Rob Bell: Everything is Spiritual (…even cats)
John on July 11, 2006 at 9:30 am
The Glass House is a small concert venue in a little artists colony section of downtown Pomona. It’s surrounded by vintage clothing boutiques and used record stores. Usually it’s host to punk bands, but on this Wednesday night a somewhat different crowd had turned out to see a young pastor from Michigan named Rob Bell.
Our Ticketmaster tickets ($10) read “Door: 7PM Show: 8PM.” My two friends and I arrived a bit after seven and found the place already packed. Nearly 350 people sat on folding chairs facing a corner stage. The stage was black except for a huge whiteboard about four feet tall running the length of the stage, perhaps 16 feet. A few white lights were shining on it, making it appear to glow slightly.
As 8PM approached someone came on stage to ask us to turn off our cell phones and to let us know that tonight’s performance was being filmed. A few minutes later the mood music that had been playing in the background became louder, adding to the concert-like atmosphere of the show. Finally, Rob Bell stepped on stage dressed all in black. He uncapped his marker dramatically and we were off…
He began with a ten minute discussion of Genesis chapter one, treating it as Hebrew poetry. He paused once to emphasize his underlying principle of interpretation, i.e. “the Bible is not a science text book.” If there were young earth creationists in the room, they decided not to throw vegetables at that moment.
At one point, he pantomimed Adam naming the animals God brought before him. When Adam named one “cat” God’s reaction was “Hey, I didn’t make that.” It was one of the lighter moments in the message. Rob then made this aside: “Someone out there with a blog, please don’t write that I hate cats. There’ll be demonstrators at the next show.” So while it was extremely tempting to title this post “Rob Bell Hates Cats”, I resisted.
The second and longest part of Rob’s talk was, in fact, about science. From quarks and strings to the vast universe itself, he covered an enormous amount of ground. I have a background in this material, so I listened with an awareness not only of where he was going, but also where he might have gone. The impression I had was of watching some agile person cross a river by leaping from stone to stone. At times he would slow his progress to draw out a tricky point, such as quantum entanglement or the stellar habitable zone. At other times he would skip lightly over issues too complex to engage in an abbreviated way, such as the differing interpretations of quantum theory. But always it seemed to me he dealt accurately and fairly with the material. It was an outstanding 20-25 minute summary of modern physics. It was a setup for a point he would make later.
Next, he turned to the issue of perspective. Using Flatland characters, he discussed how God’s interaction with our world may be difficult to understand in everyday language. This is where the “emergent view” of all things theological came across most strongly. Is God Calvinist or Armenian? Rob suggests there may be a way for him to be both.
I recognize that answers like this will never satisfy those who’ve invested any energy in either of the alternatives. And I probably enjoy a good theological argument as much as the next person. Still, I found Bell’s appeal to lay down our theological arms quite winning. There are simply some issues where the Bible stands in tension with itself. Perhaps this too is inspired and should be respected. At times I get the sense that the seminary-denominational complex has an institutional investment in keeping the arguments going. In any case, this was probably my favorite section of the talk.
Having loaded his plate with literally “everything”, Rob now had the unenviable task of summing it up neatly. If his conclusion wasn’t fully successful it’s worth pointing out that few pastors would even have the courage to try.
And there was a theme that came through, a single thread on which all the beads of science and theology were strung. We live in a very big world and yet its one in which our perspective has the ability to shift our understanding of everything. Is the universe an accident or a work of design? The truth is it could be either. Is theology confusing because it’s imperfect or because our language is insufficient? Again, it could be either.
Is anything spiritual or is nothing? Rob suggests that as Christians we must choose everything. It’s this perspective that changes what we see. We move forward through life with the anticipation — the faith — that God is not absent, that he may indeed be hiding in plain sight.
I don’t know if Rob Bell has read Roy Clouser’s The Myth of Religious Neutrality, but he certainly seems to have adopted Clouser’s ideas on the religious control of theory-making. In any case, Rob’s presentation of it is a lot of fun. If there’s one person I’d like to have a chance to have a long talk with at some point, he has to be near the top of the list. I’m already looking forward to his next book, Sex God.
The “Everything is Spiritual Tour” currently spans 23 citites. Several of the dates have already sold out. Check here for the latest. It’s definitely worth seeing. If you can’t make it, it was being filmsed, so hopefully the whole thing will be available on DVD at some point.
Update 7/16: I’ve finally added my one bad, blurry picture of Rob from the event.
Category: Religion & Faith |
thank you for your thoughts. i enjoy your writing. unfortunately i will not be able to see bell speak, but i have been doing a lot of research into him and his ministry as of late. i thought i might suggest a book that you may enjoy, too. it’s called Jesus in the Margins by Rick McKinley. blessings~
July 11, 2006 @ 11:36 amThanks, Kelly, I’ve been looking for something new to read.
July 11, 2006 @ 1:28 pmHave you read Clouser’s Is there a Christian View of Everything from Soup to Nuts?
