The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Carm Web site

Evangelical Universalism Arguments against Evangelical Universalism
#21

Well she reminds me of poor little mathematical Louisa in Dicken’s Hard Times and he of her Dad Thomas Gradgrind. If from an early age you’ve been encouraged to fill your mind with logical apologetical axioms and that is all that faith has come to mean for you there is no baby there in the first place to hold fast to when the bath water is thrown out. Gradgrind does come to the tragic realisation in the end of how much he has crushed Louisa - let’s hope that happens here too and life imitates art. Reading between the lines the universalists on his site do seem to have come from Tentmakers to proclaim the Victorious Gospel. Some of these people will have only recently had release from the terrible idea that their loved ones who have died ‘unsaved’ are being tortured for eternity by God’s holy wrath. If Matt Slick tries to disabuse them and convince them that their loved ones are actually being tortured for eternity (in terms of compelling logic even if not in terms of Edward’s imaginative sadism) I guess he’ll get a reaction. Personally I wouldn’t be bothered to go on a site like his to argue - because there is always more going on than mere logic.

In fairness to Matt Slick he does say that he has no liking for Jonathan Edwards - however he doesn’t clarify what he means by this and how this affects his theological views

#22

I seriously hope so too, Dick.

I think you are right…recent converts to Universalism might be a little like ex-smokers (and new Christians for that matter) - that is to say: obnoxious :laughing:
They’ll be wanting to defend their new position, but they’ll also be seeking for like-minded people to help confirm them. They’ll get extra upset at those who disagree, because that threatens their new world-view (which they’re probably extra nervous about, given what a house of cards in a tornado their previous beliefs were - if you’re used to building on sand…even if you find solid ground, you’re going to be nervous for a while). Such people wouldn’t be much fun to debate with, and could very regularly trot out the “your god is a monster” type of arguments…which while possibly true don’t really build any bridges. That of course is assuming Matt’s critique of their actions was fair.

#23

Yes - and that’s a big assumption. I’m sure t was ‘six of one and half a dozen of the other’ as we say in Blighty :laughing:

#24

It seems a reasonable assumption :wink:

#25

Yeah, I was pretty defensive about universalism when I first embraced it… nowadays I don’t feel the need to defend it or push it.

It’s just something that’s in my heart, it’s a hope that I have that encourages me and helps me to keep going, and I share it when it seems like a good time to share it, and that’s enough for me, and I agree with Myshkin about how it’s better not to force one’s beliefs on others, but rather to let them decide on their own what they will believe.

I mean, I think it’s okay if we share what’s in our heart and mind with others, what we’re thinking and feeling about things, as long as we’re not being pushy about it or aren’t being jerks about it, and as long as we don’t insist on people converting to our views in order to earn our favor or acceptance, but otherwise, it’s probably best if we keep it to ourselves. Yeah, we shouldn’t hide our light under a bushel, but then we shouldn’t smack people over the head with our ‘light’ either, or our bushel for that matter. :stuck_out_tongue:

I’ve had to learn, and am still continuing to learn, that expressing ones beliefs and views, and regardless of what those beliefs or views may be, without love or humility is always gonna backfire in one way or another.

I have had struggles in the past, and am even having struggles now, with this.
The hard truth that I am having to learn is that things like love and humility, and other virtues like that, that finding ways to develop those virtues within one’s self, is more important in the end than getting all your beliefs and views lined up.

In short, I’m thinking that God cares more about how we treat each other than about anything else.

Thinking on Jesus’ teachings in the gospels, and on the general thrust of the Bible as a whole for that matter, from when I read it, I think it’s safe to say that that’s what God is most interested in, more than anything else really, as far as human beings are concerned. Maybe in the end our beliefs and views don’t matter as much as we think they do, maybe what matters is our relationships with each other, and our relationship with God, which ties in directly to our relationships with each other, because, I think, it’s all connected.

I believe God has been trying to bang this into my head I think for years, but I admit I’ve been pretty thick about it, and can still be pretty thick at times about it.

