Your Brother Daniel
For more great blogs as this one go to Daniel’s blog site at: www.Mannsword.blogspot.com
Dialogues with “Christian” Universalists
Universalism can look
very appealing. Here is what the Christian
Universalist Association (CUA) writes about it:
· Are you looking for a faith that boldly
proclaims God’s unfailing love for all people? A faith that accepts Jesus as
Savior and holds him up as someone who shows us the heart of the Creator, as
someone everyone can follow with joy and integrity — and yet a faith that does
not use fear of eternal hell as a stick to force you into the fold? Are you
searching for a faith based on the premise that in the end there will be no one
left behind — a faith that through this blessed hope can truly break down barriers
and bring people together in a spirit of joy and “good tidings to all”?
This form of
universalism is appealing in a number of ways:
1. It allows you to retain some semblance of your
Christian faith.
2. It also coincides with today’s secularism that
denies any eternal punishment, removes all distinctions among peoples,
eliminates any fear of judgment, provides a popular but simplistic faith, and
is all-inclusive.
However, not
everything that is appealing is true. Here is a slightly edited dialogue (of my
own words) that I recently had with universalists at the CUA Facebook group. I
hope it illustrates some of the problems with universalism.
Daniel, you can't have
"Mercy enduring forever" and eternal torment too. One cancels out the
other right? Which would you prefer to win or last forever? Is your god,
eternally angry, hateful, judgmental vindictive? Or does your heaven have NO
eternal forgiveness, grace of unconditional love?
Even biblically, there
is so much we don't know about hell and eternal judgment. Is it a matter of
annihilation (and not eternal anger)? If annihilation is the eternal
consequence (or one of them), then it isn’t a matter of God being eternally
angry, but rather a matter of people refusing to come to the light and be
eternally healed. Is it something self-chosen due to our hate of the light
(God) John 3:17-20? In this case, how could we call God “vindictive” for
allowing the lover of darkness to choose his destiny?
Unless, you can
precisely define the nature of hell, we cannot begin to suggest that the
existence of hell contradicts the nature of God as presented in the Bible.
Consequently, I do not
see contradiction where you see it. I am willing to live with a certain degree
of tension and uncertainty about the nature of hell because I am convinced that
God will reconcile it all lovingly and justly in the end.
I am also left to
wonder where your evidence and confidence about universalism arises, now that
you have rejected the biblical revelation. Do you have a more trustworthy
revelation?
Daniel, the evidence
for the existence of a loving God is everywhere, not just in the Bible. Just
google "proof of God," and then start reading. Close your eyes and
try to imagine yourself not existing. Unimaginable. Try to imagine a God who by
His nature is the very definition of love, and at the same time hateful and
vindictive towards those who want to believe in Him, but can't. Unimaginable!
We all know in our hearts that God is love, because God has planted those feelings
there. Trust your gut. Trust your heart. God will fill in all the details when
you are ready to know more. For some, that won't come until after death. But
that's OK. Whether we believe it or not, God loves us and is always with us. So, just go out there
and live your life to the fullest and follow your heart.
Along with you, I
certainly believe that God is love. However, I don't think that this
contradicts the fact that God is also righteous (judging), just and holy.
Meanwhile, based upon what you regard
as imaginable and unimaginable, you impugn the biblical God as “hateful and
vindictive towards those who want to believe in Him, but can't.”
What if instead, they
refuse to believe (Rom. 1:18-32; 3:10-16) because they hate God and refuse to
come to Him and be saved (John 3:19-21). Unless you can prove that humanity is
as innocent as the CUAs make us out to be, then you cannot make the case that
the biblical God is “hateful.”
It seems that a lot of
our differences arise from the way the CUA seems to imagine humanity, God and
hell. While your imagination conjures up a relatively innocent humanity, and an
unjustified hell and a God who is less that righteous, just and holy, the Bible
presents an entirely different portrait.
Daniel, instead of
viewing [God’s here-and-now judgments] as vindictive, we view them as remedial
and restorative in purpose.
I too would have
trouble with the vindictive part. However, to the prophet Ezekiel, God reveals:
· "Say to them, ‘As surely as I live,
declares the Sovereign Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but
rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways!
