Review: Developing the Bible and Faith Through Story

This review first appeared on the Englewood Review of Books.

Books on the Bible are a dime a dozen, with some worth even less than that. Much ink has been spilled on the nature of the Bible and interpretations of various passages. Often, these books are either overly academic, unrelatable to many readers, or intellectually unsupported.

Rob Bell's latest text, What is the Bible?, is none of these things. In his book, Bell tackles a variety of Scripture passages in order to better help us understand the fundamental nature of the modern Christian Bible. In short, Bell actually answers his book's titular question with its subtitle: How an Ancient Library of Poems, Letters, and Stories Can Transform the Way You Think and Feel About Everything. The Bible is intended to transform our thoughts, beliefs, feelings, and actions through a variety of narrative methods in order to better respond to the world we live in.

In typical Bell style, What is the Bible? is broken up into highly readable and digestable chapters clustered into multiple parts that form an overarching narrative. Initially, the first few chapters were interesting and thought provoking regarding the specific passages being interpreted. However, they seemed disconnected from a larger coherent thesis. It takes most of Part 1 for Bell to really start making his core argument.

At first this approach was annoying and off-putting. The book seemed more helpful as an encyclopedia-type resource that could be helpful in interpreting particular Scriptures. This is not a bad thing in itself, but not exactly how the book seems to be advertised. However, as the pieces came more clearly together, the final effect was far more powerful than a traditional exposition on the nature of the Bible. Interestingly, this approach somewhat mirrors the way Scripture powerfully shares the transformative power of Yahweh and the Gospel--individual stories that don't always seem to connect, but still tell a deeper, developing tale.

Growth and development is really core to Bell's understanding of the Bible. Central to his interpretations of passages are the iterative steps needed to help humans move to new levels of understanding themselves, their neighbors, and the world. This hermeneutic provides compassion for people and situations that are otherwise easy to judge. Building compassion is one of the core traits that God is trying to build in people, so having compassion for our spiritual ancestors is a good place to start. However, a developmental approach to the Bible seems to consistently not be easy for humanity. We tend to take more of a stagnant approach to understanding all things spiritual, trying to make the case for a single perspective and set of laws that are good for all people of all ages in all places in all times. We don't do this with any other part of human development, recognizing the many variables that impact our development (or lack thereof). And when we recognize development has been limited, we can often acknowledge the contextual factors, giving us a chance to better understand where someone is coming from and have compassion on them.

Development, growth, and change, both as individuals and a species, are normal for all parts of humanity. Remembering that this applies to our spiritual lives can be transformative in how we see ourselves, others, and the Bible. Bell actually ends the entire book (even after the traditional Endnotes) with a section entitled A Note on Growing and Changing. He emphasizes this central role of growth and change, providing encouragement to those who may have experienced development, but whose communities may be uncomfortable with the change. Part of this encouragement also builds compassion for ourselves and what was helpful before, recognizing that what was useful at one point in our lives may not be now. This approach might help us better integrate our many lifetime spiritual influences.

This developmental view is similar to Peter Enns' perspective presented in The Bible Tells Me So. Both men use helpful subtitles to clarify their purposes. Enns' is Why Defending Scripture Has Made Us Unable to Read It. Enns is really more focused on helping us be more open to reading the Bible as it is. He includes a bit more scholarship related to biblical interpretation, as this is the core of his text (plus it's more of his background). Bell, on the other hand, is a storyteller at his core, and his theme is more helping us better understand ourselves and our world. Both authors use some similar language to talk about the Bible, and they have similar, accessible, digestable writing styles. These two books could be good as complementary texts, and do not necessarily duplicate efforts.

As noted, Bell is a storyteller. He is famous for his engaging, thoughtful, and moving oration and writing, and this book is no different. His style and approach is consistent with his past work, so readers who like his style will not be disappointed. He effectively brings biblical passages to life in a way few others can. It also works very well in this book, as his writing approach creates an accessibility and relationality that reduces defensiveness, creates intrigue, and invites questions. This is exactly what Bell wants in this book: He wants readers of the Bible to ask questions. Lots of questions. And some of his final chapters are focused on helping people ask good questions.

Bell's book is titled with a question, but he doesn't directly answer the question. In fact, it's a question that is likely unanswerable in a concise, direct approach. A book entitled What is the Bible? seems to be one that would have a lot of direct exposition to provide great clarity on such important topics as the nature of the Bible. However, true to Bell's style (and frankly the way the Bible and Jesus taught), the answers are provided through story, specifically helping us better understand individual stories in the Bible and how they connect as part of a larger story. There is a section where Bell more directly answers questions. In fact, it's about a quarter of the book. But this section is the end. Even the more direct analysis and argument is explained through story. In many traditional contexts, the exposition comes first, with stories used as illustrations and clarifications. However, a traditional approach would not have been as effective, as it likely would have put readers more in their heads, preparing intellectual arguments for or against. Bell's story first style creates a situation that is far more powerful than traditional argumentation. He is not merely making a scholarly, academic, intellectual claim. By putting answers to questions at the end, Bell is bringing readers along into a spiritual life that must be experienced to be understood.

What is the Bible? is a strong entry in both Bell's library as well as the general discussion of biblical understanding. He has a well-educated, but accessible style that makes challenging concepts more easily digestable. However, this text is no pop spirituality or pop theology text. It provides appropriately informed reflections that lead to solid new insights that can contribute to our on-going spiritual development through the value of biblical and modern story.

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

Review: The Sanctity of the Mundane

This review first appeared on the Englewood Review of Books.

Rob Bell, in his latest book, How to Be Here, explores how to create a life worth living through being present in the here and now. It addresses ideas that are becoming quite popular, likely because of their relevance for our modern culture and way of living. Bell continues with his strong, engaging writing style and story telling, so fans of his approach will likely appreciate this text, as well. His style should open up ideas to new audiences. At the same time, the book could be better organized to make his point clearer and send the message “home” more effectively.

As noted, Bell provides his usual writing that is engaging, accessible, and engrossing. His passion comes through clearly, and the personal anecdotes enliven abstract ideas. The short sections make the text easily digestible while allowing for pauses in reading, when needed. He is an incredibly effective story teller, and his success in many areas reflects this skill. It is once again displayed very well in How to Be Here.

The biggest challenge in this particular book is that, in many ways, it feels like a collection of short essays that are loosely connected, but could really stand on their own. I frequently found myself asking, “What is his point? Where is he going?” I struggled to find an overall thesis and direction. The book is subtitled A Guide to Creating a Life Worth Living, although interestingly, that subtitle doesn’t appear on the cover to provide some clarity. In hindsight, the title does summarize the thesis and purpose of the book, mentioned above: Create a life worth living through being present in the here and now. However, there are several sections that dive into other sub-theses and concepts, like ikigai, a Japanese word for what gets you out of bed in the morning, motivated to take on the day. There are great ideas and discussions he presents, but they don’t feel fully realized over the course of the entire book. This is what contributes to that essay anthology feeling.

A short introduction providing a direction/thesis and tying all the parts together would have done wonders for the coherency of the narrative across the entire text. On the other hand, Bell's style traditionally tends to be conversational, and his ultimate point isn't often known until his work is done. This works well for his short Nooma videos or even longer sermons. A book is a different experience, though, and making a clear direction, even if the conclusion is still a surprise, is really critical for reader engagement and comprehension. He also doesn't go back and clearly connect all the dots on the backend, which would at least have provided retrospective coherency.

All that aside, the points he was trying to make were strong. In many ways, the text reminded me of a modern version of Brother Lawrence's Practice of the Presence of God. Bell illustrates this very well, in his unique, engaging style, emphasizing examples of and the power of being present in the moment, seeing the sanctity of the mundane, helps us experience life more fully and find meaning.

Indeed, there are many faith and cultural traditions, within and without Christianity, that have taught these lessons. The behavioral sciences have picked up on these principles in the past decade, generally describing them under the umbrella of mindfulness, and plenty of research has reinforced the truth of these claims. From that perspective, there isn't much new in Bell's text, although he doesn't necessarily claim that he is coming up with a new idea. In many ways, he is a story teller to illustrate and convey principles in new ways. And Bell has always been excellent at this. This story telling to bring abstract principles to life is what How to Be Here does best. 

