Tag Archives: eternal conscious punishment

“You REALLY Believe in HELL?! But WHY?” (Epilogue)

We’ve covered my top ten reasons for “believing” in hell. By “believing” I don’t mean that Christians should revel in the idea of anyone being eternally lost. By “believing” I mean I want to affirm what the Bible teaches, allow its truth to orchestrate my actions to seek to rescue those who are still going there.

The first reason I affirm the doctrine of hell is that God saved me from going there. I trusted Christ because I was afraid of God’s judgment — a great reason to get saved! I find it amazing that more people are not getting saved out of a fear of God’s eternal judgment. Maybe we’re not getting that part of the message out.

The second reason I believe in hell is its logic. If all people will exist somewhere after death, then the biblical teaching about hell makes sense. If a person has died rejecting Christ, there is no forgiveness, no second chance, no possibility of redemption. They will be cast outside God’s kingdom and confined to a terrible place of weeping and gnashing of teeth. And it seems clear to me (from Revelation 20) that they will endure the same torment that will be inflicted on the devil, the false prophet, and the beast.

The third reason I believe in hell has to do with the doctrine of God. Is He truly “holy, holy, holy”? Then He must do something about SIN. This same God who commanded the extermination of the Amalekites in I Samuel 15, who destroyed Uzzah for touching the ark of the covenant in 2 Samuel 6, and who killed Nadab and Abihu in Leviticus 10 is the same God who executed Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5 and prematurely brought some of the erring Corinthians home to heaven because of their abuse of the Lord’s Supper in I Corinthians 11. The God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament are one and the same. And He hates sin!

The fourth reason I believe in hell has to do with the doctrine of man. Made in God’s image, man is broken and needs his sin atoned for. He does not cease to exist at his death, but there will be the separation of his body from his soul or spirit. He will also experience eternal death if he dies in his sins (not believing in Jesus). Luke 16 provides a glimpse into that time period of one’s existence between physical death and one’s resurrection.

The fifth reason I believe in hell concerns the biblical teaching about sin. To minimize sin is to minimize the price Christ paid at calvary. If God is thrice-holy, we are in a lot of trouble. The crucifixion of the Lord Jesus was God’s plan to redeem man from his sin. We may not think of our sin as cosmic treachery, but the issue isn’t what we think of our sin — but what God thinks!

The sixth reason I believe in hell relates to the biblical teaching about salvation. We were indeed “brands plucked out of the fire” (as John Wesley forever considered himself — As a five-year-old he nearly died in the Epworth Parsonage fire, leaping out of an upper window into a rescuer’s arms just as the whole roof fell in). We were rescued from God’s righteous wrath by the death of His Son. His substitutionary sacrifice bore the punishment we deserved. Editing hell automatically means redefining salvation.

The seventh reason I believe in hell concerns the doctrine of Christ. Jesus clearly taught hell as eternal separation and punishment. If He were wrong, His deity is invalid. Or He purposely deceived people in His teaching. A simple survey of a gospel like Matthew shows that Jesus is our primary source for details about the after condition of “the wicked.”

The eighth through tenth reasons I believe in hell concern the suggested alternatives. Each, we said, lacks biblical support. Annihilationism isn’t taught in the Scriptures, although many work hard to try to prove that it is. After-death opportunities for conversion isn’t in the Bible. Nor do we find persuasive evidence that all will eventually be saved (universalism).

In conclusion, these ten reasons provide a biblical certainty about the sad state of those who die outside of Christ. We who hold to the final authority of Scripture must embrace the awful truth — that God will forever separate from His presence those who die without His Son.

May we who believe such truths plead with the Lord to give us opportunities to share the Good News with others — before it is eternally too late!

(The books on the left are recommended; those on the right should be read with care).

Leave a comment

Posted by on February 27, 2020 in hell


Tags: , ,

“You REALLY Believe in HELL?! But WHY?” (Ten Reasons) (Reason 2) Logical

Why in the world would someone believe in hell? And what exactly does it mean to “believe” in hell? These are a couple of the questions we want to answer in this ten-part series of posts. We’ve looked at REASON #1 — I got saved out of a fear of hell!

