The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Joe: Why I'm not a Universalist-5 initial reasons against UR

That was for me the most important barrier to be surmounted. I could not conceive the possibility of UR until I was convinced that aionios did not have to mean unending. When I could get past that, I was free to start looking at other evidence.

Now I really don’t see it as such a big deal, but I understand where people are coming from. Before, it was a huge thing because I was such a literalist–no imagination at all. :laughing:

Sonia

The avoidance of literalism can lead to rationalizing any verse away. Romans 5? Not literally meaning all will be saved. Where’s your imagination now :slight_smile: ?

No verse should be rationalized away! That’s not what I meant at all. I’m not quite sure how to describe what I mean–so I probably shouldn’t have written it! I assure you, rationalizing anything away is the last thing on my mind.

But to me, aionios was of supreme importance at first, and continued to be very important for awhile–a huge part of my ability to be open to UR was study of this word and becoming convinced that it does not mean “endless” and is not particularly having to do with length of duration.

It was much later that my perspective gradually changed enough that I realized that the exact definition of aionios was not so important to me anymore. When I look back on how I used to think, it seems very narrow and one dimensional. No doubt some would say I’ve abandoned the “straight and narrow”. :laughing: Maybe I have–but I hope not! To me, it seems that my understanding has deepened. But how can we judge ourselves? If we’re delusional, how could we know it? So, I say with Paul, “I do not even judge myself.” But the Lord who searches the minds and hearts of men will be faithful to judge me. We cannot save ourselves any more than we can make ourselves.

I still don’t have much of an imagination … but a little is better than none! :sunglasses:
Sonia

Annoyingly the forum was down for most of the day so I couldn’t refer to any of the useful stuff people wrote on Aionion :frowning:

Anyway, here is what I posted:

Now that forum is up, I can reuse Sonia’s post :sunglasses:

Interestingly the ESV goes beyond the BDAG definition in it’s footnotes! :unamused:

Hi Sonia,
My point was that the defender of eternal hell can use the exact same reasoning- they don’t take the word “all”, for instance as literally meaning all. I claim that this reasoning leads to subjectivism and rationalization.
Your take?
Bob

For me, the aionios debate was not a big deal because from my initial perusal of scriptures that use aionios, it was quickly evident to me that it didn’t “ALWAYS” meant “endless”, as in the “eternal” fire that destroyed Sodom. Sodom did not burn forever. Also, it was used in the LXX to translate the Hebrew “olam”, which was a word that referenced that which was beyond site, beyond understanding, and often was related to the hoped for Messianic Age (which was beyond site/understanding).

I was initially drawn to UR because of studying Rom. 5:18 and Col. 1:20 in context. In their literary context they seem to me to strongly affirm UR. I was finding these scriptures to be such compelling support for UR that it scared me so I decided to study scripture concerning Hell in order to counter this compelling support. The more I studied what scripture actually says concerning sin, judgment, and “Hell”, the more shaky the concept of Hell became, and the stronger UR seemed. The “tipping point” for me was understanding that not one word in the Bible should be correctly interpreted as Hell, even Gehenna.

The exact point, the one piece of information, that spilled the beans was when I found out that Gehenna could have been (possibly was likely) understood by some of the 1st century Jews (Pharisees) as a place of remedial punishment for many, if not most of humanity - punishment meant to bring positive change. This freed me to believe that Paul really meant that God was in Jesus reconciling all of creation to himself (Col.1.20) and that just as the sin of Adam plunged all of humanity into bondage to sin and death, the sacrifice of Christ ultimately gets us all out of that bondage to sin and death and into the freedom of righteousness and life (Rom. 5.18), that through His sacrifice Jesus really does draw all of humanity to himself (Jn. 12:32), that…

I had studied scripture seeking to understand UR and oppose UR so intently for so many months that when the beans spilled, it was a quick change, seeming to have happened overnight, though I had agonized over it for months. Even then, it took a personal word from the Lord for me to come to admit to myself and others that I actually believed UR and was not just studying it.

