I've started reading "Velvet Elvis" by Rob Bell. Rob is the founder of Mars Hill Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He is also a lightning rod for controversy. In the Sunday School class I'm in at my church, we watched a DVD from Brannon Howse, where he spend quite a bit of time criticizing Bell and calling him out for his false teachings. One book he mentioned by name was "Velvet Elvis".
So, I decided to get the book out of the library and read it for myself.
After reading the introduction, here's what I'm getting out of the book:
Bell starts by talking about a Velvet Elvis he has in his basement and asks the reader the following question: What if the artist told other artists there was no more need to paint because his was the "ultimate painting".
Using this question, Bell says "Followers of Jesus, like artists, have understood that we have to keep going, exploring what it means to live in harmony with God and each other."
In other words, he's saying that as the times change, people need to find newer, innovative ways to spread the UNCHANGING Gospel of Jesus ("Times change. God doesn't, but times do").
Bell uses the example of Martin Luther and his "revolutionary" concepts from 500 years ago..."He insisted that God's grace could not be purchased with money or good deeds. He wanted everyone to have their own copy of the Bible in a language they could read. He argued that everyone had a divine calling on their lives to serve God, not just priests who had jobs in churches."
The idea of being "culturally relevant" kept popping into my head while reading this introduction. It's what they do at Granger Community Church (a TERRIFIC church in northern Indiana). I went there from 2000-2004, and it was great to see the church use the culture around them to teach God's word (and YES...it WAS Biblical teaching).
I also thought of I Corinthians 9:22-"I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some." (NIV)
Bell basically sums up the chapter by saying in order to keep the truth reforming, "we can't be making copies of the same painting over and over." We have to "take what was great about the previous paintings and incorporate that into new paintings."
What worked for the parents may not work for the children. I love listening to hymns (sometimes more than the modern worship stuff that I hear on radio or in the church). However, not everybody is going to be into that. Some people may come to Jesus at a rock concert where the band members scream like crazy and have tattoos up one arm and down the other. The point is...THE SAME METHODS DO NOT WORK FOR EVERYBODY!!
If you're not compromising the Gospel of Jesus, then there's no problem with reformation or innovation in the methods that are used. I think that sums up what Bell is trying to say in the introduction, and I have no objections.
Stay tuned...tomorrow I will dive into chapter one. I will tell you this...I have proof that Bell has been completely taken out of context when it comes to his alleged rejection of the trinity!!! You'll have to wait until tomorrow, though, to find out!! *LOL*
Thanks for reading!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have had concerns with Rob Bell because sometimes I have felt his "NOOMA" videos for instance, seem so simplistic. I like your conclusion so far about the introduction (of which I've not read so I'm trusting your thorough reading at this time).
ReplyDeleteMy general concern when people refer to Rob Bell, Rick Warren or Bill Hybels is this: Every church has their own personality. In the same way there are really no two people alike, there are no churches alike. So I hate it when churches spend more of their time trying to be a Willow Creek or Mars Hill or Saddle Back. Simply because it's not possible. We need to spend more time on our "individual" churches and learning what their personality is. Remember the church isn't a bldg, but a group of people.
SO...long winded I know...I agree with you, as long as the message of the Gospel does NOT change I think there are many methods to teach, send, sing, act, preach that message.
Agreed?
Hey, Chris. Thanks for reading.
ReplyDeleteYes, I agree with you about using different methods to preach the Gospel as long as it doesn’t change.
I think there’s no problem with churches using resources from people like Warren, Bell, or Hybels (our church did the 40 Days of Purpose back in 2004, and my dad has used the NOOMA videos for illustrations in his sermons). However, if a church spends more time following a man instead of God…that’s wrong.
I don’t have the book with me right now, but Rob Bell does say something in “Velvet Elvis” about how a church’s main goal shouldn’t be bigger buildings or better music…it should be spreading the Gospel.
Here’s another cool quote from Bell (from Relevant Magazine):
“I think the problem is that when people say "church," many mean religious goods and services where you come and there's a nice inspiring talk, good coffee in the back, snappy music and everything is fine. Jesus speaks of His people who are will to suffer and die so that the world can be healed-that's an entirely different proposition.
For us at [Mars Hill], if you can resolve a sermon in the course of the church service, then the sermon has failed. If you can resolve what's being talked about just by listening to it, then something's seriously wrong. The only way to resolve the church service you just experienced, and specifically the sermon, is that you're going to have to go and wrestle with it and then live it out.
Our interest is not in providing goods and services that will leave you with a well packaged religious experience. We understand the Gospel to be how are you going to break yourself open and pour yourself out for the healing of the world.”
Thanks again for reading the blog, Chris.