July 11, 2006 @ 1:54 pmI have now…
Actually, that’s a good summary of his “Myth of Religious Neutrality.” It has all the same ideas and even the same examples. The book simply lays these ideas out in much greater detail.
July 11, 2006 @ 3:06 pmThanks for the interesting first-hand account. I found the part about “lay[ing] down our theological arms” in light of the Bible’s irreducible paradoxes or “tension[s]” to be quite on-target.
July 11, 2006 @ 6:12 pmHi — You say the event was videotaped. Do you know if Zondervan was taping or if The Glass House was doing it? We were at the Arlington, VA show last night and would love a copy.
Thanks.
July 23, 2006 @ 10:32 amJan,
It was definitely Rob’s crew doing the filming. Perhaps for the next Nooma or perhaps to simply release in its entirety.
Actually, they weren’t using video. It looked to me like they were using actual film cameras, similar to the way they shoot Nooma videos.
I look forward to getting a copy myself.
July 23, 2006 @ 12:59 pmSince you mentioned you were in the field, thought you’d enjoy my friend’s blog entry “Fact-Checking Everything Is Spiritual”, http://www.rocketblog.net/
September 13, 2006 @ 11:05 pm[...] Great wikipedia biography Reviews on the Everything is Spiritual tour here, here, and here Beliefnet interviews Rob Bell Article on Christianity Today on mhbcmi Preaching.org review of using Nooma [...]
November 17, 2006 @ 8:40 am[...] UK Feb ‘07 Great wikipedia biography Reviews on the Everything is Spiritual tour here, here, and here Beliefnet interviews Rob Bell Article on Christianity Today on mhbcmi Preaching.org [...]
July 8, 2007 @ 7:42 pmFrom the suggestion in the previous comment I went over to preaching.org and they said I had to pay them $20 for access to their site. Why are Christians always trying to make a profit from God? I took a look a the Bible the other day and inside the front cover was a copyright notice. A copyright on the word of God? What’s up with that? How can a Christian take the words of God and claim them as his own intellectual property? What did Jesus have to say about such behavior? Atheism is much less expensive than you Christians. If Christianity is just a business then I don’t think I want any part of it.
July 25, 2007 @ 4:10 amMark,
The copyright is on the translation. It takes thousands of hours of work by Greek and Hebrew scholars to produce a translation.
You can access dozens of translations for free online here.
July 25, 2007 @ 8:26 amAlso lots of versions (with some overlap on Johns recommendation) here.
Mark, I have no idea why preaching.org charges $20 for access to their site. I imagine it’s because they have to somehow pay staff t run it. It is, however, possible to get a lot of really good Christian content on the net, or in ‘real life’ for free. I guess preaching.org may be more like a magazine subscription or a book? Nobody objects to spending money on Christian magazines or books, so I guess they are applying the same model.
I get the feeling that you’re here because you’re responding to something, like scratching an itch. Keep on with it, is all I can say, and I’m glad my comment about coffee elsewhere both amused and gave pause for thought – I’m clearly more profound than I give myself credit for!
All the best
Keith
July 25, 2007 @ 2:09 pmJohn said: “…The copyright is on the translation. It takes thousands of hours of work by Greek and Hebrew scholars to produce a translation…”
I’m afraid that I may have caused a bit of confusion by ranting about online membership fees in the same post as my complaint over copyrighted bibles.
Charging money for books about religion or websites about religion is fine although I personally would seriously question the real motives of anyone who uses God to ask for money.
I was listening to a church online the other day and the pastor explained that the average family income in his area is $80,000 therefore he expects to see an average yearly contribution from his members of $8,000, Amazing!
I have also noticed that Rob Bell is always asking for money for the poor (as I have heard Jesus did) but never seems to ask for money for his church. The most I have heard him say is that there are “joy boxes in the back”. That sort of behavior gets the attention of a person like me.
Now, with regard to copyrights, I don’t have a problem with charging for the printing costs of a bible. Its not about getting a free bible for me. Its about who those words belong to. Its about who the folks that printed/translated that bible say those words belong to. For someone, anyone, to claim a copyright on the word of God (be it translated or not) is absolutely breathtaking to me. Its nice that all those Greek and Hebrew scholars put in so many hours for the translation but when they slap a copyright on their work then it tells me they didn’t do it out of obedience to the creator of the universe but instead did it for their own self interest. How can anyone hold that book up and claim its the word of God when the copyright clearly claims its really the words of Larry the translator? It tells me that those words aren’t worth paying attention to. Is that the message they want to put into their book right up front? Do they even know that people like me get that message loud and clear from their actions.
Thanks for letting me rant. Yes, it feels good to scratch the itch.
July 25, 2007 @ 4:13 pmMark,
I get what you’re saying.
And, hey, I’m a big Rob Bell fan. I like his approach on a lot of issues, including money.
I’ll be seeing him when he comes in town in November. Tickets were $16 but (as with last time) I’m pretty sure all profit goes to charity.
July 25, 2007 @ 11:43 pmMark, I loved that line about Atheism being much less expensive than you Christians.