Why will you die, people of Israel?’" (Ezek. 33:11)
Perhaps then hell is a
matter of annihilation for those who refuse to be connected to Life and find
restoration or perhaps hell is self-chosen. Since they detest the presence of
the Light as they have in this life, perhaps for them, darkness will remain
preferable to the Light in the next life.
Oh no! Who refuses to
be connected to Life, who detests the presence of the Light? They are the ones
whose souls have been warped, wounded, and wasted, deprived of love and
compassion, and poisoned from the well of warfare, hatred, and greed. None of
us can boast of our goodness, we fall so short of the mark. Our destiny is not
in our hands, but in the hands of a forgiving and compassionate creator. We are
all, in the words of Kalen's book, DESTINED FOR SALVATION.
What if humanity is
far worse than our relative innocence you imagine? What if we have truly become
evil to the core, as so many verses suggest:
· As it is written: “There is no one righteous,
not even one; there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God.
All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who
does good, not even one.” “Their throats are open graves; their tongues
practice deceit.” “The poison of vipers is on their lips.” “Their mouths are full of cursing and
bitterness.” “Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery mark their
ways.” (Rom. 3:10-16)
If this portrait
corresponds to the real nature of humanity, wouldn’t you have to revise your
assessment of our innocence and God’s “hatefulness” by judging?
Daniel my brother, you
can't have both judgment and mercy enduring forever. You cannot hate and love
at the same time. One cancels out the other. In Christ, mercy triumphs over
Justice. That's in your bible too!
You insist that
judgment is incompatible with love and cite “mercy triumphs over judgment” in
support. However, you seem to believe that this teaching eliminates any need
for judgment. However, when we take a look at this passage in context, we have
to reject this possibility:
· Speak and act as those who are going to be
judged by the law that gives freedom, because judgment without mercy will be
shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment. (James
2:12-13)
Instead, James
insisted that judgment is still on the table for those who aren’t merciful.
What then is mercy? According to Jesus, mercy is predicated on repentance:
· Jesus answered, “Do you think that these
Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered
this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. Or
those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they
were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But
unless you repent, you too will all perish.” (Luke 13:2-5)
Daniel, you can find
passages of scripture that support annihilationism. Those same passages,
however, are subject to more than one interpretation. The word in the Bible
that is translated "destroyed" simply means "lost." That
which is lost can also be found. That which is dead can be made alive again.
That is what the Gospel of Christ is all about. The Bible clearly teaches that
in Christ "all shall be made alive." Yes, the wages of sin is death
and the destruction of the soul, but the gift of God is life. All we like sheep
have gone astray and become "lost." Jesus will not lose any of those
sheep permanently. He will seek them out and eventually bring all of them back
into the fold.
I certainly agree that
the doctrine of eternal judgment is a difficult one. It is for this reason
(among others) that I am reluctant to associate it with a God of Hate but
rather of justice.
You are right that “in
Christ, all shall be made alive.” However, we have no basis to apply this to
those outside of Christ. Instead, Scripture offers little hope for those
outside:
· Just as people are destined to die once, and
after that to face judgment, so Christ
was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second
time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for
him. (Heb. 9:27-28)
I might not like this
exclusivistic message, but I am bound to submit to it, even before my
understanding catches up to this revelation.
Daniel, do you really
believe that that the Gospel is about justice? It is exactly the opposite. It
is the height of arrogance to believe that you are "justly" going to
heaven, while the mass of "unjust" humanity is going to spend
eternity in Hell.
You are right!
Entering heaven is not a matter of justice but of mercy, and mercy can be
discriminate.
What kind of justice
is it that prepares a "place" of eternal suffering for temporal
misdeeds? This even goes way beyond the "eye for an eye, tooth for a
tooth" scale-balancing justice of the Hebrew Bible. We might even be able
to live with a scale-balancing justice like the
"12-months-in-Gehenna" pictured by the rabbinical scholars of Jesus'
day, but a never-ending conscious torment?
Before we can conclude
that hell is either unjust, we first have to determine the exact nature of
hell. However, we are told that hell will be different for different people. It
is also possible that those in hell might eventually be annihilated. It is also
possible that hell is self-chosen, and that some would prefer darkness to the
presence of God – something they detest.
Therefore, before you
can disparage the justice of eternal punishment, you need a better idea of what
it will consist.
