# Rob Bell's new Nooma video "She"



## caoclan

The Emergent "Church" just keeps digging deeper into heresy:

[video=youtube;-p_W_ZprQYU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-p_W_ZprQYU[/video]


----------



## Notthemama1984

The speakers on my comp went out. Can someone give an overview?


----------



## CDM

Speaking of feminine images...sheesh


----------



## caoclan

Chaplainintraining said:


> The speakers on my comp went out. Can someone give an overview?



Bell is claiming the Hebrew word for compassion can mean womb, therefore God is "womb-like," therefore feminine images and terms for God are legitimate (as much as masculine terms are).


----------



## Archlute

Not everything that he points out is completely off, however, the problem lies in the underlying motive for such a presentation, which usually has for more to do with satisfying egalitarian urges within the church than it does in serving more noble purposes. 

Unfortunately, it is not too difficult for me to imagine any number of younger PCA pastors with whom I am familiar giving a hearty "amen" to that clip, and then rushing off to find a way to present the material in the course of next week's bible study.


----------



## caoclan

Archlute said:


> Not everything that he points out is completely off, however, the problem lies in the underlying motive for such a presentation, which usually has for more to do with satisfying egalitarian urges within the church than it does in serving more noble purposes.
> 
> Unfortunately, it is not too difficult for me to imagine any number of younger PCA pastors with whom I am familiar giving a hearty "amen" to that clip, and then rushing off to find a way to present the material in the course of next week's bible study.



Scary that you would say PCA pastors... This guy was on stage at Seeds of Compassion which had the Dalai Lama, Desmond Tutu, a Muslim, Buddhist, all walks of spirituality and he made on mention of Christ being the only way, even though the others were making it clear all roads lead to God.


----------



## Archlute

Just as an aside, the Hebrew for womb in Job 38:29 is a completely different root from that of the cognates for womb/compassion that he had earlier been discussing. Don't feel the need to cave just because somebody throws out a couple of Hebrew terms in support of their thesis. Make them prove the connections. If they can't do that clearly, then they most likely do not know what they are talking about.


----------



## Poimen

Sounds like a lot of preaching today: did you know such and such a word really means this? (even though I have never studied Greek or Hebrew let alone taken any classes on hermeneutics). Well it does mean that and because of that I postulate the following: _. (cue Charlie Brown 'adult talk' warbling sound as I roll my eyes).


----------



## jawyman

I apologise for my crudeness, but this sort of drek makes me sick to stomach.


----------



## GTMOPC

Somewhere I was reading that it's not the outright heretics that are the most dangerous but rather the wolves in sheep's clothing that parade around as if they were orthodox that pose the greater threat. I'm not saying that Bell is orthodox by any stretch of the imagination but he does claim to be a Christian and a pastor. To many people that makes him legitimate and therefor a voice to heed. The dangerous one's aren't the heretics that start with erroneous doctrines but the ones that attempt to insert deceptive doctrines into commonly held truth. They slide it in the backdoor whilst everyone's guard is down. Not to mention Bell's videos have a very meditative and esoteric feel like something you'd see in Buddhism or new age material. He's also a very persuasive speaker and well liked I believe.


----------



## Casey

I wonder why the lady on the bus sitting behind Bell didn't stare at the video camera that was recording him . . how often does that happen on a bus? Not very "authentic," seems to me . . .


----------



## DMcFadden

As Driscoll said in his sermon at the Desiring God conference . . .
* Love the sheep
* Rebuke the swine
* Kill the wolves
* Bark at the dogs
* Pray for the shepherd


----------



## he beholds

"Throughout the Bible God is described as compassionate."
Is he saying that the word for compassionate is the same word for womb? Or is he saying that God is described as both compassionate and womb-like with the use of two words?
Either way, a Father is compassionate!!!
And a womb is where life begins--a womb is not feminine itself (body parts don't have gender). Yes, only females have wombs, but couldn't the point be to connect God to his creating ability, rather than to his "femininity." 

Also, in the second passage from Job 38 where womb is mentioned, God never answers that it was his womb: 
"From whose womb did the ice come forth,
and who has given birth to the frost of heaven?"

Could he be asking, "whose womb? No one's womb," as to show that mankind had nothing to do with creation?
I am not being rhetorical, so answers are appreciated

And certainly this earlier part is primarily figurative language (as Bell pretended to acknowledge), right?

