The Evangelical Universalist Forum

EU ticks more boxes than either Calvinism or Arminianism

Evangelical Universalism Arguments for Evangelical Universalism
#1

Hello everybody

Matt (jaxxen) and I have started getting into some interesting territory in our one-to-one debates. I thought it might be instructive to throw one little bit of that territory open to wider discussion (if that’s okay with you, Matt).

To whit:

Of the three main theological schools of thought which dominate this forum – Calvinism, Arminianism and Evangelical Universalism – it seems quite clear to me that each has some support from some, or even all, of the main criteria by which we believe anything that we believe – ie reason, authority and experience.

Now if we break these categories down a little we could arrive at the following five ‘faith criteria’ (which are neither exhaustive nor absolute, obviously):

Reason

  1. Reason – what our rational minds tell us

Authority
2) The authority of the Bible
3) The authority of previous generations of believers and thinkers

Experience
4) What we believe God reveals to us in our hearts
5) Our instinctive emotional response

So, using the above five criteria as our yardstick by which we can arbitrate between the three main schools of thought (Calv, Arm, EU) we might conclude:

Calvinism
Has the support of 2), partially; 3) and 4) (if you’re a Calvinist). To look at each criterion in detail:

  1. Human reason could not possibly accept that it is reasonable for a God who is love to arbitrarily damn some of his creatures to ECT. To the human mind that is capricious, fickle and entirely unreasonable.
  2. Some parts of the Bible appear, on a prima facie reading, to support Calvinist doctrine. Other parts – the Arminian and EU parts do not.
  3. Lots of theologians and thinkers have endorsed Calvinism (or Augustinianism) over the centuries.
  4. I can’t speak for Calvinists here, but I guess their theology speaks to their hearts. It does not speak to mine.
  5. No sane, thinking, loving person can possibly want Calvinism to be true, on a purely emotional basis.

Arminianism
Has the support of 1); 2), 3); 4) and 5) partially. Again, to look at each criterion in detail:

  1. It makes sense that if we are truly free to choose or reject God, some people will reject God, and hence not be saved.
  2. Some parts of the Bible appear, on a prima facie reading, to support Arminian doctrine. Other parts – the Calvinist and EU parts do not.
  3. Lots of theologians and thinkers have endorsed Arminianism over the centuries.
  4. I can speak for Arminians (sort of) here, because I used to be one. Their theology kind of speaks to their hearts.
  5. No sane, thinking, loving person can really and truly want Arminianism to be true, on a purely emotional basis. Yes, we may want to ‘zorch’ our enemies (nice one, Jason :smiley: ), but if we follow the teachings of our Lord, we must earnestly desire and pray for the salvation of everyone, including our enemies.

Evangelical Universalism
Has the unequivocal support of 1); 2), 3); 4) and 5). Again, to look at each criterion in detail:

  1. It makes perfect sense that if God loves all his creatures, and wills to save all his creatures, then all will indeed be saved.
  2. Both the Arminian and the Calvinist parts of the Bible, taken together, appear, on a prima facie reading, to support EU doctrine.
  3. Lots of theologians and thinkers have endorsed EU over the centuries – especially the early church fathers, who were closest to Christ.
  4. EU undoubtedly speaks to our hearts.
  5. Any sane, thinking, loving person must want EU to be true. Yes, they may wish that the wicked get punished for their ‘crimes’ (and maybe they will be). But if you love God with all your heart, and love your neighbour as yourself, as God has commanded, that must by definition mean that you desire their salvation.

Now none of this is a logical ‘proof’ that EU is true, or a ‘better’ theology than Calvinism or Arminianism, I realise that.

But I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on it.