REASON #2 – “Doesn’t It Make Sense?” LOGICAL

Just a few notes from several reviews of the book, Hell: The Logic of Damnation: Jerry Walls makes the point that traditional views of hell are still defensible and can be believed with intellectual and moral integrity. His approach to the topic is philosophical theology, arguing from the two truths of the divine nature and the human nature.

In light of the divine nature, Walls argues that some versions of the doctrine are compatible not only with God’s omnipotence and omniscience, but also with a strong account of His perfect goodness. It is this topic — God’s perfect goodness — that receives Walls’ special attention since the doctrine of hell is most often rejected on moral grounds. Walls also argues that human freedom does not make the doctrine of hell unintelligible, since the idea of a decisive choice of evil is a coherent one.

A reviewer writes, “If there is an eternity, it’s not something to mess with. Which brings us to hell. So much depends on whether there is a hell.”

For many centuries hell was very popular. In the last century or so “the hot grip of hell has loosened.” Bertrand Russell said in 1927, “Hell is neither so certain nor as hot as it used to be.” Culture either downright denies or at least waters down the very idea of hell. Sartre’s play “No Exit” presents damnation as a few of your rotten neighbors getting on your nerves for eternity.

And then there are the words of Jesus — “repeated and categorical and hammered home, not only to the effect that there is a hell but that it is a fiery and totally miserable place, and eternal, too.”

Many today suggest that “a really good God would find a way to let even the worst of us off the hook in the end.” He quotes one Charles Duthie, who puts the question more beguilingly: “Do you or do you not entertain the hope that somehow, in the end, all men, even the worst, will be reconciled with him?” We all want a theological happy ending.

The famous philosopher Bertrand Russell had no qualms about finding fault with Jesus Christ Himself on this point, since nobody, Russell argued, “who is profoundly humane can believe in everlasting punishment.” For James Mill, a God who sent people to hell represented “the most perfect conception of wickedness.”

Many Christians accept the idea of hell, but don’t really believe it. Evidence that they don’t believe it is that they do not act like it. We would immediately warn our unbelieving neighbour if his house was on fire, but we seem “strangely reconciled” to his eternal fate. “Walls . . . does not think that because a culture trivializes the concept of hell it does not exist, nor does he think that belief in the existence of hell compromises belief in a good and loving God.”


Here are some logical questions that occur to me:

1. If at God’s right hand “are eternal pleasures forever more” (Ps. 16:11), what must be at His left hand?

2. Does it not make sense that the opposite of God in all His beauty and perfection is ugliness and brokenness and loss?

3. The extent to which we consider the awfulness of being separated from God forever directly flows from the wonder of being in fellowship with Him forever.

4. To reject eternal hell is to do irreparable damage to the atoning work of the Lord Jesus.

5. If man is an immortal being, he must exist somewhere, even in his lost condition.

6. If eternal hell is rejected, then is it redemptive? Purgatorial? Only hortatory?

7. What do we do with the outright, biblical statements about hell’s punishments, eternality, awfulness?

Pray with me? “Lord, I certainly don’t relish the idea of anyone suffering forever, excluded from fellowship with You. But there is a certain logic to eternal condemnation. Help me not only to accept the teaching of Scripture, but to care deeply for those who are still going to that awful place. In Jesus’ name. Amen.” (to be continued)


Leave a comment

Posted by on February 9, 2020 in hell


Tags: , ,

“You REALLY Believe in HELL?! But WHY?” (Ten Reasons) (Reason 1) Autobiographical

“The gospel ain’t true unless somebody around here can get damned!”, said the old farmer after a revival meeting.

The evangelist Billy Sunday declared, “If there is no Hell, a good many preachers are obtaining money under false pretenses!”

Why in the world would someone believe in hell? And what exactly does it mean to “believe” in hell? These are a couple of the questions we want to answer in this ten-part series of posts.

REASON #1 – “This is my story — and I’m stickin’ to it!” AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL
When I was around fourteen years of age, a man in our church took his turn serving as the leader of the young people. He was a serious man who didn’t have time for humor — or our foolishness. I remember one Friday night his showing us a film about hell and closing the youth meeting by asking us, “If you were to die tonight, would you go to heaven . . . or hell?”

As I recall that event, for me it was life- and eternity- changing! I remember dropping to my knees beside my bed when I got home and trusting Christ as my Savior. I hadn’t been a particularly evil teenager, but I knew that if God were half as holy as I suspected and the gospel were true, I was not going to go to heaven when I died. I knew that. And I got saved.

Trusting Christ out of a fear of God’s judgment — is a great reason to get saved! There is eternal judgment awaiting all who die outside of Christ. And no one who comes to faith out of such a rational and overwhelming fear should be ashamed of such an entrance into the family of God.

Scripture tells us “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb. 10:31). Jesus said to the religious leaders of His day, “If you do not believe I am who I claim to be, you will die in your sins!” (my paraphrase of John 8:24).

My conversion was over fifty years ago — and there has been a lot of theological and biblical study that I’ve pursued over the years. I’ve had the privilege of teaching hundreds of Bible college and seminary students in my career and I’m more convinced than ever of hell’s reality and our need to warn others not to go there.

Many mock the very idea of hell (especially the creator of “The Simpsons”). There are many more reasons to “believe” in hell (which we will pursue in subsequent posts), but this one is my first. I got saved out of a fear of God’s judgment and His eternal wrath. And I’m surprised more people today don’t get saved for the same reason.

Leave a comment

Posted by on February 7, 2020 in hell


Tags: , , ,

Review of Article: “Why Do People Believe in Hell?” Why SHOULD People Believe in Hell Part 5 (Conclusion)

This is Part 5 and the conclusion of my response to David Bentley Hart’s article entitled “Why Do People Believe in Hell?” (found here). In this last post I want to continue to present my case for why Christians SHOULD believe in hell.

In our previous post we surveyed the gospel of Matthew to see what the Lord Jesus had to say about hell. He is — or should be — our final authority for what we believe. And His statements are unambiguous.

Is there a more unpleasant topic than eternal lostness? Of course not! Are we free to hold various views about the afterlife for those who die without Christ? Yes and no. Yes in the sense that we can believe whatever we want to believe. But such an exercise of our free will does not make us immune from the consequences of our beliefs. No, in the sense that if we profess to be Jesus-followers, we ought to follow Him in His teachings. And Hart’s position is a detour (“departure” might be the better word) in his discipleship, I would suggest.

If we assume (on good grounds) that God has made clear what we ought to believe about the afterlife, then holding a contrary position to the Scriptures, as John Stott once said, is foolish. He wrote, “Freedom to disagree with the Bible is an illusory freedom; in reality, it is bondage to falsehood.”  Stott also wrote: “If we come to Scripture with our minds made up, expecting to hear from it only an echo of our own thoughts and never the thunderclap of God’s, then indeed he will not speak to us and we shall only be confirmed in our own prejudices.” (Culture and the Bible).

There are many echoes in our culture, so holding to hell as eternal conscious punishment (ECP) is not, nor should it be thought of as, popular! That should not surprise us!

I suspect that Hart’s beef is not with Augustine or Calvin or other ECP believers, but with Jesus Himself. If it is unequivocally true that Jesus taught eternal conscious punishment, then Hart and the rest of us have a choice to make between two options. (1) Jesus was Himself deluded. He was “a man of his time” and shared some of the same pre-scientific misconceptions of his contemporaries. [This view eviscerates Christ’s deity, does it not?]; (2) Jesus purposely taught hell (knowing that it would not be eternal, nor conscious, nor punishment) to motivate people to faith. His warnings were merely hortatory (def. “urging to some course of conduct or action; exhorting; encouraging”). [In that case would He not be rightly thought of as deceptive?].

Those two scenarios are unsatisfying, to say the least. To suggest that Jesus was Himself deluded?! Or to imply that He purposely taught an un-truth in order to get people to believe?!

In conclusion, the testimony of the Lord Jesus about eternal lostness is clear. To reject what He said or to twist His words to fit an alternative theological theory is dangerous.

If it is a crime to shout “fire” in a crowded theater when there is no fire, how much more criminal is it not to shout at all when the fire is raging all around and people are asleep in their seats? The biblical Christian does not want to be alarmist, but he ought to be sounding the alarm!

Lessening the severity of hell or redefining its biblically declared nature is, in our opinion, more dangerous than outright denial. To promote the hope that hell will be a place of growth (rather than a place of groaning) is to twist the tenor and content of Christ’s teaching. Redefinition is more serious than total rejection, not only because the one doing the redefining appears to still be a member of the camp. Redefinition does nothing to change that which is being redefined; it only causes less caution to be taken in the face of a dangerous reality. A cup of poison relabeled Kool-Aid is not less lethal, only more enticing. (from The Other Side of the Good News).







Posted by on January 25, 2020 in hell


Tags: , , , ,

Review of Article: “Why Do People Believe in Hell?” Part 2

I wanted to begin my rebuttal of Hart’s article entitled “Why Do People Believe in Hell?” (found here) with the following sentence:

“The idea of universal salvation is neither biblically, philosophically, nor morally justified. But for many it retains a psychological allure.”

(If you’ve read his article, he began his essay with the sentence: “The idea of eternal damnation is neither biblically, philosophically nor morally justified. But for many it retains a psychological allure.”). (Sorry for the snarky attitude, but Hart’s article really ticks me off).

You see, I’ve been reading through Dr. Hart’s newest book, That ALL Shall Be Saved: Heaven, Hell & Universal Salvation. If one wants to believe in universal salvation — that all not only can, but will, be saved  — you pretty much have to get rid of hell. And that’s what Dr. Hart seeks to do.

1.This is a very personal issue for me, mostly because I got saved as a result of being afraid of going to hell. If hell doesn’t exist, or if it is something quite different than Christians have believed (like, the purging flames of God universally applied), then I got saved under false pretenses.

2.The very first book I wrote sought to defend the traditional doctrine of eternal conscious punishment in light of its erosion among Evangelical theologians (such as Clark Pinnock, John Stott, Michael Green, etc.). Some of my brethren have opted for substitute views like annihilationism (see the book Rethinking Hell). My contribution to the discussion was/is entitled The Other Side of the Good News: Contemporary Challenges to Jesus’ Teaching on Hell and covers the three primary “alternative views” (universalism, post-mortem conversionism, and annihilationism).

3. I am quite familiar with all of Dr. Hart’s objections to eternal hell. My Ph.D. is in historical theology (how doctrines have been understood down through church history). I have made it a practice in my scholarly life to read what I call “boiling books” (books that will make a conservative Christian hopping mad before he or she gets past the preface) so I can familiarize myself with the arguments of unbelievers. I am not reading Hart’s That ALL Shall Be Saved for my spiritual nourishment, but to see what his objections are to the clear teaching of the Word of God, the B-I-B-L-E. (I can’t get rid of my snarkiness).

4. I believe the denial of hell as eternal conscious punishment minimizes the seriousness of man’s sin, makes a mockery of Christ’s atoning work, and eviscerates the very enterprise of missions and evangelism. Why seek to convert others to biblical Christianity if all will ultimately be saved? The universalist theologian Theodore Parker (d. 1860 -who is celebrated as an intellectual who “played a major role in moving Unitarianism away from being a Bible-based faith”) once quipped, “I believe that Jesus Christ taught eternal punishment — I do not accept it on his authority!” If the gospel is true and hell is real and Jesus is God the Son, that’s the dumbest and most dangerous thing anyone could ever say!

Here’s a copy of the letter I’ve written to the Opinion Editor of the New York Times. Let’s hope they’ll let me write a rebuttal piece. (to be continued)





Posted by on January 22, 2020 in hell


Tags: , , ,

Some Thoughts on the Book “What’s the Least I Can Believe and Still Be a Christian?” (Post #6) BAD PEOPLE WILL BE “LEFT BEHIND” AND THEN FRY IN HELL

The next chapter of the book by the United Methodist minister Martin Thielen (entitled What’s the Least I Can Believe and Still Be a Christian?) is entitled Bad People Will Be “Left Behind” and Then Fry in Hell. He subtitles this chapter “Left-behind rapture theology is neither a biblical nor a historical Christian belief and should be left behind by mainline and moderate evangelical Christians.”

In this chapter Thielen attacks two end-times’ doctrines: the doctrine of a secret rapture and the doctrine of eternal conscious punishment (ECP). He rejects the secret rapture doctrine, arguing it was invented by John Darby (I did my Ph.D. dissertation on Darby, and it’s difficult to prove that he “invented” it). I agree with Thielen that some who hold to the left-behind view have tended to not care about the environment or social issues. But that should not automatically eliminate the possibility that Jesus can return at any moment. There does seem to be some support in the Scriptures for the secret rapture view.

Concerning the fate of “the wicked” (those who die without faith in Christ), Thielen lists the three alternatives to ECP: universalism, after-death opportunities to repent, and annihilationism. I’ve examined each of these views extensively in my first book The Other Side of the Good News and find each lacks biblical support.

MY RESPONSE: Thielen says the ECP view is “fiercely debated” (but that’s also true with the doctrine of the Trinity, isn’t it?). He rejects the idea of eternal conscious punishment because it presents God as One who “ultimately loses” (if many are condemned) and that He is guilty of giving out “a highly disproportionate penalty.” If God’s ultimate goal is His own glory — and if human beings deserve God’s eternal wrath — then those who go to hell are evidence of man’s poor choice, not God’s poor planning. The disproportionate argument misses the point of the seriousness of sin against a holy God. Stealing from a stranger is bad. Robbing one’s mother is quite different. Rejecting the Son of God merits the worst possible punishment — banishment in hell separated from God and His redeemed people.

After examining the three “alternatives,” Thielen comes out as an agnostic about what will happen to the lost. Such agnosticism is not warranted by the Word of God. I appreciate the terror he felt as he watched the “Left Behind” movie as a teenager, but fear can sometimes lead people to trusting Christ! And suggesting that each of the three “alternatives” to hell have some biblical support and that we “simply have to trust God to do the right thing whatever that is” fails to take the Bible seriously.

Here’s one popular picture suggesting what might happen at the rapture.



Leave a comment

Posted by on February 12, 2019 in doctrine


Tags: , , ,


Friends: Have I got a deal for you! My book, The Other Side of the Good News: Confronting Contemporary Challenges to Jesus’ Teaching on Hell, will be sent to you IF you sent $10 to my PayPal account:

The Other Side of the Good News discusses Screenshot 2016-01-10 14.27.07three alternatives suggested (universalism, post-mortem conversionism, and annihilationism) to replace the biblical view of eternal conscious punishment.  Jesus’ teaching on hell is carefully examined. Go to, click on “Pay or Send Money,” and that’s it! I’ll be notified via email that you have paid for the book and I’ll send it to you. You are also welcome to send me your shipping address (email me at

This book — The Other Side of the Good News — is the most academically-researched book I’ve written.  This book will help you answer questions about God’s wrath and the need for Christ to provide salvation.

Leave a comment

Posted by on February 12, 2016 in hell


Tags: , , ,


Thanks to all who have supported me in this publishing project, “Farewell, Rob Bell”:  A Biblical Response to Love Wins.  I especially appreciate the support of Ken Silva of Apprising Ministries.  This book is now available through  There is also a Kindle version.  Allow me to repeat the flyer below which shows the cover (masterfully done by Christian cartoonist Ron Wheeler):

God’s given me courage to send a copy to Bell’s elders at Mars Hill Bible Church.  Please pray that some of them will read it and respond properly.

I’ve also sent a copy to Mark Galli of Christianity Today who says that Rob Bell and Love Wins are no litmus test of orthodoxy!  He’s publishing a book entitled God Wins.

Discussion Questions:  Why should we get in such a flap about a book on God’s love?  What makes neo-universalism so dangerous?


Tags: , , , , , ,

“Will Only a Few Be Saved?” (Part 3)

This three-part discussion of Luke 13 in which a person asks Jesus, “Lord, are only a few people going to be

Is GOD a tightwad?

saved?” provides a foundation for us to discuss neo-universalism and its charge that Evangelicalism is stingy and holds that God is not generous in salvation.

Rob Bell (and to some extent Brian McLaren) advocate endless opportunities in the after-death state for God to “melt every heart” and win everyone over to salvation.

The Bible indicates that God owes no one salvation.  His greatness (contra Bell) does not depend on His saving many, a few, or none. Let’s look at our Luke 13 one more time:

22 Then Jesus went through the towns and villages, teaching as he made his way to Jerusalem. 23 Someone asked him, “Lord, are only a few people going to be saved?”

He said to them, 24 “Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to. 25 Once the owner of the house gets up and closes the door, you will stand outside knocking and pleading, ‘Sir, open the door for us.’

“But he will answer, ‘I don’t know you or where you come from.’

26 “Then you will say, ‘We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.’

27 “But he will reply, ‘I don’t know you or where you come from. Away from me, all you evildoers!’