At the same time, the book full title: How to Be Here: A Guide to Creating a Life Worth Living is misleading, as it isn’t really a guide, at least not in a traditional sense. There are no steps, no real recommendations; just stories. A reader could easily walk away from the book wondering what they can really do to be here. Bell’s stories have examples, but they’re highly contextualized and therefore not necessarily generalizable. There are plenty of more concrete guides to mindfulness and presence that lay out example activities, prayers, exercises, etc. that can help us be more mindful and present in the moment. A potential downside of these materials is that they can be viewed prescriptively and formulaically, which is definitely a problem.

Perhaps this is why Bell takes a different approach. In reflection, an implicit part of his message seems to be that there is a journey, a story, to being able to be effectively present and create a life worth living. His initial and most enduring metaphor is in writing a story of our lives, starting with the blinking line on an electronic page. There is great truth to this approach, and frankly, I think it is truer than any activity, exercise, or form of prayer, as it is frequently in the doing of things that we lose our presence and sense of meaning. Yet many people need some examples of things to do to practice this sort of thing. Bell’s book can be complementary to these other, more traditional guides, with them providing practices, while he helps build motivation and weightiness to value of such practices.

In the end, How to Be Here is a book with meaning and value, but it doesn’t sit on its own well. Additional structure to orient the reader what the purpose of the book is, and ensuring all points are clearly connected would have strengthened it significantly. As it is literally advertised as a “how to” book and a “guide,” reference to other resources would have helped, as well. Even explicitly discussing the power of narrative and journey over practices, as I noted above, would have helped improve Bell's thesis and purpose.

This text is probably best for people who don’t necessarily need suggestions on what to do different (many of us know what to do), but need reminders of priorities and that mindfulness and presence is really quite worthwhile.

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.” 

Rob Bell's Modern, Graceful Hour of Power @realrobbell @CarltonCuse @godgrrl

Many people know Rob Bell left Mars Hill Bible church last year to move to LA and work with Lost producer/writer Carlton Cuse on some mysterious venture. Well, last night, I got a preview with a "beta test" of their new plans. My friend, Luthor, was able to get tickets to the show, and we wound up sitting in the front row, feet on the platform, literally three feet from Bell most of the night.

As Luthor and I were leaving and talking about the hour and a half event, I commented that it seemed like a modern, hipster Hour of Power. In many ways they were able to accomplish updates that Robert A. Schuller and others were trying to do while getting push-back to retain an outdated model.

I actually laughed inside a few times while observing some of the totally stereotypic hipsters in the audience. In one row, there were 3 or 4 guys next to each other, all with the same type of black, thick-rimmed Ray-Ban-like glasses on. I was amazed how many people seemed to have the same plaid patterned shirts, albeit in different colors. And the audience was rather white. And male. Well, there were women, but men were a bit more plentiful. Some of the production staff actually asked a few of the guys behind us to move so they could put women in because it was too many white males right in the camera's view. :)

Anyway, the night started off with a band (I don't remember the name, but they had a Southern folksy sound I liked) singing three songs. Then Bell and Cuse gave an introduction; followed by another song; an interview of Cathleen Falsani, a religion reporter; another song; a Q&A with Bell; teaching by Bell; then a closing rendition of Amazing Grace, with audience participation.

Looking at that format, it's a classic format for a church service, except for the band performing rather than leading a worship song (although there was some of that). And the Hour of Power flowed similarly, with an interview of someone about faith-related matters, followed by a message. The basic structure is there, but in a far more accessible manner for younger generations in Bell rather than Schuller (maybe it's a Robert thing that such programs can work well).

I doubt it would be officially called a church service or even Christian. From the introduction of the night and ensuing discussions, it sounds like Bell and Cuse are trying to help people see God all around them without the barriers that stop that observation. Unfortunately, "Jesus," "Christ," and "Christianity" have been given bad names due to the bad behavior of those of us who adopt his name. Sometimes we need to separate ourselves from the label in order to rediscover and re-experience the true beauty of the real Risen Christ.