Shalom

Johnny

#2

Johnny! So, I’ve caught you cheating on me in another thread, have I? Shame on you, Johnny Parker…shame on you :cry:
Just kidding :laughing: I also started another thread. BTW, mine’s better :sunglasses:
And now, I’ll systematically refute most, if not all, of your presuppositions. They may be relevant to itching ears, but not mine.
“Reason” Our unregenerate minds are not rational on true spiritual matters. Refer to the “Clarifying Calvinism” thread.
The authority of the Bible stands alone. The traditions of our parents are only valid inasmuch that they teach the Scriptures RIGHTLY. We may learn history and such, and it is profitable for us to know history. General revelation will affirm special revelation. Any conflict yields to special revelation i.e. the Bible.
We can not trust our hearts to interpret our feelings, only Scriptures.
Humans will of course reject ECT. Not only ECT, but all matters relating to the true and living God. ECT is without a doubt a hard concept to accept. But you (we) do not comprehend what it is to be holy, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, holy, perfect and just in all of your / our ways, holy, and transcendent.
Many parts of the Bible support the Reformed faith, both superficially and at a depth that will blow your mind. There’s more to the Doctrines of Grace than just election and reprobation.
“Lots of theologians have accepted Augustianism / Calvinism over the centuries…” Just the ones that were truly saved :sunglasses:
Calvinism doesn’t speak to MY heart-it convicts it and reveals more about my wretchedness than even I’d thought possible.
“No sane, thinking, loving person would want Calvinism to be true…” First, none of us are as thinking, loving etc as we’d like to believe. If we were, we would never sin again! You are right, however, that no one, on a purely emotional basis would want Calvinism to be true :wink:
Johnny, your arguements, bless your heart, are straw-men. They attempt to manipulate the readers into an “either or” box.
I still empathize with you, however.

Matt

#3

Hello Matt

That’s the trouble with us totally depraved EUs - we’re so promiscuous with our threads! :laughing:

Seriously, thanks very much for your post. I will come back to you in a bit of detail when I have time (v busy at work currently). But for now, I would just raise the point that your refutation of my presuppositions is, in essence, derived from your *own *presuppositions - and therein lies the rub in this thorny debate, would you not agree?

Because, *if *you reject Total Depravity, Biblical inerrancy and sola scriptura - all of which I do, to a greater of lesser extent (I will explain my reasons for doing so later), then your arguments all fall at the first fence, as it were. :slight_smile:

Does that make sense? Of course, this in no way ‘proves’ I’m right and you’re wrong (it doesn’t prove anything, in fact). But what it does do is show how difficult it is to even *start *debating these issues on a level playing field. It’s like us trying to play sport together, when you think we’re playing baseball and I think we’re playing cricket. :smiley:

I think we are just starting to burrow down to the heart of why the oppostion between Calvinism and other Christian worldviews is so intractable.

More soon.

Take care & shalom

Johnny

#4

i think the problem is that Calvinism, for example, takes as read Total Depravity, which as Jaxxen has stated basically means we CANNOT reason rightly of ourselves, because we are not sane, or good, or anything nice at all…we are wretched and totally debased. (given that God cannot look at sin, in most of the viewpoints i’ve heard that are not EU, i find it difficult He could love any of us, from this point of view).

but i think that’s a bit of a crap argument, honestly.

  1. i state x as true
  2. you state x as not true, because x conflicts with your reason and your notion of right and wrong
  3. i say you could not possibly understand or accept x as true because you are clearly too corrupt to understand it.

that doesn’t work and is no way to win an argument.

God clearly says “come and let us reason together.”
Jesus clearly says that “you who are evil know how to give good gifts to your children”

we CAN and DO recognise good and evil. this is a fundamental truth. yes, we can sear our consciences (conscience, there’s an interesting one for a Total Depravity devotee to explain), yes we can think that evil is good and good evil. but we know how to give good gifts to our children. most of us think murder and theft are wrong. society, moreover, is growing up in many parts of the world to recognise that sexism and racism are wrong. this to me argues against reprobation quite conclusively. we are like a child being taught right from wrong by its parent…and this says to me that even when there’s ignorance, there is SOME knowledge of good and evil, and some ability to judge rightly between them. thus we can see that Jesus is good but that the crusades (in His name) were vile.

God asks us to engage our brains. He doesn’t say “switch it off, you’ll never understand because you are too disgustingly vile”. no, He wants us to learn and to grow in understanding. constantly saying “mea culpa!” in false humility is not the kind of relationship God wants with His children. any human parent that did such a thing to their children would be rightly stigmatised as abusive. “you who are evil STILL KNOW HOW NOT TO BE RUBBISH PARENTS.”

also, this idea that we are “so very wretched”…this to me is not Biblical. we are good and bad. we have God’s breath of life in us as well as carnal flesh. Paul argues about this very well…the good he wants to do the sin nature keeps him from doing. but the good is still in there, and Christ sets it free to work, and helps us to die to our sin nature.

our sin nature is a part of us, but it is not ALL of us.