I have a lot to learn and a lot of growing to do for sure, and we all do in one way or another and to one extent or another.

When I was a kid my parents were pretty hands off when it came to spiritual stuff. Looking back on it, I appreciate that in some ways, though I do sometimes wish they had been more available and would have been willing to talk with me about spiritual stuff more, though their being agnostic at the time (my mom is an atheist now, and my dad is into native American spirituality mostly) probably made it hard for them to talk about it, which is understandable.

When I have kids I hope to approach it like my parents did to some extent, though with a little more involvement, like maybe praying with my kids, or talking with them about faith and God and different religions and worldviews, encouraging both exploration and tolerance, and above all love… or at least that’s how I envision it, and I hope to be a good father, the best I can be.

And I for one hope that Matt Slick will be able to make amends with his daughter somehow, and realize in his soul that his connection with her is even more important than his most cherished beliefs, because his beliefs are in his head, but she is there, flesh and blood, like him, a person like himself, who needs the love and acceptance of her father, and that is important whether you believe in God or fairies or Santa Claus or the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Spongebob Squarepants or whatever, at least in my opinion.

It’s hard, I know, it’s hard for me. Dealing with ideas and concepts and trying to figure out the answers to the deep questions, where we come from, why we’re here, where we’re going, and all of that, can for some, like myself, come more naturally than cultivating relationships.
There are some of us who feel more comfortable in ivory towers, so to speak.
I am slowly learning, one awkward step at a time, that thinking about life isn’t as important as living it, and the bonds we have with others are more important than anything else.
Even the Bible says somewhere that if we can’t even love each other, or people that we can see and touch, then we can’t say that we really love God, who we can’t see and touch…
I think in a way loving others is loving God, or at least God counts it as much… kind of how Jesus told Peter that if Peter loved him, then he should feed his sheep…

This is hard for me. It makes sense in theory, but in reality it is very difficult. I have a lot of difficulty relating to others, being the loner and introvert that I am, even as talkative and verbose as I may be. Love is hard, trust is hard… but these things are what life is all about, from what I feel God has been trying to tell me over the years, and even if right now I’m not very good at them or they don’t come naturally.

I think that’s what guys like Matt Slick and all of us, including me, need to learn… how to live, actually live, and love, actually love, rather than just going on and on about it and arguing about what’s true and what’s not true and who’s right and who’s not and not really going anywhere with it, not doing any good in the world or making the world any better by it.
Words, words, words… I’m so good with words, but there is more to life than words, and that’s what I’ve gotta learn, I know.

Which is why I’m gonna leave it there and go and try to get some sleep, because sleeping is a part of life. :wink: :laughing:

#26

Yeah, but it’s not that simple Matt. One of the joys of being a Universalist is that there’s no need for us to shove our views down other people’s throats. Everyone will come to a realisation of the truth some day. If we can help them along the way, that’s great.

But many people are actively turned away from the truth by the toxic bullshit peddled by the likes of Matt Slick. Five minutes on Google turns up numerous examples of thinking, caring folk voicing their disgust at the arrogant, self righteous, self aggrandising and deeply homophobic bilge with which Slick populates his vanity site. People who, I daresay, won’t go near a church as a result. Whenever I read another article by another persecuted gay man denouncing CARM and Christianity along with it, I am reminded of Jesus’ stern warnings to those who would cause his little ones to stumble.

I see nothing to gloat about in Rachael Slick’s story, James. I think she’s far better off now as an ‘atheist’ - and in all probability far closer to the spirit of truth, and hence to God himself- than she ever was being force-fed Slick’s particular brand of reason-free fundamentalism. I wish her all the very best. Unlike some of her father’s sock puppets, who have tried to smear her emancipation from error as nothing more than her sinful desire to have sex without being married.

As for Slick himself, he who rules his own little fiefdom, quashing any dissenting voices with the ruthlessness of a medieval despot, I wish him well too. But I don’t like him, and I will continue to call him on his hypocrisy, his illogicality and particularly his homophobia.

