Rod Bell on the Blood of Christ

I agree with your critique Chick. Rod Bell has been hanging out with the Presbyterian Ian Paisley all these years and is a quasi-sacramentalist like Paisley. Salvation is by faith in Christ's once for all sacrifice. No manipulation of physical objects required!

 

I don't know about congealing blood, but I'm inclined to believe that the sin nature is passed on from generation to generation through the male seed. That is why Jesus was born of a virgin, so he would not have the sin nature.

 

I had never heard this before, and frankly it is embarrasingly ridiculous!

If Christ did nto have human blood, then he was not 100% human. This is akin to monophysite mysticism and other heresies which deny the total humanity of Christ.

 

I agree with Chick. If the sin nature was in the blood or in the seed as someone else suggested, then it would be possible to isolate the sin gene or genes by DNA sequencing. Therefore, it would be possible for man to remove the Curse by genetic engineering!! Eternal Life without Christ! That is not possible.

The Curse affected ALL of Creation. Romans 8 says that the entire Creation groaneth and travaileth.

 

Me thinks Mr Bell has to much time on his hands. FYI you can increase the Pro time [clotting time] of blood very simply with Heparin or Coumadin, its done all the time if that was the problem with blood from the fall we could fix it - Vitamin K or plasma will make blood clot faster -done every day in hospitals -dont notice less sin in hospital patients. I think sometimes theologians need to get out in the real world more -share Christ with a sinner or two they would be less prone to these kinds of silly things.

 

I agree. I was brought up in the Rod Bell crowd. Dr. Gary Jones of Farmingtion Avenue Baptist( my home church as a child) was a big-wig leader in the FBF crowd in New England and the Bob Jones crowd. We (my family) always referred to this "phenomenon" as the "magic-blood" theory, and never held to it. I also agree that this crowd is not very baptist, they are more protestant than anything.

[ April 30, 2001: Message edited by: Joy2 ]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by keylan:
I think sometimes theologians need to get out in the real world more -share Christ with a sinner or two they would be less prone to these kinds of silly things. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Neither Rod Bell or Dr. Dehaan could be correctly called a "theologian." Rob Bell is a graduate of Bob Jones University with only a BA, I believe, and Dr. DeHaan was, of course, a Medical Doctor prior to the present level of knowledge concerning hematology. It is amazing what passes for "science" in one century and is classed as "nonsense" and "fiction" in the next.

 

The magic blood theory is a good description of this teaching. I wouldn't refer to it as Protestant though. It sounds more Catholic too me. Think about it. This position is just one step away from the Quest for the Holy Grail.

 

I would beseech this forum to pause for a moment before it goes any further in slicing and dicing Brother Bell. Let us look at the position he has set forth and not treat his person as so much fodder for a good stir fry. Remembering that when we all get to Heaven we all will find out that we misinterpreted, misapplied, and thereby mislead our listeners in certain Truths. I trust that this may be minimal for all of us but it is worth keeping in mind in discussing the topic at hand .

So, what are the questions Brother Bell is dealing with? In no particular order, I believe they are<UL TYPE=SQUARE><LI> How did Our Lord not inherit a sin nature?<LI>Since a crucial factor in the doctrine of Soteriology is the Blood Atonement, was/is it necessary for all of the Blood shed by Our Lord during His beatings and Crucifixion to be presently in Heaven?[/list]And there are problably other questions that were not obvious to me.

These questions are worthy of our attention anything else is for the moment only so much Sunday afternoon roast preacher.
Rob't Fall

 

I agree that Rod Bell's views are incorrect, and goes into an extremist area that borders on unorthodoxy, but on the other is not the blood in our veins and arteries corrupted by sin? Certaintly Adam before the fall could not have gotten cancer, diabetes, etc... but we can because sin has corrupted human nature completely. Since we are descendants of Adam that would naturaly mean that our sin nature is inherited from him and does deal with the corrupted Adamic bloodline.
In Adam all die which does imply that our sin nature comes through the bloodline of our parents. I am not accusing anyone here of not believing in original sin or Total Hereditary Depravity (Since I know we have a good number of Calvinists here) but would caution that the other extreme of Rod Bell is Pelagianism which teaches that sin is a learned behavior and not something we inherit through our Adamic nature.

 

There are certain mysteries that God has chosen not to reveal to us in his Word. I think we need to be careful about trying to solve them on our own, because that is where we get into trouble with our doctrine. God wants us to accept His Word by faith. Attempting to explain what has not been revealed to us yet, is a lack of faith. It causes heresies, strife and division amoung believers.

As I mentioned, I grew up in those circles, so I am not roasting anyone. I loved Dr. Bell as a child-still do, but when a brother strays in doctrine, I think it is important to address the issue, so that our doctrine will remain sound.

On this particular issue, perhaps it seems a little catholic, but by in large, the FBF and BJU, which are connected, are protestant-like, and not very baptistic in some areas, though they are in others.

 

I try not to make personal attacks on the BB but I might have cut it close with my earlier comments on Rod Bell. Kind'of ironic that he along with BJU's magazine were the first to jump up and yell "heresy" about John MacArthur's view on the blood. Yet when he prints his own view it turns out to be heresy or at least questionable. I guess we baptists do reserve the right to disagree with one another. I think that I can say with confidence that many who are involved with FBF do not agree with Rod Bell's editorial. I'll be interested to see the letters to the editor in the next issue.

 

Why does it seem such a hard concept to grasp - that it was who Christ was and not the chemical makeup in His blood that kept Him from sin? This is a no brainer to me and Im no scholar.

 

I have a thought.(what a miracle! ) I've been told that a child inherits his blood type from the father, is this true? This leads me to ask that since Jesus has no human biological father, what kind of blood did He have? I'm just honestly wondering! Help!

 

&gt;&gt;what kind of blood did He have? &gt;&gt;

I Peter 1:18-19
18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
19 But with the precious blood
of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

HankD

 

It takes two genes to determine the blood type of an individual. One gene from the mother and one from the father.