“How To Be A Universalist Without Really Trying?”: Part 1

I am currently reading Rob Bell's new book “Love Wins”. According to my Kindle, I am 76% through the book. I have been 100% disappointed since about page 1. I won't say a lot more right now but once I have finished the book I will post a couple of comments. The best thought I can come up with for what Bell offers by way of theological musing so far is that a better sub-title would have been, “How To Be A Universalist Without Really Trying?”
Since before the book's release, Bell has been all over the airwaves declaring that he is emphatically NOT a universalist, only to then continue by expressing a stream of platitudes and thinly veiled universalist theological positions. As I have read the book I have found my personal frustration mounting. Bell, like many others, likes to precede many of his musings with the a priori disclaimer, “I am not a theologian” and then proceed to offer sloppy theological arguments. That is like saying, “Well, I am not a trained surgeon, but I am going to operate on you anyway.” Bell argues throughout the book that the position he is offering has been around in the Church for along time. He is right about that. Thereafter, his conclusions are specious at best.
Heresy has been around a long time. Longevity alone does not indicate truth. The longevity of the orthodox positions on heaven and hell are not substantiated by their having been around a long time. They are substantiated by God's Holy Scriptures. Bell's concern to preserve the best part of the “story” in the Bible reveals something about his starting position over and over again...at least in the first 76% of the book.

More later... when I have read 100% of the book

IHN
mark+