All the best

Johnny

#27

I get what you’re saying…you’re right to be angry over the treatment of vulnerable people. I know we both hope that he comes to a more tolerant view soon, and that his relationship with his daughter is healed soon.
Actually we don’t have to hope…we can trust that this will happen, as you say! But in the meantime yes, we ought to not tolerate hateful language.
Not being privy to his arguments with Universalists, i can’t comment for sure, but it sounds like a similar persecution complex suffered by the strong, ever so sure of themselves majority when everyone else starts telling them their opinion isn’t all that matters…
sorry, but you don’t get to argue that you’re a victim from that position. even if the majority is decreasing, it’s still the status quo of the past. Jesus was good at questioning the status quo of the Pharisees, but they never legitimately could argue they were the persecuted minority. it’s a similar thing here.

Still, we ought to pity our enemies (that’s a strong word. i’m not convinced he’s an enemy…he’s not as bad as McClymond and the other two discussing with him!!!) and their broken relationships and long for the day when that is healed too

#28

That’s possible. There is a great series of recent articles on Pete Enns blog by an ex-apologist who has some interesting things to say about how the apologist mindset can actually destroy your faith, or slip in a false substitute for it:

patheos.com/blogs/peterenns/ … rt-1-of-3/

Is the first installment of three.

#29

Very interesting Melchi -

#30

Yes, Indeed. Very eye-opening. :slight_smile:

#31

Hey Johnny, I hear what you’re saying mate, and I know how you feel. Nearly all fundamentalists out there (aside from the few nice ones that I’ve been lucky enough to meet, and maybe there are more out there than I realize), especially ones who espouse the more exclusivist and soul-crushing beliefs and views, get my hackles up too, so I don’t blame you for feeling that way, and we should be angry, like Jesus was, when some people oppress and wound other people through their teachings or preachings, like the Pharisees did.

But, at the same time, I feel some compassion towards Matt Slick, as I’m sure Jesus did for the Pharisees, because he’s blind in some ways, as we have all been and will all be at one time or another, because we’re all human. In his own way I’m sure he loves his daughter, but his beliefs and views on things have become more important to him than his own daughter, it seems. I think he to putting his dogma before his daughter, and I think that’s where the problem is.

But you’re right that beliefs like his don’t help the situation, because there’s so much cognitive dissonance and mixed messages in them that love, as important as it is, gets clouded over at least in some ways by all the insanity, and becomes more difficult than it already is, and I know this from experience. With universalism it’s relatively simple by comparison, the whole love thing, because love is put up front and center, but with a lot of fundamentalists they put defending truth (as they understand it) front and center, or being holy (again, as they understand it) front and center, or giving God the glory (whatever that may mean to them) front and center, and love becomes secondary, even though Jesus himself and the Bible too make it pretty clear, at least to me, that love should be front and center.

Loving others is hard enough as it is, but when our beliefs or views become blinders it makes it all the more difficult, or even virtually impossible for those who are more blind than others.

With that said, from the sound of it, though Matt Slick sounds like a bit of a pompous ass, he sounds a little more reasonable and open than say someone like Mark Driscoll or, at the very least, the Westboro Baptist Church.
And who knows, as others have said, perhaps losing a relationship with his daughter may give him the push that he needs to reconsider some things, or even a lot of things.

I remember there was a time when I totally hated and despised this one preacher, John MacArthur, because his teachings from the radio had ended up wounding and disillusioning me, and his teachings were one of the main reasons i think I walked away from faith from about age 19 to 24 or so.
So I blamed him, and even wished him ill at times. Heck, I even wrote an e-mail to his church blasting him at one point.

But over time, after hearing this and that about him, seeing some signs of good in him despite his insane beliefs and views, and after recognizing that his parents were blind too and had raised him with that same blindness (as my dad is fond of saying sometimes, ‘shit rolls downhill’), and after going through my own period of fundamentalism (if not as extreme), well, that all has given me perspective.
I don’t blame John MacArthur any more.
He’s just a man, a blind man, blind like Matt Slick and John Piper and Mark Driscoll and the Westboro Baptist Church and all of us in one way or another, to one extent or another, at one time or another.

