on to say Bell was amending the Gospel to make it palatable to contemporary people who find the concepts of heaven and hell hard to stomach. While Bashir may have been unfair to Bell in some of his questions, he was right on in his criticism of Bell’s own stated beliefs. His comment was somewhat like Paul’s: “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.”

The part of the comment Bell made most disturbing to me was the “I’m a pastor” statement. If he failed to defend himself at any point, he did so most remarkably with this statement. Instead of indicating he gave sound theological and biblical guidance to his parishioners, Bell seemed to indicate he just gave them choices, “the gift of, by the way,” knowing others have these questions and here’s how they answered them.

Bell’s implication was he did not have the time to formulate answers based on Scripture, since he is so busy trying to help people find answers. I believe oxymoron, or at least paradox, is the operative term at this point. Throughout 37 years of pastoral ministry, my understanding of my role has been to be a shepherd who feeds and guides his sheep with the truth of God’s Word. And, in those cases where I myself could not speak definitely, I had the freedom and responsibility to say, “I don’t know.” My expectation has been to grow more and more knowledgeable through continuing study in order to be a better spiritual leader. Saying, “Here’s ten statements, choose the one you think suits you best,” has never been an option for me.

Rob Bell is not the only pastor who has offered the “I’m just a pastor” excuse. Being a pastor does not relieve one of his responsibility of coming to an understanding of the biblical revelation. Indeed, being a pastor heightens that responsibility. Admittedly, we all have intellectual limitations, but each of us can understand the Bible to the fullest of our abilities. If we commit ourselves to the study of Scripture, each of us will be able to “present [himself] approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.” My task is not, in the end, to give my opinion or rehash the theological arguments of the past. To the best of my abilities, I am to assist others in understanding the truth of Scripture, regardless of how “offensive” that truth first may appear to a human mind.

Obviously, Bell himself has a personal struggle with the nature of heaven and hell. If we are honest, many of us will admit to a similar dilemma. Yet, while I might question what the Bible says about the nature of heaven and hell, I do not have any doubts at all about the fact of heaven and hell. Further, when each of us dies, God is bound by his own character to honor and respect the decisions we have made in life and carry with us into death. What we decide on this temporal side of death matters essentially for our existence on the eternal side of death. As a just God, who is also merciful and gracious, the Lord will accept our choices. Grace no more disregards our decisions than justice does.

Otherwise, why would our choices in this life matter at all? Why would accepting or rejecting the Gospel be meaningful if, after we die, God through his love will convince us and save us from ourselves and our choices? If ultimately I will be convinced, why worry about the question now? As a pastor, as chief theologian and biblicist for my congregation, I must have a biblically definitive answer to these questions. I am a pastor. I deal with real people in a real world, and, oh yeah, I am required to give them scriptural answers and guidance as they struggle on their own journey. I can and must say with conviction, “thus says the Lord.”