Mohler began by saying we’ve seen what Bell is arguing before.
McLaren responded with a critique of Mohler and offered support for Bell.
Mohler responded to McLaren by saying the issues he raises are important even if he rejects McLaren’s argument.
If that is not enough for you, Bell has his own piece on HuffPo about why he wrote the book.
Roger Olson has an Arminian review of the book. He says some people owe Bell an apology.
Ben Witherington III has started a chapter-by-chapter review of the book that starts here. Here is a bit of Witherington’s review that speaks to me:
The problem which already surfaces in Chapter One is that Rob has blended together in his creative mental cuisinart both some true aspects of the Gospel story and some false caricatures of the Good News, and unfortunately, he is not just rejecting some of the caricatures, he is rejecting some of the true aspects of the story. And this is a problem, all the more so when Rob wants to suggest that a just or righteous or holy or judging God is somehow not good news.
Tell that to the oppressed Christians in North Korea. Tell that to the ordinary citizens of Libya longing to be set free from a wicked and brutal dictator. Tell that to the Jews during the Holocaust in WWII. In a sin-soaked world, Good News involves both redemption and judgment, both vindication and liberation, both holiness and love. The God of the Bible is holy love. Not love without holiness which would fail to deal with the cancer called sin. And not holiness without love, for if that was the way God related to us all— no one could stand. The Good News of and about Jesus Christ, who will be the final judge of the world, is that justice, mercy and grace are all a part of this story.