I pity John MacArthur rather than hate him now, even if there’s still a part of me that is kind of angry with him because of the damage he unknowingly did to me. I’m trying to let go of that anger though, and I want to learn to love my enemies. It’s hard, it’s very hard, to love the people who, frankly, piss you off, but I want to keep trying.

And just as I pity John MacArthur, I pity Matt Slick and John Piper and Mark Driscoll and the Westboro Baptist Church and all of those crazy and woefully whacked folks (and even though they’re easy to make fun and lambast at times I admit), because they just can’t see how deluded they are.
And I say this as someone who has been deluded, even highly deluded, and no doubt still is deluded in some ways.
But if God can love me when I’m wrong and offbase, He can love them, and if He loves them, then I should too, or at least I should want to, and pray that God would help me to, because loving our friends is hard enough, while loving our enemies is another story.

But I agree with Myshkin that Calvinists don’t necessarily have a corner market on arrogance or heavy-handedness.
I remember L. Ray Smith’s Bible-Truths website was my first exposure to universalism, and unfortunately Smith (God rest his soul, he passed away not too long ago) through his air of superiority and his forceful teaching on universalism among other things, though no doubt unintentionally, drove me away and I didn’t look at universalism again for a long time in part because of that.

I’ve heard from people who knew Smith that at heart and in private he was a kind man (I’ve actually heard this about MacArthur too), but they acknowledged that he could come off as arrogant and could be heavy-handed when teaching, though he mellowed out towards the end of his life.
But I’d bring up Smith as an example of someone who had beliefs and views that were closer to our ours, at least as far as universalism is concerned, though the way he went about expressing his beliefs and views left something to be desired.

I think Myshkin is right and I think you’re right too, Johnny, both of you are, in different ways, when it comes to this.
The truth is, as it usually is I think, somewhere in the middle, like the cream filling in the Oreo, and a little or this, a little of that. :wink:

Well anyways, I gotta get headed off to work guys, life calls me again. :slight_smile:

Blessings to all, and peace :slight_smile:

Matt

#32

Hi James, hi Matt

Slick is certainly an enemy of Universalism. And he is also pretty antagonistic towards Universalists, banning them from taking part in his forums. He has claimed this is because some Universalists have insulted him, but if you ask me it’s more a case that they’ve run rings round him theologically, exposing his Calvinism for what it is - hateful, illogical and unbiblical tosh. This is certainly the stance of people like Gary Amirault at Tentmaker - people who I am far more inclined to believe are telling the truth.

And of course, I would call myself an enemy of Calvinism. I do have sympathy for many individual Calvinists, those who have been indoctrinated - brainwashed - into it, know in their hearts that it is wrong, but for whatever reason haven’t yet been able to break free from it. But those adherents who, like Matt Slick, embrace Calvinism wholeheartedly, who proselytise for it (although one wonders why they bother), and who use it as a weapon to browbeat and terrorise anyone who believes differently - well, them I have about as much sympathy for as I do the Nazis.

Strong words? Yes. But think about it. Calvinism and Nazism share a very basic characteristic: both are exclusivist ideologies that reserve all the good things in life for a narrow, self-defined elite - the elect, the master race - and condemn the rest of humanity to misery, destruction and death.

It has been argued that Calvinists are “only being true to their view of the Bible”, and we should respect them for that. I say poppycock. If Hitler adduced the Bible to support his belief that the Jews should be exterminated from the face of the earth, should we respect him for that? Of course not. As George MacDonald says, “To say on the authority of the Bible that God does a thing no honourable man would do, is to lie against God; to say that it is therefore right, is to lie against the very spirit of God.”

