The Evangelical Universalist

Years ago for my first year theology class, I read Four Views On Hell. The alternatives offered were literal flames, metaphoric flames but eternal conscious torment, annihilationism, and a Catholic explanation of purgatory. I was convinced by Clark Pinnock’s idea of annihilationism or conditional immortality. It contends that we are only made immortal through God’s intervention, and the fate of those who reject God is extinction – not eternal punishment but non-existence.

It is a view that has some scriptural support, taking seriously the idea in the New Testament that without Christ we will perish, that death is the fate of those who have not found salvation. If not hopeful, it at least eased my conscience; the thought of an eternal torture chamber continuing on underneath the new creation is distressing.

An option not presented in Four Views of Hell, indeed an option that few evangelicals consider open to them is of hell as restorative punishment – or, to use a word evangelicals tend to be scared of – universalism.

A month or more ago I read an intriguing book called The Evangelical Universalist by Gregory MacDonald. Gregory MacDonald is actually the pseudonym for an evangelical writer who works for a prominent evangelical publishing house, and didn’t want the rest of his work and his employers’ work dismissed by association. Gregory of Nyssa and George MacDonald are two noteworthy universalists. MacDonald kept a blog where he kept his readers guessing as to his identity for a couple of years, assuring them he was not Rick Warren or John Piper, before finally revealing his identity a few months ago.

I have wanted to write about it, but I feel myself unable to; I’m not sure of my conclusions about the book. So I have called on two of my friends to offer their contrasting views of it. Please direct all your concerns about their heterodoxy or whatever to them.

 

Bill Barclay

The Evangelical Universalist is a splendid book. It offers both a theological and biblical framework for understanding that the New Testament actually affords us hope for a universal reconciliation between humans and God.

For MacDonald, universalism is an implicit doctrine in the New Testament, ready to be teased out, in an analogous manner to the way the Trinity has been developed as a doctrine. In particular, Colossians ‘provides the contours of a grand theological narrative with a universalist ending. It is this basic theology that I suggest can form the framework within which the rest of the Bible can be appreciated.’ (p.7) MacDonald makes important the verses which proclaim that one day every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord.

So when I claim that universalism is biblical, I do not mean that all biblical authors were universalists but that the universalist tendencies of some authors provide the big picture within which we can happily accommodate the teachings on hell of all the biblical writers. (p.40)

MacDonald obviously has a lot of work to do to go against the tide of centuries of interpretation of passages about hell and final judgement. He certainly believes in the reality of hell, and that is a terrible place we should do everything possible to avoid. But he argues that its function is not to punish forever but to bring people to repentance. (Yes that does sound a little like purgatory, doesn’t it?)

MacDonald believes that Bible clearly teaches that God desires that none shall perish but that all should have eternal life. He doesn’t agree with Arminian logic that people are able to, finally, resist the love and will of God. If God desires that all should have eternal life, then He shall bring it about.

Many free-will defences of hell make the importance of free-will so much that protecting it justifies anything, even eternal punishment for eternity. Many discussions of hell also insist that while God’s justice – his need to condemn sin – is immutable and absolute, his mercy has its limits – that in the end, God’s justice will win out over his mercy for lots of damned people.

MacDonald spends considerable time with the relevant Bible passages about hell and makes a case for how they can be interpreted consistently with (eventual) universal salvation. His proposal about the lake of fire in Revelation is perhaps the most intriguing. Who is it that is thrown into the lake of fire? The rebellious nations who have followed the Beast. Who is it that is welcomed into the New Jerusalem in the next chapter? All the nations! Why are the gates of the New Jerusalem open day and night? Who are they open for? What is outside the New Jerusalem? Well, the lake of fire, and the people leaving it.

Most evangelicals will find the idea of universal salvation utterly disturbing. Which says something of how perverted evangelicals are. One can’t help but sense that most evangelicals will be a little disappointed if everyone gets to join the party in the new heavens and new earth.

If evangelicals are only driven in their mission efforts by the heat of the flames of hell, then perhaps their good news isn’t good enough.

 

Will Shedd

MacDonald makes the most sense in this whole book when he writes on p.3, ‘…universalism is so far off the ‘soundness’ radar that it does not even register! Universalism is so obviously false that it can be rejected with hardly a moment’s thought.’

It disturbs me, the plague of young ‘evangelicals’ who sound like liberals. The essence of liberalism is that whenever one encounters a biblical truth that one finds unpalatable, one reinterprets it in the light of other knowledge to make it palatable. Being evangelical means standing under the authority of the Bible.

You have to strain very hard to make the New Testament universalist, and MacDonald strains very hard indeed. Unclear passages, like the one in Colossians that he builds so much on need to be reinterpreted in the light of clear teaching of the rest of the Bible – which, in this case, we have so much of.

 

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “The Evangelical Universalist

  1. I would agree that Evangelical Universalists stretch some passages about Hell to mean something other than eternal torture, but it’s only because they are not reinterpreting the all the rest of what Jesus said about the nature of God which would preclude Him from hurting anyone, much less for eternity.

    I’ve actually written an entire book on this topic–“Hell? No! Why You Can Be Certain There’s No Such Place As Hell,” (for anyone interested, you can get a free ecopy of my book at my website: http://www.thereisnohell.com), but if I may, let me share one of the many points I make in it to explain why.

    If one is willing to look, there’s substantial evidence contained in the gospels to show that Jesus opposed the idea of Hell. For example, in Luke 9:51-56, is a story about his great disappointment with his disciples when they actually suggested imploring God to rain FIRE on a village just because they had rejected him. His response: “You don’t know what spirit is inspiring this kind of talk!” Presumably, it was NOT the Holy Spirit. He went on, trying to explain how he had come to save, heal and relieve suffering, not be the CAUSE of it.