“Or who shut in the sea with doors
when it burst out from the womb,
9 when I made clouds its garment
and thick darkness its swaddling band,
10 and prescribed limits for it
and set bars and doors,
11 and said, ‘Thus far shall you come, and no farther,
and here shall your proud waves be stayed’?



JOB 38 (ESV)

38:1 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind and said:

2 “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?
3 Dress for action [1] like a man;
I will question you, and you make it known to me.

4 “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements—surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 On what were its bases sunk,
or who laid its cornerstone,
7 when the morning stars sang together
and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

8 “Or who shut in the sea with doors
when it burst out from the womb,
9 when I made clouds its garment
and thick darkness its swaddling band,
10 and prescribed limits for it
and set bars and doors,
11 and said, ‘Thus far shall you come, and no farther,
and here shall your proud waves be stayed’?

12 “Have you commanded the morning since your days began,
and caused the dawn to know its place,
13 that it might take hold of the skirts of the earth,
and the wicked be shaken out of it?
14 It is changed like clay under the seal,
and its features stand out like a garment.
15 From the wicked their light is withheld,
and their uplifted arm is broken.

16 “Have you entered into the springs of the sea,
or walked in the recesses of the deep?
17 Have the gates of death been revealed to you,
or have you seen the gates of deep darkness?
18 Have you comprehended the expanse of the earth?
Declare, if you know all this.

19 “Where is the way to the dwelling of light,
and where is the place of darkness,
20 that you may take it to its territory
and that you may discern the paths to its home?
21 You know, for you were born then,
and the number of your days is great!

22 “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow,
or have you seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I have reserved for the time of trouble,
for the day of battle and war?
24 What is the way to the place where the light is distributed,
or where the east wind is scattered upon the earth?

25 “Who has cleft a channel for the torrents of rain
and a way for the thunderbolt,
26 to bring rain on a land where no man is,
on the desert in which there is no man,
27 to satisfy the waste and desolate land,
and to make the ground sprout with grass?

28 “Has the rain a father,
or who has begotten the drops of dew?
29 From whose womb did the ice come forth,
and who has given birth to the frost of heaven?
30 The waters become hard like stone,
and the face of the deep is frozen.

31 “Can you bind the chains of the Pleiades
or loose the cords of Orion?
32 Can you lead forth the Mazzaroth [2] in their season,
or can you guide the Bear with its children?
33 Do you know the ordinances of the heavens?
Can you establish their rule on the earth?

34 “Can you lift up your voice to the clouds,
that a flood of waters may cover you?
35 Can you send forth lightnings, that they may go
and say to you, ‘Here we are’?
36 Who has put wisdom in the inward parts [3]
or given understanding to the mind? [4]
37 Who can number the clouds by wisdom?
Or who can tilt the waterskins of the heavens,
38 when the dust runs into a mass
and the clods stick fast together?

39 “Can you hunt the prey for the lion,
or satisfy the appetite of the young lions,
40 when they crouch in their dens
or lie in wait in their thicket?
41 Who provides for the raven its prey,
when its young ones cry to God for help,
and wander about for lack of food?

-----Added 12/20/2008 at 10:00:13 EST-----



DMcFadden said:


> As Driscoll said in his sermon at the Desiring God conference . . .
> * Love the sheep
> * Rebuke the swine
> * Kill the wolves
> * Bark at the dogs
> * Pray for the shepherd



I have connections, you think we should take him out?

But seriously, you are calling him a wolf, right??


----------



## DMcFadden

he beholds said:


> DMcFadden said:
> 
> 
> 
> As Driscoll said in his sermon at the Desiring God conference . . .
> * Love the sheep
> * Rebuke the swine
> * Kill the wolves
> * Bark at the dogs
> * Pray for the shepherd
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have connections, you think we should take him out?
> 
> But seriously, you are calling him a wolf, right??
Click to expand...


1. I was "just" quoting Driscoll.
2. HE said to "kill" the wolves.
3. Yes, I'm no Rob Bell fan (although my pastor son does listen to his sermons and claims to find a diamond or two in the manure pile). I would suspect that if you looked in a dictionary of Christianity, you might find Bell's picture next to the word "wolf."


----------



## ReformedWretch

This is what happens when hermeneutics doesn't matter.