Hi Sherman! I’m assuming that, in your estimation,no word should be correctly interpreted as Hell, the way many of us have defined it as an endless place of torment, because that is never the context. Is that right? Places that refer to Gehenna aren’t accurately a hell because the understanding was that it was a place for remedial judgement, but what are the other places you refer to? Would you mind giving a little more detail? I’d sure appreciate it. Thanks, Amy

Sheol and Hades mean realm of the dead or grave, are non-specific terms that do not necessarily imply torment. Tartarus was a word that implied torment, but was only used once, and did not reference humans, and even such torment was only specifically noted to last until judgment for sinning angels.

Concerning Gehenna, I believe the best interpretation would be “the city trash dump” and thus it would be left open to the person to interpret based upon their understanding of the text and its context (literary, cultural, historical, and authorial). And to me, there is sufficient evidence that suggests that the Pharisees could have understood it primarily to reference remedial punishment, though the ultimate seems to be annihilation after an indefinitely long punishment. This reference to annihilation is meant to encourage people to not fear man who can only destroy the body, and instead fear God who can potentially destroy the soul in “Gehenna”.

To me, if God meant to warn humanity of ECT (Hell), then such would have been specifically, clearly, and repeatedly stated in scripture in the original languages, and would not need to be read into, much less translated INTO scripture, especially the OT, the Law! The Egyptians had a form of Hell in their mythology, and thus it seems noteworthy to me that Moses did not warn of ECT in the Law. The penalty/results of sin according to the Law are tragic things in this life (disease, poverty, oppression by others, slavery, etc.) and ultimately death.

And in the NT, the lack of use of Tartarus is an important fact to me also. Tartarus in Greek Mythology was a place of ECT for those consigned there by the Greek gods. The Titans were held there with no end in site, and humans that ticked off the gods, especially Zeus. If Paul believed in ECT, Tartarus would have been a perfect word to warn people of such. It would have been the perfect word to translate Gehenna, if ECT was meant by ECT; but it wasn’t. Instead, Ga Hinnom was transliterated by Matthew as Gahenna. And in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Luke uses the non-specific word Hades; if he had though Jesus meant to convey ECT, Tartarus would have been a better word to use.

When I acknowledged to myself the actual lack of scriptural evidence in support of ECT, it freed me to accept in faith (and not seek to explain away) the many passages of scripture that specifically, clearly, and repeatedly speak of the salvation of all humanity. I was freed to believe that “All” means “All” in these universalist passages. It was very difficult for me to acknowledge to myself the compelling evidence that was against my traditions, but the more I studied the subject, the more I found my traditions, the traditional doctrine of ECT, to be built on quick sand.

And concerning Remedial Punishment, the more I study passages on judgment and punishment in the afterlife, the more I come to believe that such punishment is the punishment of Truth. When we come into the perfect light of God and see the contrast between how we actually lived and what we could have lived if we had heeded the word of God to us, we’ll all have plenty of crying (weeping) and expressions of terrible, even angry at self, regret (gnashing, grinding of teeth) to do. Thankfully though, such a revelation of our wickedness and evil is also accompanied by the revelation of the love, grace, mercy, and forgiveness of God for us all. These two aspects of judgment burn the hell out of us; it’s terrible, fiery; but it’s good medicine. It is so terrible that it would be better to go through life blind, and maimed than to enter judgment having treated others terribly! The struggles of this life are nothing to be compared to the pain and self-reproach (in this life and potentially the life to come) that we’ll suffer if we give our lives over to sin - whether we believe in Jesus or not! The parables of Mt. 25 work in me a tremendous humility because I must admit to myself that I often foolish like the 5 foolish virgins, lazy and twisted in my thinking like the man with one talent, and selfish and unconcerned about the needs of others like the kids (goats).

And the fact that most of the passages concerning the judgment of God are spoken as warnings to the children of God, not unbelievers. Being a child of God, faith in Christ, being filled with the Spirit of God, are “gifts” that relatively few people have been blessed with. We as believers are “rich” and need to recognize that such riches are not of ourselves but are gifts of God and we are thus responsible for them. Sadly, though I’ve been lazy like the man with one talent, the truth is I’ve been lazy and selfish though I’ve been given ten talents, relatively speaking.

By mistranslating the passages of judgment to warn of a separation of believers and unbelievers, such mistranslation nullifies the power of these passages to call believers to righteousness and fail to empower us to live under the reality of such judgment. In fact, I believe judgment is an eternal reality, something that is both Now and Not Yet. When we embrace the judgment of God concerning our sins, we are freed from sins - in this life and the life to come. We embrace that truth to some degree today, but in many ways we hide from such truch and remain in our sins. Some day though, the Truth will burn the hell out of us all! Even our faith will be refined as by fire! Through the fire of truth we ultimately die to self and live for God!

Is it even possible for us to not be subjective in our reasoning? Our understanding of anything is necessarily subjective to our experience, knowledge and ability (and other factors no doubt, such as revelation from God–although I’d class that with experience and knowledge)–and hopefully our subjectivity is always growing towards God’s objectivity.

If we are honestly seeking truth, rationalization won’t be a problem… we’re not trying to escape truth by reasoning it away, we’re trying to find it. And the success of those endeavors is between the man and God–who judges the heart and motives. We are to “judge nothing before the time” according to Paul. None of us is placed as watchman and judge of another’s thoughts.

The defender of ET is quite welcome to use any reasoning he chooses–but I’m under no obligation to accept that reasoning, and I don’t expect he should accept any opinions of mine, unless he perceives the truth of it. I don’t think we can come to a rational, objective, unified understanding, because we’re all like the blind men feeling the different parts of the elephant–and we cannot judge the honest and intentions of the other blind men to know how far we can trust their perceptions. Perhaps we can feel our way around to where they are and see if we find the same–then if we still disagree we can learn how to love in the midst of conflict. Without love it doesn’t matter who’s right–both are wrong.

My testimony above was merely a statement reflecting on myself, not an intent to convince anyone–and thus I probably should have kept it to myself–and it was very much subjective analysis of myself. :open_mouth:

Anyway, that’s all I’m going to say on this thread, as it’s off topic, but it fits well with some things I was thinking about in regard to the thread/poll on denominations. Or maybe you’d like to start a thread on subjectivity and rationalization? :sunglasses:

Sonia

Reasoning is an necessary part of understanding. “Reasoning away” speaks more of a purposeful attempt at explaining evidence in such a way so that the evidence does not appear contrary to what we believe. Are we seeking to understand the passage or seeking to interpret the passage in such a way so as to fit our beliefs. And like Sonia noted, we all can be guilty of the later and thus need to walk in humility and refrain from accusing others of such. From experience I’ve found that my traditions often hinder me from understanding scripture for what it actually says; and we all have traditions. These are like the hard ground in the parable of the sower. They are subconscious assumptions that we do not question. The belief in ECT is one such assumption for most Christians. For many, damnation is actually a deeper and firmer assumption than salvation. I’m always suprised at the number of theologians who when discussing Calvinism vs. Arminianism discuss all aspects of salvation, but have a common assumption of damnation. Their understanding of salvation is based on the assumption of damnation. Take away damnation and it radically shakes their understanding of salvation. It did for me.

Thanks, Sherman, for the extra explanation! I’m still processing through this myself. Everything you shared makes sense. I’ve been exposed to these ideas, but since I don’t know the words, before translation, it feels complicated. It sure would be nice to attend your church, if I were in Tennessee. I know I would get so much out of it! :smiley: Interesting that you say the word Tartarus was hardly used, when it could have been. Also interesting, is that Greek Mythology contained ideas of torment and these ideas were not emphasized in the OT, when they could have been.

This is my worst nightmare!!! :astonished:

I think you are right about this. We don’t take seriously God’s commands and think that Jesus died to get us off the hook because we are incapable of doing any different. The only difference between us and the world, for many Christians, is that we will be forgiven. My cousin recently posted a question on FB asking will you get judgement or (and I can’t remember exactly what it was), but the implication was if you are a Christian you will not be judged.

It is humbling to think that God has given us the task of using the gifts he’s given us and we will be held more accountable. There is no room for placing importance on who has a corner on the truth, as if that in itself is the advantage. What’s important to God is that we use that knowledge to help others. And we’re convinced that God is committed to the work of reconciling all things to himself.

Amy, thanks for your encouragement.

   Many years ago I read of a man who had a vision from God. And in that vision the man was in a room with many doors.  Some of the doors were brightly lit, and a couple even had ornate decorations all around it.  A couple of the doors were dark, forboding, even neglected.  The man saw one that was especially dark, forboding, and neglected, even hidden away; so he asked the Lord what were the doors and what was the dark door.  The Lord, in the vision, told him that the doors were the different truths taught in the church. The brightest door was Salvation and the darkest door was judgment.  The brightness of the door was the relative amount of teaching that the church did on these subjects.

 I recall that I was impressed that this was a true vision from the Lord.  And I was moved to pray, asking God to reveal to me the truth concerning judgment. Well, year's later my understanding of Judgement has radically changed, as well as my understanding of Salvation. In fact, my understanding of salvation was changed through coming to understand judgment as 1) for us all, 2) based on works, and 3) terrible but remedial.  The church has traditionally taught that judgment is in reality 1) only for unbelievers, 2) based on faith, and 3) radically unjustly vindictive and punitive (eternal punishment for temporal sins).

  I'm a universalist in large part due to my study of what scripture actually says concerning punishment of sin (temporal and eternal) and eternal judgment!  This not only study freed me to have faith in the salvation of Christ for everyone, but it also scares the hell out of me personally!

Hi Sherman, I’m glad you are encouraged. I’m encouraged, too, by you.

Eternal judgement scares the hell out of me too! I have wondered if the church isn’t doing a disservice to people to not emphasize the judgement more. A friend was at my house today telling me all about how she was getting a divorce and did not want to work on her marriage. She followed it up saying, “God’s forgiven me. What’s one more thing?!” I could see her pain and was not wanting to come down hard on her for all that she has been through. Her husband is bi-polar, but her reasoning indicated that, if it were a sin and went against God’s desires, that God would not seriously care about dealing with her sin and would simply dismiss it.

I agree with your points one and three. I’m not as comfortable to say that judgement is not based on our faith. Isn’t it our faith that leads to the kind of works that please God and make us exempt from needing a remedial wrath? Faith and works seem to go hand in hand, are not mutually exclusive.

Sherman, I was surprised to see that you haven’t read GM, or Parry’s, book yet and you, already, are so well thought out. Talbott’s book was a bit of an easier read for me than Parry’s. I think because Parry has so much scripture to follow. I need to read it again.

I always appreciate your posts, Sherman, and find you a model of graciousness!

Yes–I agree with that. The church teaches people not to really care about being unrighteous.

The attitude is: It’s okay–sins are all paid for–just gotta get through this life and then we’ll all be “zapped” into righteousness. “Christians aren’t perfect–just forgiven.” (That means we can get away with stuff.)

And that attitude is blatantly condemned in scripture–the unrighteous and false prophets are always saying “God’s not going to punish us for doing wrong.”

Here’s one example from Jer 7:
If you really change your ways and your actions and deal with each other justly…then I will let you live in this place, in the land I gave your forefathers for ever and ever. But look, you are trusting in deceptive words that are worthless. 'Will you steal and murder, commit adultery and perjury, burn incense to Baal and follow other gods you have not known, and then come and stand before me in this house, which bears my Name, and say, “We are safe”–safe to do all these detestable things?

Exactly … that’s a perfect example of this line of thinking. I don’t know that I’ve actually heard anyone ever say it that directly–but that’s the implication of what is commonly taught. Sin doesn’t really matter, it’s all paid for–past, present, and future! Why should we strive for righteousness?

Maybe that’s why sometimes Christians are less pleasant people than non-Christians.