All the best

Johnny

#33

One other thought on this:

Matt, you put your finger on it when you talk about how the teachings of John MacArthur were a significant factor in your temporary apostasy. I know of one stalwart on this site whose faith has taken a battering because of the loveless, whacked out views of a supposedly Christian minority. And I’m the same. For a number of years during my twenties, when I was apostate, I despised Christianity. I wasn’t simply indifferent to it, or even just anti it; no, I actively loathed it. Loathed the insufferable arrogance, self righteousness and pomposity of it - the “believe what we believe or you’re in the oomska eternally” mentality of it.

Now of course I am old enough and ugly enough to realise that it was never Christianity I hated - not the teachings of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the living embodiment of God’s holy love for the world. No, it was Christians - specifically, fundamentalist Christians. I suppose that damaging loathing, that disgust with religion that kept me away from God for a good few years, still lingers. I do not call myself religious, except occasionally as a useful shorthand. Neither do I call myself a Christian very often, preferring the term ‘follower of Christ’.

Yes, I’m still angry that fundamentalism poisoned God for me. But, thank God, I’m not as angry as I used to be, and I am mellowing - gradually - with every year that passes :smiley: .

Cheers

Johnny

#34

That’s good to hear bro :slight_smile: I’m gradually healing up myself, as healing from spiritual abuse, whether direct or indirect, takes time.

And it’s a good thing too, because if our hope for universal reconciliation indeed ends up coming to fruition, it’s going to require us to drop whatever ill feelings that we may still have towards guys like Matt Slick, Mark Driscoll, John Piper, John MacArthur, and yes, even guys like Hitler… the day will come when we must learn to embrace all people as brothers and sisters, even those who were the most twisted and warped in their thinking or in their actions in this life, forgiving them for the destruction they caused through their words or actions in our lives or the lives of others, just as God forgives them, and us.

No doubt they will have to face some kind of correction or purification when they pass the veil, but then I’m sure I will too, and all of us will too, in one way or another, because none of us are perfect, and all of us have room to learn and grow throughout our lives and in our souls.

There’s a part of me that dreads that, going through some kind of correction or purification, but then a part of me actually looks forward to it.
Maybe it’ll be like a woman giving birth… for some women it is relatively quick and easy (key word, relatively), for others it is a long and arduous and agonizing process where the pain is overwhelming, but for all there is at least some pain, in one form or another, though, at the end (and this is where the analogy weakens, because, sadly, some women lose their babies in one way or another, or they come out with a serious deformity or disability, which is tragic, but for the sake of the analogy, we’ll just assume the baby comes out alright), a new life comes into the world, and instead of pain, there is joy.

Or that’s kind of how I imagine it anyway. And I’m sure that the ladies would be glad that the men will get salted with fire too in this instance. :wink: :laughing:

And yeah, there was a time I hated Christianity and Christians too, Johnny, so I can relate to you there, and because of all the baggage that terms like religious and Christian carry, I don’t tend to like those labels myself.
I prefer spiritual to religious, and I would rather just say I’m a guy who believes in God, if not the God of the Bible necessarily, as if God could be contained in a book, though God may speak through it, but rather a God of deep love and understanding, who can even be defined as love and understanding itself, who is greater than we can imagine, mysterious and intimate at once, whose ways are often confusing and wild and unpredictable, but who in the end will make perfect sense, like a wonderful conclusion and resolution to a story with many twists and turns and much conflict and struggle, like when, near the end of the Lord Of The Rings, Frodo Baggins wakes up in Rivendell, alive, whole, and he and Gandalf and all of his friends break into laughter, because the war is over and all is well and it was all worth it, and a God who reveals Himself/Herself (both, and neither, at once :wink:) to us in the here and now, in glimmers and glimpses, through Jesus and his old but ever new story in an important way I believe, but also in many other ways, through nature and art and miracles and dreams and other people, etc.

And if I identify myself with Jesus, I would just say that I’m an awkward and haphazard and mostly mediocre follower of Jesus. :wink: :laughing:

Well, that’s my two cents anyway. :slight_smile:

Blessings to you mate :slight_smile:

Matt