----------



## Hamalas

Was anyone else blown away by the Genesis reference?!?!? That is such a blatant misreading of the text of the, "Genesis poem". First that term is a not-to-subtle jab at the accuracy of these chapters, and secondly it shows a real lack of scrutiny in his hermeneutic. Here are the relevant passages:

Genesis 1:27 
"So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them."

Bell's herminutic requires us to take this passage and turn it on it's head. In Bell's mind we are to look at humans to understand God. His implied argument is something like this: 
a. God made humans in His image
b. Both men and women are humans
c. Therefore, by looking at men and women we can understand God.

The problem is that the concept of Man as an image bearer is not primarily designed to show us God's character. Gen. 1:27 is not a call to superimpose our observations about man onto our understanding of God's nature. This passage does clearly teach that Man, both male and female, are made in the image of God. But it is not the only word on the subject. I would be very interested to here Bell's exposition of passages like 1 Corinthians 11:7-12. Verses 11-12 are particularly interesting in this regards, it says:

"Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are form God."

What Bell is trying to do is to independently ascribe gender qualities to God rather than recognize that the creation order requires unity between the genders. Calvin in his commentary on this passage says this:

"When he soon afterwards adds, that God created them male and female, he commends to us that conjugal bond by which the society of mankind is cherished. For this form of speaking, God created man, male and female created he them, is of the same force as if he had said, that the man himself was incomplete."

This is one of the main problems that I have with the NOOMA video's and Rob Bell's teaching in general. He tends to make blanket statements based on some shaky scholarship, and then cherry picks the passages that he examines. If he were to broaden his scope, and look at the whole counsel of Scripture I think many of his ideas would fall apart.

I work in a "Christian" (I use that term somewhat loosely) bookstore and we have a little TV set up that play's Bell's NOOMA videos. It is amazing to see how little discernment people have when approaching his stuff. Most people don't take the time to look through the passages or interpret his assertions through the sieve of Scripture, and they end up swallowing heresy because of their complacency. So sad.


----------



## lwadkins

It seems to be a human propensity (sin) to hold fast to some spiritual revelation that people experience. Instead of testing it against Scripture they have a tendency to then see Scripture in light of their "revelation". No amount of enlightenment (for many anyway) will then correct that "dogma" that they have created via their "revelation".

Acting upon the desire to share this "revelation" with others, they teach it and gather a following (if they are in a position to do so). This following is inevitably and in actuality based on a cult of personality not on being persuaded by the words of Scripture. Presto! You have a splinter of Christianity teaching a particular (and peculiar) “dogma” along with their otherwise Scriptural understandings.

In actuality they are following a charismatic man whom they then view as a great teacher. Criticism of the "dogma" that he teaches is from this point on viewed as a personal attack upon him.

This is evident in all circles and levels of understanding within Christianity. Note the debates that have been raging without end over doctrines where, clearly, the evidence from Scripture leads to a conclusion that all should hold in common.

I have been much dismayed in seeing how this plays itself out in Christendom. The imperative to gather more “converts” to their point of view fosters a culture of “anything goes” in the crusade for Dr. [insert name]’s distinctive “dogma”. Civil discourse and scholarly discussion, in pursuit of the truth, is cast aside in favor of attacks aimed at discrediting their opponents, not their views. Zealous disciples carry out campaigns on their own initiative and the battle continues even past the death of the originator of the “dogma”.

Pragmatically, this results in the Non-Denominational, Non-Confessional churches that are the norm in our country today. In attempting to placate all sides in the name of “unity” most dogmatic Scriptural doctrines must be set aside. The unity created inside these churches is a sham and what is created instead is a whirlpool of conflicting ideas that is quite damaging to new Christians that may find their way into these churches.
Often in order to avoid being sucked into the swirling vortex of personally held dogmas, the new convert will attach himself/herself to a particular teacher (Rob Bell?) as the flotsam to which he/she may cling.

Ultimately, Christianity viewed (as a whole) from the standpoint of an outsider or a new convert appears to be a raging tempest of chaos with no way to distinguish Scriptural truth from human falsehoods.

Hmm, I wonder how we contribute to this “appearance” and how as followers of Christ we could/should be combating it? 

Sorry for the whining, screed is over. 

Thank you God that You are sovereign over all things.


----------