28 “There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. 29 People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God. 30 Indeed there are those who are last who will be first, and first who will be last.”

To review:  Jesus does not directly answer this question about “only a few” being saved.  Instead, he launches into an analogy involving a narrow door, a house, and a homeowner.  Jesus begins the story by encouraging His listeners to “make every effort” (the Greek word implies agony) to enter through the narrow door.

It appears that many will try to crash the house (“many will try to enter and will not be able to”) and will be turned away.  The homeowner will at some point get up and close the door, prohibiting any more from entering his house.

But those on the outside do not simply give up and walk away.  They began providing arguments why the door should be re-opened and they be allowed entrance.  They claim to have eaten and drunk with the Lord and to have heard Him teach in their streets.

The homeowner responds to their arguments by saying, “I don’t know you or where you are from.”  The clear implication is that entrance to the house is based on a relationship with the homeowner.  And they had none.

We are then told that He brings the conversation to a screeching halt by saying, “Away from me, all you evildoers!”  This hardly seems consistent with Hebraic hospitality.  But the issue isn’t hospitality, but salvation (remember the original question).

Jesus then describes the outside of that house as a place of weeping and gnashing of teeth.  We pick up the text at this point.

28 “There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. 29 People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God. 30 Indeed there are those who are last who will be first, and first who will be last.”

Let’s summarize and add a few questions for reflection.

Jesus uses the analogy of a house —

1.  there is a narrow door;

2.  effort is required to enter through the narrow door;

3.  there will be many (competition?) who will try to enter & won’t be able to (why not?);

4.  the house’s owner will get up and close the door (which, of course, is his prerogative — he’s the owner!);

5.  YOU will stand outside knocking & pleading, “Sir, open the door for us.” (v. 25)

6.  His response?  “I don’t know you or where you come from.” (v. 25) (= “you are a stranger to me — why should I trust you?”);

7.  YOU seek to identify yourselves:  “We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.” (v. 26).

8.  His reply:  “I don’t know you or where you come from.  Away from me, all you evildoers!” (v. 27)

9.  CONCLUSION:  “There will be weeping there . . .”

What do we know from Scripture THAT WE LIKE?

1.  He is not willing that any should perish, but that all come to repentance!

2.  Jesus did not come primarily to condemn, but to save.  He came on a RESCUE mission!  Judgment is God’s “strange work.”

3.  The Lord’s arm is not short that it cannot save.  There is no INABILITY in the Lord that prevents most or ALL being saved!

4.  He wants His house FILLED!

5.  He does not delight in the death of the wicked!

6.  He has declared that people from every tribe, people, tongue and nation will be at the throne worshipping!

What do we know WE MAY NOT LIKE from Scripture?

1.  God is thrice-holy and is allergic to sin!

2.  He WILL judge!

3.  Hell is a real place!

4.  Not all will believe!

5.  Satan has blinded the minds of unbelievers.

6.  Death ENDS all opportunities to be saved.

7.  We have an OBLIGATION to get the gospel OUT!

Discussion Questions:  Which of the above considerations need more attention by Evangelicals in light of the challenge of neo-universalism?  How might solid exegetical preaching help in providing answers to some of these questions?


Tags: , , , , ,

“FAREWELL, ROB BELL”: A Biblical Response to Love Wins (available soon)

Friends:  I’ve been working hard the last few weeks to complete my response to Rob

me at hard labor

Bell’s Love Wins:   A Book about Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived (HarperOne, 2011).   The book is finished and is being published through Amazon’s Create Space (print on demand).  Not a particularly long book (70 pages or so), “Farewell, Rob Bell:  A Biblical Response to Love Wins” deals with the primary questions Bell raises in his presentation of what I’ve been calling neo-universalism.

I’m extremely pleased with the original cover art by cartoonist Ron Wheeler.  Below is the cover (which probably needs no explanation):

Didn’t he do a great job? I’m trying to keep the price down, so I’m charging only $10 (which includes shipping to the USA and Canada).  Send a check or money order made out to me (Larry Dixon) + your address and I will ship your copy as soon as they come off the press!  My address:  117 Norse Way, Columbia, SC  29229

Sorry for the commercial, but I believe I’ve put together a solid response to Bell which will be of help, especially to those who have not or do not intend to read Love Wins.


Tags: , , , , , ,