#5

Thank you, corpselight, for something I wanted to express myself in a much more concise and non-confrontational manner.

I’m not really sure if I agree with johny’s analysis here, though. I think UR fits very well into the emotional box, but that’s about it (not that that’s little). I do not believe it’s correct to say that UR unites Arminianism and Calvinism, because those are a question of free will vs predestination, and that has very little to do with UR itself. A union of sorts of Arminianism and Calvinism is fully compatible with ECT. Furthermore, even if UR did unite those views, there do exist Bible verses that do not favor UR.

I think UR does have a huge influence on how one views certain parts of theology, though. But I’m not sure Arminianism/Calvinism factors in there.

#6

i may be approaching this from another angle, but for me the reason why UR unites the “best” of Calvinism with the “best” of Arminianism (and discards the worst of both) is the following (pretty much nicked from Parry’s TEU)

Calvinism:

  1. the best: Calvinism says God’s power is unlimited and His sovereignty is unquestioned, and that we don’t deserve His grace.
  2. the worst: in order for Calvinism to allow damnation, it has to imply that God is justified in not saving all of us.
    God’s love is therefore limited and made less important than God’s power and glory.

Arminianism:

  1. the best: God’s love and desire to save are limitless, universal, extended to all God’s creatures
  2. the worst: in order for Arminianism to allow damnation, it hast to imply that God’s saving power is limited. it says that God loves us too much to force our hand, yet basically says that God cannot persuade us…He whose word brought the cosmos into being can’t argue persuasively and woo us into spending eternity with Him.

so, in short, Calvinism limits the scope of God’s love, whereas Arminianism limits His power/ability to save

UR discards these two weaknesses and, noticing rightly that damnation in the Bible is NEVER permanent, says that God both desires to save all and CAN save all…and therefore WILL save all. so God’s power AND God’s universal desire for us to be with Him will not be thwarted.

personally, i think UR ticks the Scriptural box best as it takes into account the meta-narrative, particularly of the OT, which shows judgement followed by reconciliation in every example. the NT read holistically with the OT leads conclusively to this conclusion, in my opinion. if any individiual verse appears to contradict the overall thrust of the Bible, then that verse is being misunderstood.

#7

James

Couldn’t have put it better myself, old bean. :smiley:

Bird - you are spot on in saying EU doesn’t unite Calvinism and Arminianism, because it doesn’t. But what I think it *does *do, as James has pretty much explained in his post, and as Tom Talbott also explains so eloquently in The Inescapable Love of God, is take the central Calvinist doctrine of God’s absolute sovereignty and capability to achieve everything that He wills and combine it with the central Armininian doctrine that God loves absolutely everyone.

If you accept both of those two doctrines as true, Evangelical Universalism is necessarily entailed - as James (corpselight, not the apostle!), Robin Parry and Tom Talbott (and little old me) all maintain.

One other (fairly obvious) point, Bird: one can accept predestination as an EU, as long as one accepts that *everyone *is predestined to salvation!

Shalom

Johnny

#8

Who did God NOT foreknow? NO ONE!

#9

"Calvinism:

  1. the best: Calvinism says God’s power is unlimited and His sovereignty is unquestioned, and that we don’t deserve His grace.
  2. the worst: in order for Calvinism to allow damnation, it has to imply that God is justified in not saving all of us.
    God’s love is therefore limited and made less important than God’s power and glory."

I would actually contend that Calvinism limits God’s sovereignty. In that, if God is perfectly sovereign, then to not save everyone (who cannot obviously save themselves) either demonstrates that He is incapable of doing so or He doesn’t love everyone. So Calvinists, in order to be consistent, must demean one of God’s perfect attributes in order to preserve their system.

I’m know there is more to this, but I figured I’d toss in a few pennies and step back.

–DS

#10

From my experience, love gets tossed. Hence the “God hates everyone except the elect”.

#11

James (Corpselight)… brilliant brother, brilliant. :slight_smile: