Friday, December 28, 2007

False teachers part II

Good verses were given about what a false teacher is.
No which ones apply to Rob Bell in particular?
I ask specifically for a friend of mine who continually says that Bell is a false teacher.
How does Bell qualify as a false teacher?

7 comments:

layneh said...

personally, i do not know who he is, but i am sick of hearing about him.

Morris said...

Roland, one of the problems, I think, is that leaders like Rob Bell put the authority of interpretation by the group or community *before* the authority of the Bible. Doing so is like Satan in the Garden of Eden saying to Eve, "Yea, has God said?" (calling God a liar, basically). Either the Bible is the literal final , set-in-stone word of God or it's not. If it's not, then it's useless as a final authority on anything.
Putting the authority of a personal or community interpretation before the factual interpretation is SOP for those in the Emergent Church movement.

Roland said...

So making interpretations of scripture makes one a false teacher?
I'm trying to see that one in scripture, Morris. I can't find it.
I can see your point however. If taken to an extreme, by one who is unlearned in such things, it can very well turn into what you are pointing out. But that isn't what Bell is endorsing. Whether or not others are doing that is another matter. But I want to focus on Bell being labeled a false teacher.
What specifically (Biblically) has he done to be labeled a false teacher?

Geppy said...

Morris, I would agree that his leanings towards "community" probably go to far. But that does not make him a Scripturally "false teacher."

RE: "factual interpretation"
Give me 10 people and we'll have at least 4 different "factual interpretations" on most of Scripture.

Overall, Rob is a good teacher with a few bad interpretations - in my opinion. Maybe he's right though.... But I will continue to live according to what I understand to be right - as I am required to do. :)

j razz said...

Roland,

Here is a blog I frequent often and there was a pretty good discussion on this very topic in two posts. Here is one of them if you care to take a look.

Denny Burk on Rob Bell

Have a good night.

j razz

MikeT said...

Roland,

That is not what Morris said. What Morris said was:

"put the authority of interpretation by the group or community *before* the authority of the Bible."

He's not objecting to making an interpretation, he's objecting to what seems to be the practice of reading a bit of what you want to read into scripture.

I do this with Romans 13. I'll admit that. I've twisted it in some very strange ways in arguments in the heat of the moment. I know I'm wrong, though. Pisses me off to no end that I have to submit to leaders who are corrupt and shiftless, instead of being able to throw them out, but Romans 13 says to behave.

Roland said...

Mike,

But someone HAS to interpret it.
The problem of today is that it no one is encouraged to test the spirits. If anyone does, they are labeled disobedient by some.
The truth is, even when we say, "I'll just go to the authority of the Bible," there is still interpretation to be made. Some things are far easier to interpret and leave little doubt as to what is said, but I've seen people misinterpret "Thou shalt not kill."
Why?
Because they do not understand that in the original language, 'kill' was equated to 'commit murder'. Our 'versions' of the Bible are just interpretations. Some are more literal. Some are more dynamic. Either way, someone somewhere decided which words to use. Even when it was written down.
The truth is, if you give me a verse, I can find several different takes on it. All by Christians.
But again, that is just what I've seen. Maybe there is someone out there (besides Christ) who can do that. Of course, I would dispute that if you found him/her.