Daniel, you are
completely missing the point. The purpose of God's judgments is rehabilitation
and restoration and repentance.
Is it always such? Can
you support this contention? Perhaps punishment is a just payment for our sins.
Daniel, unbelief is by
definition ignorance of the truth. If one is not ignorant of the truth, then by
one would obviously be believing the truth. Jesus refers to our sin as a kind
of blindness. On the cross He asked the Father to forgive his tormentors
because "they know not what they do."
I think that you will
find that Jesus regards such ignorance as culpable:
· "This is the verdict: Light has come into
the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were
evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light
for fear that their deeds will be exposed.” (John 3:19-20)
Also see the parable
of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16) where the problem of unbelief is not
about a lack of evidence.
Daniel, yes, we are
culpable or held accountable for our sins, regardless of whether they are
committed in ignorance or not, because our sinful attitudes and behaviors are
harmful to ourselves and others. So God does chastise and correct us. That is
not the same as banishment to Hell for all eternity.
If God didn’t rescue
them from their willful ignorance and rebellion in this life, why should we
expect that He’ll do so in the next? In fact, we are taught to not expect this.
Peter argued that if He condemned the rebellious angels to hell, we should
expect that he will do the same with us:
· For if God did not spare angels when they
sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them in chains of darkness[b] to be held
for judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood
on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven
others; if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to
ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and
if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the depraved conduct
of the lawless… if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from
trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment.
(2 Peter 2:4-9)
If you were
all-powerful and able to change peoples’ hearts and minds through the influence
of your indwelling spirit, would you not be completely able to bring your
wayward son to repentance, after you feel he has suffered enough to learn his
lesson?
I think that this is
your strongest point. However, it just doesn’t seem that our Lord does this.
Instead, we see many who become hardened in their unbelief and vitriol. Jesus
said, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to
you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers
her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing." (Mat. 23:37)
Jesus declared that He
had done what He either could or would. Why doesn't God become more coercive
with all unwilling people? I don't know. However, I trust that He has his
reasons. I am willing to live with a certain degree of uncertainty in this
area, while taking Him at His word.
Meanwhile, you insist
that Her will not condemn anyone or allow anyone to go to hell, because this
doesn't correspond with your philosophy. However, it does seem to correspond
with Scripture.
I believe all the
words of Jesus. Of course, He grieved over the lost condition of the nation of
Israel. Remember this also. That which is lost can also be found. Jesus didn't
come to condemn the world but that the world might be saved through Him. He is
more than able to accomplish all that He set out to do.
Indeed, He can
"accomplish all that He set out to do." But did He ordain to
accomplish the salvation of the entire world? So many verses indicate that
although He had paid the price for the sins of the world, many will not avail
themselves of it:
· “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is
the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter
through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and
only a few find it... Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will
enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father
who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not
prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name
perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away
from me, you evildoers!’" (Mat. 7:13-23)
While it is true that
Jesus acknowledged that He didn’t come to judge the world, this still leaves
open the possibility that the non-believer will judge himself and flee from the
light – the presence of God – which he has always hated and into the darkness
of lies and denial.
Universalist Carton
Pearson started this thread by writing:
· What happens after this life we can only speculate
about and trust that in the ultimate reality, intrinsic good will prevail in
us, for us, through us and as us.
It is noteworthy that
Pearson confesses agnosticism about his universalistic heaven. It points to the
possibility that agnosticism is endemic to universalism. Why? Can the
universalist really believe in the mercy of God if he denies the inevitable
judgment of God without it? It would seem that mercy of the cross is predicated
on our understanding that we need the cross, and that without it, we face judgment.
It also makes me
wonder if the Spirit will validate such a faith in those who have rejected the
fullness of the biblical revelation. Instead, this agnosticism would seem to
prove that the Spirit will not endorse a faith based on picking-and-choosing
those verses we find appealing. Instead, we when submit to God, we submit to
the totality of His Word (Mat. 4:4). By doing this, we honor Him and He honors
us:
· “Because he loves me,” says the Lord, “I will
rescue him; I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name [who I am]. He will
call on me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble, I will
deliver him and honor him. With long life I will satisfy him and show him my
salvation.” (Psalm 91:14-16)
Does the universalist
know God or has he re-created him in a form that he finds appealing? In this
way, has he thus rejected God?