One statement I really appreciated from Bell was that church is supposed to reorient people to be aware of God throughout the week rather than be just the one encounter of God during the week. While they will undoubtedly get criticism for not being explicit about Jesus and the Cross all the time (again, the Schullers have had their fair share of criticism on that front), Christ and his love were everywhere. Seeing Bell in person made me really believe that he deeply lives out his values rather than paying them lip-service like so many famous Christian talking heads. Ultimately, in my opinion, a person cannot have a full experience of grace and God without eventually encountering Christ, whether or not that person names Christ explicitly.

On the topic of criticism, one of my favorite lines of the night came from Cuse, who discussed some of the "vociferous naysayers" he encountered because of the ending to Lost. Bell laughed saying, "Is that what you're calling critics now?" I was surprised neither applied the term to Bell's detractors. Later, during the Q&A, Cuse read a question, "How have you dealt with the criticism from Love Wins?" Bell sarcastically responded, "There was criticism?" and then had a pause, seeming to consider a wise response. I impulsively responded, "vociferous naysayers," which got a nice laugh. I have to say it's fun making famous people chuckle. :)

One of the ways Bell has really earned my respect was by the way he has handled the plethora of criticism and sometimes flat-out cruelty following his writing. His lack of engagement in fruitless debate demonstrates, in my opinion, a maturity and faith not many people have. His discussion of trying to move to this and the struggle appeared so sincere and not just a PR response, which I appreciated.

Beyond these "lighter" topics, the theme for the night was grace. Falsani shared some amazing stories from her interviews with others, citing Phillip Yancey's definition of grace: "Justice is getting what you deserve, mercy is not getting what you deserve, and grace is getting what you don't deserve." I think it's an important reminder for many us. And when I get spare time again, I think I'm going to have to read some Falsani's stuff--I liked what I heard.

Bell expanded on the topic of grace during his "sermon." Ultimately, I really hope the video or a transcript of the message is released sooner rather than later. There were so many great quotes that I wish I remembered. As Luthor noted, Bell puts into word many things some of us find hard to say. And I think he did that last night.

One element that really stuck out to me was that grace lets go of having to be right and is not always logical. As Bell knows well, so much discussion in the Christian realm has to do with debate and trying to be rational and right. But as I'm learning more and more, what is right is not always rational. And letting go of having to be right brings great peace.

A couple of illustrations of this. I've been making my way through the Star Trek movies (I know, how can a Trekkie not have seen them all already). Laci and I just saw The Voyage Home, which has a subplot of Spock recognizing that the right thing is not always logical, confusing some of his Vulcan brethren.

Further, some of the psychological sciences is supporting that rationality is not always best. In DBT (Dialectical Behavior Therapy), for instance, the ideal "wise mind" is a balance of emotion and logic, making decisions aware of both, but perhaps going with the conclusion by one or the other.

Finally, another point that stood out to me was a question in the Q&A asking Bell what one element from another religion he would bring into Christianity. He essentially explained Buddhist mindfulness, noting the importance of stillness. He had some great quote, which I'll butcher here about modern American Christianity having a "caffeinated business" where we fear a God who is "always pissed off and if we stay busy enough, he may not notice us." While our theology does not always reflect that, our lifestyle does reflect exactly that. He noted the importance of stillness to rest in God's grace.

Ever since I took a Buddhist psychology course in undergrad, I noted the similarities between many Buddhist and Christian values, namely mindfulness. From my training and experience in DBT, this is an area of concern for many Christians, but it is actually a deeply Christian practice. Ultimately, this concept does not need to be taken from Buddhism and applied to Christianity. It is already deep in Christian tradition, although we often forget "the still small voice" and "be still, and know that I am God."

Despite Bell's use of media, I find he utilizes media in a way that actually creates a stillness in me. It does not have a frenetic feel of many Christian outlets. Rather, Bell uses the arts to focus attention intentionally and mindfully on one thing, allowing a depth of absorption that would be impossible with regular American distraction.

I'm not sure what will come of the show. I have a feeling this was a pilot that will be shopped around. I hope something positive comes of it because we need more God-centered, grace-filled shows that point people to recognize the Incarnation in daily life.