Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:22PM 
The early words of Francis Chan are an excellent preface to what you will find in "Erasing Hell", a new book that resoundingly challenges the premise and conclusions of universalism, especially as highlighted recently in Rob Bell's "Love Wins".So I decided to write a book about hell. And honestly—I’m scared to death. I’m scared because so much is at stake. Think about it. If I say there is no hell, and it turns out that there is a hell, I may lead people into the very place I convinced them did not exist! If I say there is a hell, and I’m wrong, I may persuade people to spend their lives frantically warning loved ones about a terrifying place that isn’t real! When it comes to hell, we can’t afford to be wrong. This is not one of those doctrines where you can toss in your two cents, shrug your shoulders, and move on. Too much is at stake. Too many people are at stake. And the Bible has too much to say.[1]
Chan takes the high ground in this well researched book- he refuses to label or harangue Bell, and in fact compliments him on the admirable aspects of several of his points. Francis Chan is careful to deal directly with the material on the issue of hell, salvation and our purpose on earth. What is helpful about the book, is that he provides solid exploration of all the Biblical texts dealing with the pertinent issues- including ones that look (at first) to support an opposing view. This is precisely what Rob Bell failed to do in "Love Wins", and "Erasing Hell" is clearly written to correct and critique on both content and method.
I won't go into the details of each point made by Chan, but one point that is of major importance is his refutation of Bell's false interpretation of hell, which shows the disparity between Bell's unresearched work and Chan's book. Chan says plainly:
Much of what Bell says about hell relies upon a legend from the Middle Ages.[2]
This is backed up by the appropriate details and further context. Additionally, Chan helps explore the actual scripture understandings, especially from Jesus and his followers that speak about hell (Chapter 3) and our understanding and responses to it (Chapter 5). Again, he faces several passages that are normally used by universalists as support and mines through the various interpretations and understandings of them.
Beyond the core of refutation of universalism (and Bell's book), Chan also provides a helpful FAQ (frequently asked questions) section in the Appendix which handles 6 common questions about hell. This material is very helpful and should be read by all pastors, as it is excellent summary to issues that have been discussion for centuries.
Chan's "Erasing Hell" is not a monolithic or even deeply impressive work, but it is a contrite and succinct response to Rob Bell's "Love Wins". It sets out to be a clear corrective on postmodern Christian universalism, and succeeds by taking classical and appropriate steps to expose the error and excise it as a sickness from the body of Christ - the American church.
Even if you haven't read "Love Wins", this book ("Erasing Hell") provides the outline for understanding these important issues.
Amazon Product Link: http://amzn.to/rvlG3C
Review by Kim Gentes
apologetics, chan, erasing hell, francis chan, hell, love wins, rob bell, universalism in Apologetics, Bible, Book Review, Church, Grief, Jesus, Leadership, Loss, Postmodern, Theology
Reader Comments (5)
So, is Chan saying that he wouldn't follow Jesus if there wasn't a place called hell?
Brian,
I am not sure what you are asking.. I don't see Chan saying that, either in this review I posted or in the book... If I said something that led you to believe Chan is saying that, please point it out to me (a quote?) so I can make sure I didn't write ambiguously or something.
Kim
I don't think it's what you wrote but it seems that Chan's quote above is saying that if he says there is no hell that people won't follow Jesus. I'm not sure how that logically follows unless his conviction is that without hell he and others wouldn't be following Jesus.
"If I say there is no hell, and it turns out that there is a hell, I may lead people into the very place I convinced them did not exist!" If he's sharing Jesus I don't see how people will end up in hell just because they didn't know it existed. I'm just not getting his concern. Does he say that Jesus is somehow less attractive without hell?
Not preaching universalism, it just seems like Chan is emoting a lot of angst over people ending up in hell just because they don't believe it exists and I'm pretty sure that's not how anybody gets there from what Jesus' said. Not trying to be argumentative, just my German non-emotional side coming out I guess!
oh.. i see.. I guess I should have included the broader context of the quote.. Chan is actually trying to explain the various options of opinions-- IE, what if he is wrong, what if he is right, what if he tells people one opinion and what are its consequences.. he is not saying he believes in each of the options he is saying here.. its a hypothetical list he is working through.. it makes much more sense in the context of the chapter in which I read it.. perhaps I need to chose another quote that doesn't require further explanation..
then again, maybe just telling people to read the book is best :) ha.. but that is my cop out .. not writing a clear enough review maybe... :)
I think your review is plenty clear, I think I should wait to share my own thoughts until I've actually read the book!