The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Cold-Case Christianity temporarily goes Kath today. ;)

Evangelical Universalism Arguments for Evangelical Universalism
#1

coldcasechristianity.com/2014/wh … worldview/

I don’t think it’s possible to comment on that thread – at least my old browser doesn’t see an option to do so – but hey, if someone else sees how, go for it. :slight_smile:

Because, humorous irony aside, what JW Wallace is talking about there is something I’ve often said myself, and I believe it’s 100% true.

My only problem is that JWW doesn’t actually believe it’s true. Oh, he may believe it’s true for the time he wrote this paper, but he defends hopeless punishment elsewhere in as much detail as he thinks is necessary (though respecting ancient Christian universalists, possibly without realizing people like Origen and Clement and Nyssa weren’t just pre-schism catholic but Christian universalists.)

This is an example of the selective double-think that bothers me so much when I hear it or read it now – and I know I used to be the same way. I just didn’t think out far enough the actual implications of what I was saying, or of what I was leaving out of what I was saying.

Here’s the key paragraph, but with the missing points of his doctrinal position reinstated by me in bold letters.

See, I can say the last thing and actually mean it consistently without having to temporarily forget about, suppress, or ignore part of my beliefs on the topic. So can any Christian universalist, even if we have disagreements among each other about how fast the salvation happens. Even annihilation doesn’t offer true closure, because the unjust people aren’t led to finally do justice happily ever after. They only reach the ultimate end of injustice faster, or put another way they cross the line of ultimate injustice instead of always approaching but never getting there (per ECT).

I respect JWW a lot, and I don’t want to pick on him too much. (Which is why I don’t pick on him too much. :slight_smile: ) I just read the article today and felt sad: a lot of people are being sold a half-closure, instead of the full closure of full justice fulfilled, and told well that’s all the closure you’re going to get – but then have it painted like it’s really full closure.

Or rather, JWW is picking straight up on the full closure spoken of in the Bible, which is why he can talk about this (I even have a good idea which Bible verses he has in mind), and doesn’t realize this {telos}, the completions, goes beyond where he thinks the end of justice is.

#2

I found a ‘comment’ link but it took me to FaceBook, which lies under a Fatwa I issued.

#3

^^ Indeed. The ad/mod crew talked me into re-registering finally, but I use it for NOTHING, and I refuse to give it access to anything.

#4

But yeah - I think MavPhil might call this an ‘aporetic dyad’ :

All things are to display God’s glory AND
Eternal conscious torment is God’s will

Holding the two concepts in mind simultaneously is like throwing two cats in a sack. Or trying to force together two magnets with the same polarity. Or throwing an ortho-trin and a unitarian in a sack. :laughing:

note: good-natured ribbing only! :smiley:

#5

Good post, Jason.

Partial closure is no closure at all. Atheism would be more of a closure than endless Hell. Think about all the people you know and love. Under the presuppositions of belief in endless Hell, what is the chance that every single person you love will escape Hell? The chance is virtually zero. Thus (under the presuppositions of belief in endless Hell), virtually every single human being from Adam to the crack of doom will A) himself be in endless Hell and/or B) have one or more loved ones in endless Hell. “Good news”? That’s the worst news I’ve ever heard!

Endless Hell means no closure for anybody. At least atheism promises oblivion. No wonder so many people act as though atheism were a breath of fresh air since they think Christianity necessitates endless Hell. Thank God, how wrong they are.

#6

Amen, Geoffrey!

#7

I had a quick look at Mr Cold Case on the web and I agree with comments above. I just wonder how he ever solved his cases if he can’t yet crack the big one.

#8

To be fair, people are variably competent at a lot of things. :slight_smile:

#9

That was I bit tongue in cheek Jason

#10

I really scoff a bit at the argument’s used… Basically appeal to something – in this case, this guy was a homicide detective, (therefore he speaks for all homicide detectives, NOT). He comes to a conclusion the Bible is true (Well, that settles it). Therefore, it is true. He is appealing to a position of authority. “I was atheist and now a believer, therefore God is true” is no evidence at all. It just means that one person changed their mind.

It is like NDE’s… Christian’s only give them credit when they speak of Hell. But when they don’t, then the source is 'untrustworthy" and full of “agendas” - Is anyone fair minded anymore? I am sure we all have bias to some degree or another, but I tell you, some people really have the blinders on full power.

#11
#12

That is indeed pretty horrid, though unfortunately also pretty typical. :cry: