Hello All:
I know this question has been touched upon in various places, but for some reason I’m having a hard time coming up with a good rational for the emphasis on HOPE if in fact Paul really taught UR.
I don’t hope Christmas is coming, I know it is. So I’d never speak of the hope of Christmas coming.
I hope that the New England Patriots win the Super Bowl, but that will depend on lots and lots of factors (one being their terrible defense!)
The introduction of the concept of “hope” in Christian Theology seems almost a direct swipe at the notion of Universal Reconciliation. Yes, we talk about certain UR, or hopeful UR, but I’m finding those distinctions less and less useful. It’s as if UR is not an idea I can tentatively endorse, or tepidly embrace. Hope seems to diminish what I’ve come to see as a future reality. Hope in one sense can seem to diminish certainty.
Further, what exactly IS it that I’m supposed to hope for/in?
– that God exists?
– that God is truthful?
– that God can do it? (ie bring ALL to the point of repentance and redemption…)
– that the Saving Life, Death, Resurrection of Our Lord actually happened?
– that the critics/skeptics are wrong?
– that I’ve been a good enough boy to have my name written in the BOL???
– that I won’t be in that number to whom the Master says “depart from me…”??
As I’ve come to see things, God is completely Victorious in recreating His entire creation eventually. Thus any concept of hope inevitably tends to detract from and diminish that certain victory. It’s almost as if doubt is automatically introduced the moment one entertains the idea of hope…
How do you see it??
Bobx3