|
| Christian news worldwide |
 Home |
 Archives |
 Subscriptions |
 Adverts |
 Find a church |
 About us |
 Contact us |
 Site Map |
 PrintableVersion The evangelical universalistThe biblical hope that God's love will save us allEveryone gets saved?THE EVANGELICAL UNIVERSALIST Surely to be ‘evangelical’ (thus committed to Scripture’s absolute and final authority) and a ‘universalist’ (believing that, ultimately, all will be saved) is a contradiction in terms? In this disconcerting book, GM (the anonymous author) claims otherwise. There are two sets of Scripture texts, one describing hell in terms of irreversible finality (e.g. Matthew 25.46, Luke 16.26, 2 Thessalonians 1.9, Revelation 14.9-11, etc.) and the other presenting an ultimate future where all people are reconciled to God (Colossians 1.16,20; Romans 5.18, 2 Peter 3.9, etc.). Traditionally, the first group of texts has been ‘taken at face value’ and the second set reinterpreted to fit. Where to start?But GM argues that it is valid to start from the premise of universal redemption and then understand the hell texts in a way that fits this model — indeed such an approach is preferable, since it resolves thorny questions about the love of God, the extent of Christ’s victory, and the justice of eternal punishment. GM affirms that there is a hell of conscious torment, where sin meets its deserved consequences, and which is to be avoided at all costs. Nevertheless, the door remains open in hell for the damned to renounce sin and trust in Christ’s death for sinners, on which sole basis they are then welcomed into heaven. Ultimately God’s persistent and irresistible grace will empty hell, and Christ’s triumph will be complete. In the absence of explicit texts describing such an exit from hell, GM argues primarily from the unfolding story of Scripture, e.g. the way in which God’s enemies are both defeated but also reintegrated (Isaiah 19.16-25; Ezekiel 16.53-55; Revelation 19.19 & 21.24-25). Throughout, the style is clear, irenic, and persuasive. But is it a valid evangelical position? ‘No’ to eternal punishmentThe book begins with philosophical objections to eternal punishment. Despite protestations, the approach appears biblically deficient. Particularly disturbing is its naivety as to the irrationality, perverseness and hardening effect of sin (‘It may actually be impossible that a free agent would reject God forever’, but cf. Revelation 16.9). GM asserts that ‘a God who loves all is more worthy than a God who loves some’, but underplays the biblical notions that God’s goodness consists also in his hatred of evil, and that he is much honoured in his just punishment of sin. Belief in a temporary hell already concedes that something may be more important than the immediate cessation of suffering, but GM never really accepts that God could have good reasons for not saving everyone — for example, as enduring testimony to his holiness, and to sin’s irrationality, futility, sinfulness and potentially irrevocable consequences (perhaps love can no more long for a square circle than for the wellbeing of the damned). It is assumed that Christ’s victory implies universal redemption, but, as Bruce Milne wisely says, ‘in the end, God’s perfection and triumph must be defined by God himself’. GM fails to grapple with the concept of death as precisely that state in which there is no opportunity to choose, or repent — these are the activities of life, and the damned have ‘run out of life’ (though not annihilated, they have no ‘future’, only a past). Much of the discussion seems contrary to the warning of Romans 9.18-23, and the tone of Daniel 4.35 — God is not answerable to us, still less to unbelieving philosophy. Believers in the Trinity and the humanity/deity of Christ must be more modest as to the limitations of reason. Exegetically weakIn terms of exegesis the book is (unsurprisingly!) strong in dealing with the ‘universalist texts’, but sometimes very weak in its treatment of the hell texts — particularly Luke 16.26; Revelation 13.8, 20.15 & 21.27; and the word ‘eternal’ (how else is a Greek speaker supposed to say ‘forever’?!). GM focuses on the scriptural pattern of BlessingÐJudgmentÐRestoration, but doesn’t grapple with the similarly prominent pattern where opposite destinies are put side by side at the close of a section, implying finality of blessing / curse: e.g. Isaiah 25.6-12; Isaiah 66.22-24, Daniel 12.2; Malachi 4.1-3; Matthew 25.46 (and parables); Romans 2.7-8; Revelation 22.14-15. Not recommended Phil Heaps,
|
|
