The Evangelical Universalist Forum

A Confession to Make

Evangelical Universalism Arguments against Evangelical Universalism
#61

F & B and Rainboz,

FWIW, as one of the moderators, I think your tentative or doubting affirmations of universalism fit in well in the context of this site and its’ mainstream. It fits well with the book for which the site is named: Robin Parry’s compelling but humble approach acknowledging that he could be mistaken at many points.

In light of the nature of Scripture and the understandably debated meaning of key texts, it’s easy for me to empathize with anyone who is reluctant to be dogmatic. Where I may differ a bit is that I have precious little doubt that I can’t affirm the traditional ECT view. For me, if there is a good God, a universalist understanding makes so much more coherent sense of the loftiest central ideas about God that I find Scripture commends, that no dismal view can compete with my deepest sense of our need. I see that affirmations about the nature of Ultimate Reality and the divine values we will live by, are at best expressions of reasoned faith, more than something we can prove. But, apparently unlike e.g. Glenn, I’m willing to bank on the trust that the one we call God stands for the universal and unremittingly victorious Love that I see displayed in Jesus.

Don’t be intimidated by a few who denigrate any who won’t be as dogmatic as they. In my view, universalists should be MORE appreciative than most, that demanding everyone now be on the same page is out of touch with reality.

#62

Yes, I owe Rainboz AND F&B a big time apology for saying those things. I am truly sorry. Sometimes I get up on my high horse and regret things I say from that position later. No, Not sometimes - every time! When am I ever going to learn.

And for the record: ‘My Confession’ on this thread is such a pile of self-serving crap that I wish I could delete. This morning I was cursing myself for having written it. And yeah, the hangover didn’t help either. I’m really sorry for that too.

#63

Ran

You are all the more ‘real’ to me after this post :wink:

#64

I regret some of the more personal things I have said or implied as well. No worries to anyone.

I would say that Justice is not necessarily arbitrary, but the concept does completely come from God, whether from his personhood or more directly. I do believe that we can understand God’s justice (imperfectly) as we were created in his image. God’s Logos, that became flesh in Jesus, is often considered also to be that part of us that reveals God’s natural order/law.

#65

*…or more directly? *

How can you not make a more direct judgment than what comes from His personhood? There is nothing more direct than a judgment which comes from the personhood of God.

#66

More directly would be if Justice was in fact something God IS. I’m sure some Calvinists would argue that God is justice as much as love. I wouldn’t argue that, I was just showing an alternate way that justice could be arrived at from a Christian perspective. Either way, God is not constricted to previous concepts. Either way Justice comes from God. I understand it’s important to you all to know exactly where I stand. I am a supporter of negative theology regarding the personhood of God, also called Apophatic theology. You can get more and better information from wikipedia as my time is short today, but practically, I think that God is ineffable. At the same time, all concretes come from God. We are told God is Love, but we will never be able to put into language what ‘God is Love’ truly means.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Via_negativa

Anyways, hope you all have a good week. Me and my wife have some time off and are flying to the Philippines for the week. If you all want, when we get back I can share some pictures.

#67

It seems like that wiki entry (while still valid) contains a lot of non-Christian uses of apaphatic theology as well. So I would like to add that it is very much within the Christian tradition and is not a personal quirk of mine. Essentially any Christian mystic is in this tradition. I would recommend ‘The Cloud of Unknowing’ which is an anonymous work written in the middle ages, or St. Theresa’s ‘Interior Castle’. Also, I’ll add that I’m not a mystic personally, and have very little inclination toward being one at the expense of more horizontally active Christianity (although all Christians are mystics in the simplest of their prayers). I simply think the tradition is the most productive way to think of God. Perhaps it will interest you further that most Christian mystics are also Christian Universalists.

#68

Where has God’s personhood ever been called justice? Justice flows from a median, it is not the median and what is the median that Justice comes from but the personhood of God?

#69

Okay, the righteousness that demands justice. Is that better? This is an exact demonstration of why the above method is necessary.

#70

Ran Ran-

I love your intensity, and appreciate your highly charged posts. I definitely forgive you, brother. Sorry I got personal.

#71

Righteousness again is based on a median, what is that median? There is no such thing as ‘righteousness’ without it first being established what ‘righteousness’ is. That median again is the personhood of God, the ontological nature of God. Love is not an aspect, read the Scriptures. God is love, the most important spiritual gift is love, out of faith, hope and love, the greatest of these is? Love. Your words betray your thoughts, and reveal your truth belief system.

#72

:laughing: So is Talbott, MacDonald and Pratt but don’t let that trip you up. :wink:

#73

When I first heard of Christian Universalism, I thought, “That can’t be true! But it would sure be nice.” It took me about 10 years of study, prayer, and reflection to gradually (3 steps forward, 2 steps back) get to the point where I am now: 100% certainty that God will bring all his children home.

#74

I recommend more study, more prayer and reflection. :smiley:

God bless,
Aaron