I think Christianity requires much less Faith, as well. Apparently we can’t save on Both of those commodities at the same time. ;c)
As a good general rule, it might be best to simply never watch televangelists or listen to radio Programs (emphasis on the Programming part, you see). Unless you are looking for a laugh or something to fuel some stimulating angst. At least, that’s what happens to me. In fact, you might find those “farting preacher” video clips that someone (not me) has edited out there to be really, um, (groan) cathartic. Watching one of those sucks the fake religion angst outta me like a teenager on a Slurpee in July.
I think meeting individuals who do not seem so far out on the edge or so on-the-make is the best way to investigate something as misrepresented as [insert swirling searchlights and fanfare] Christianity. But then, I’m just a deaf guitar player…
-Enjoyed everyone’s comments!
July 25, 2007 @ 11:54 pmMark
the copyright thing – copyright doesn’t always equal profit motive. We have a local free newspaper, but the editorial content is still copyright. It also offers some protection against mis-use of the intellectual property.
My father-in-law is one of those hebrew scholar types, and I can tell you, if there’s gold in them there Bible translations, he doesn’t see it. I honestly don’t think Bible translation is something people go into for financial gain, but the copyright protects you from people quoting great chunks of it with a made up bit in the middle saying “give your priest loads of money” or… well, you get the picture. But fair use isn’t objected to, as the above websites attest.
Keith
July 26, 2007 @ 9:10 amKeith said: “…the copyright thing – copyright doesn’t always equal profit motive. We have a local free newspaper, but the editorial content is still copyright. It also offers some protection against mis-use of the intellectual property…”
It makes perfect sense that a newspaper would want some legal help to protect themselves from “mis-use” of their intellectual property but why does God need the copyright laws to protect him? or…. If those aren’t the actual words that belong to God (or if God doesn’t really exist) then why should I bother with them?
I seem to recall a movie years ago where God himself proclaimed that he needed a starship and then the captain of said vehicle stepped through the crowd and asked: “excuse me!? Why does God need a starship?”
Awesome question!
I’m basically asking the same question: “Why does God need a copyright?”
July 29, 2007 @ 7:09 amSo that someone can’t make an almost Bible, but with made up bits to suit their cause? I’m just guessing, but I’ll ask someone who shuold know.
July 29, 2007 @ 11:41 pmHey Everyone,
I’m the guy behind preaching.org and thought I’d weigh in to explain. I won’t try to justify the copyright thing on Bibles. I appreciate the concern, though I understand the need for publishers to take care of their business.
Regarding preaching.org, let me just say that encouraging Christian endeavor can be expensive. Running websites takes time and talent and that means money. I can tell you that no one at preaching.org is making a profit. This is a labor of love and the subscription fee is simply a way of covering some of the costs. My personal dollar investment in this website has been substantial over the years. I’ve made the investment willingly because I believe in what we are doing. I could add, of course, that some of the content on the site does not require subscription and that all of it is available for six months for free via the CD in the back of _Choosing to Preach_.
Hope this helps clarify. Carry on the good dialogue.
August 7, 2007 @ 12:19 pmHi Kent!
If someone feels moved by the creator of the universe to speak or write or make a video expressing the deepest parts of their faith and beliefs then I really want to see it. If someone is speaking or writing for the purpose of generating cashflow then I’m much less interested, not that there is anything wrong with trying to generate cash its just that the spiritual value for me is zeroed out.
I assume that just about everyone would agree that if, for business marketing reasons, a person falsely claims to be writing from purely spiritual inspiration when in fact they are really motivated by making money then a serious integrity issue exists.
If you have a mix of both types of products on your web site then it would be helpful to people like me for you to clearly identify and separate them so people like me don’t have to waste time with products containing a profit motive that we consider to have little or no spiritual value.
Perhaps we should name this truth-in-advertising principle after the passage in the Bible where Paul bent over backwards to explain that what he is about to say was from him and not from God. I don’t have that chapter and verse handy. Does anyone else know it?
August 8, 2007 @ 5:08 amI guess I am still missing the joke about God not creating cats?
December 11, 2007 @ 12:31 pmDavid,
I believe the “cats” reference is related to the ancient theological tradition that cats came on the scene after the fall of Adam and Eve as a form of punishment for mankind’s fall from grace.
That tradition has since been discredited in the Biblical record since the various Bible codes have proven that the fall from grace actually resulted in the creation of polyester, country music star Conway Twitty, creamed corn and (ironically) the musical “CATS.”
Hope this is helpful!
December 11, 2007 @ 4:15 pmScott,
It was thank you, I was just missing the history of the joke. Now it makes a lot more sense.
Thanks for the reply
December 11, 2007 @ 4:52 pmYou forgot Disco and Disco dancing (which go hand in hand with polyester), Scott. I am sure that was mentioned too.
December 12, 2007 @ 10:00 amDisco is the anti-Christ!
Uh…sorry, did I say that out loud?
December 12, 2007 @ 10:27 am…and all this time I thought that my ex-wife was the anti-Christ. Thanks for clarifying John “)
December 12, 2007 @ 11:08 pm