    So it only stands to reason that this same Jesus, who was appalled at the very idea of burning a few people, for a few horrific minutes until they were dead, could never, ever burn BILLIONS of people for an ETERNITY!

    True, there are a few statements that made their way into the gospels which place Hell on Jesus’ lips, but these adulterations came along many decades after his death, most likely due to the Church filling up with Greeks who imported their belief in Hades with them when they converted.

  2. Hi Nathan,
    This is a topic with so much complexity that it is difficult to know how to respond. At least MacDonald adds a further option that evangelicals should consider, without necessarily accepting.

    Some difficulties that I have with the concept of hell are:
    (1).There are different Hebrew and Greek words translated as hell in some translations and perhaps the bible has different concepts relating to this topic.

    (2). If I remember correctly, the OT does not have the classic doctrine of hell (eternal conscious punishment of body and soul) in it. e.g. Hades is the place of the departed.

    (3). I seem to recall that Gehenna refers to the rubbish tip outside Jerusalem and the Matthean Jesus uses this word in Matt.25:31-46. Is this the fire that consumes as Fudge maintains? Does this point to annihilation rather than eventual universal restoration or to the classic notion of hell?

    (3).The classic notion seems to be based on a Greek dualism of body and immortal soul being read into the bible, rather than being the actual teaching of the bible, or at least I suspect this.

    (4). MacDonald’s concept of “hell” as a time of refinement is probably superior to the classic notion or even the metaphorical view expressed in the book ” Four Views on Hell”. Are these latter two views based on the idea of God as a God of retributive punishment? If so, it seems to me that they picture God as a God of violence.

    Jesus pictures God as a God of peace, not a God of violence. God’s justice is restorative rather than retributive and perhaps this is what MacDonald is getting at (I have not read his work). If so, I agree with him on this point but think the NT, as a whole, does not teach what he teaches but lean to the views of the annihilationists.

    God is unconditional, others-centred, self-giving compassion whose mercy is wide and who seeks to restore all into a right relationship with himself/herself.

    I would like MacDonald to be right but is it not possible for people to continually reject God’s lovingkindness revealed supremely in Jesus and to spurn it to the end and to be confirmed in their rejection of redemptive love?

    The idea of people suffering eternally, I find intollerable and inconsistent with the overall teaching of Jesus and God’s reign of shalom.

    Shalom
    John Arthur

  3. Normally I’m not slow to express an opinion but this is an issue I feel too unsure of to come down strongly one way or another. I am interested though, to notice what happens when someone is seen to step of line, especially in Evangelicalism. Tony Lane’s admission of annihalitionism in the 1980’s provoked open condemnation from his colleagues at London Bible College (now the London School of Theology). More recently Steve Chalke and Stuart Murray Williams have courted the ire of some Evangelicals by questioning aspects of the Substitionary Atonement. In the case the Evangelical Alliance did a good deal to ensure that different voices had an opportunity to be heard by hosting a formal debate (http://www.anabaptistnetwork.com/node/235).

    My suspicion is that in the United States where conservative Christianity is stronger than in the UK, rebels have more to lose. I am sure all of us have heard tales of lost livelihoods and ostracism. My own rejection of the validity of ordination has undoubtedly harmed my career.

    I’m reminded of a generous phrase that John Howard Yoder was so fond of: ‘the dignity of dissent’. It’s a hard phrase. These dissenters can be gadflies, heretics, extremists and even our tormentors. God forbid that we should ever be so fragile that we fail to appreciate them.

  4. [url=http://foampositesforsale11.weebly.com/]foamposites for sale[/url] There is just no reason to give him the rest of my chips when I have the right read As a great player you need to be able to execute on your instinct in every situation The majority of players would just look at this situation and say “well you had a great hand and lost [url=http://lebronshoesforsalebuy.weebly.com/]lebron shoes for sale[/url] getting full breath becomes counter intuitive With the shallow breathing that results, one’s health is negatively affected The first exercises in WingTsun are not calisthenics They are martial arts movements and at the same time, train the student to “get rid of their own force” The single straight-line thrusting punch is to be executed in a way that released all the energy of the punch and condition the appropriate muscles to do so http://lebron9forsale6.webs.com/.
    [url=http://lebronshoesforsalebuy.blinkweb.com/]lebron shoes for sale[/url] Iron Mike managed to show a rigid means to turn a soft team into a solid defensive team that hungered for more than just a chance at the playoffs He created a team that was able to take the league by storm and show them what true firepower was when they bulled everyone over and took the teams out with effort, determination, skill, and passion Once Ditkas turned the team around they became a team to be reckoned with and respected This was one of the things that made them a powerful team that could not only beat other teams, but also intimidate them with the level of skill they have developed under the direction of this new coach Ditkas even found a way to use the egos that were on this team to create a level of pride that was impressive to behold [url=http://nikeairmax952.blogspot.com/]nike air max 95[/url] If you havent by now you should look at upgrading your golf clubs Im suggesting that you break the bank on your next set of clubs, but if youve never been fitted properly for a set of clubs you will, at some point, limit your improvement progression Also, since your practicing more and playing better, your swing will be settling into a more consistent routine As a result, getting some properly fitted clubs will be a better investment, than if your swing was about to dramatically changeAs your game continues to improve, the areas of your golf game that need attention and improvement wont be so glaringly obvious.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s