I find that my belief in UR, and the changes in belief that came with it, has made me much more willing and able to forgive and have patience with others faults. There’s something about knowing that all people are on their way to righteousness that makes it easier–maybe it helps to know that someday they will really be sorry and ashamed.

I agree that, scripturally, faith and works are inextricably tied together, but my guess is Sherman is talking about the thing which most churches seem to teach suffices for “faith”: “These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.” The churches, speaking in general, teach lipservice and legalism–not faith which results in righteousness.

The more I ponder these things, the more I am convinced that we’ve really mixed things up. This belittling of the judgment of God has begun to really disturb me when I hear it taught in church–even more so than the teaching of the hopeless lostness of the lost.

Sonia

It sounds as if your friend believes divorce “in and of itself” is a sin. I believe divorce is the result of sin, not sin in and of itself necessarily. As to whether or not she should divorce her husband or not, that’s her decision and she has to live with the results of it. Your place as a friend is to provide a listening ear and comforting arm, and if, “IF” you believe you have some wise counsel to share, do so. But leave it up to her whether she accepts it or not.

My book, “God is a divorce’ too!” might be a help, though it is more theological than practical. It could help her determine whether or not she’s out of line in seeking a divorce. Ultimately divorce is caused by the hardness of heart. Has her husband hardened his heart against her, she against him, or both of them hardened against eachother. Living with someone who is bi-polar is very difficult and often toxic.

We, as believers, have actually already embraced eternal judgment. We’ve looked at ourselves in the light of truth, repented of sin and turned to God. And as we’ve grown closer to the Lord, He’s progressively dealt with “issues” in our lives. This is how I understand judgment, it’s the chastizement of a loving father - terrible but for our good.

Check the scriptures out that speak of judgment and I think you’ll find that most, if not all, of them are related to works, how we actually live our lives, not just whether or not we have faith in Christ. I understand faith as a gift, a product of God revealing His love for us to us. It’s not something we choose or can take credit for. Faith should and does profoundly effect how we live and how we treat others. The more we realize how much God loves us, the more we are empowered to love others.

I’ve actually purposefully limited my study of material that makes a strong case for UR. I was originally asked by someone what I thought of Carlton Pearson and his change in beliefs. I told the person I didn’t have a well informed opinion and would get back with them. So I got a copy of his book thinking it would present the reasons why he changed his beliefs. It presented some basic information but was more of a vent for the frustration and pain he’d experienced by being rejected for coming to believe UR. Anyhow, his book only mentioned a couple of scriptures like Col. 1:20 and Rom. 5:18. So I started to study these passages in context assuming that I would quickly dismiss them as not actually saying Jesus saves everyone. But the more I studied them, the more it became evident to me that they were.

This scared me so I decided to study scriptures on Hell and judgment to reaffirm my traditional beliefs. The more I studied them though, the more I began to see that the traditional doctrine of judgment and Hell is not what scripture affirms. So my study of scripture on judgment and punishment of sin literally freed me to accept in faith the many scriptures that affirm the ultimate salvation of all humanity.

After that, in sharing my research with others, I ran into so much opposition that I didn’t want to study other UR material because I wanted to be able to say that I had come at these conclusions from my own study of scripture and was not influenced by others. Not only that, but the scriptural evidence was so compelling I didn’t feel a need to expand my research of such. In fact, I primarily studied anti-UR material, hoping that if I was getting off into something wrong, the Lord would break through and correct me. But the more I studied scripture for myself, the more I came to be convinced of UR. And the more opposition, even persecution, I faced, the more I studied and the more I’ve come to believe that Jesus really is the savior of all humanity, not just in title but in reality!

I think I understand what you mean.

I tried to be a good listener and give good cousel, but I didn’t know what to tell her. I’ve never been in her shoes. How could I tell her what true love is when I’d never had to endure what she’s been through. Like you said, Sherman, she was so hardened going on about how she didn’t care what others thought. Though, she clearly did because she kept explaining her rational. She was deeply angry and wounded. The pain was all over her face, like I’d never seen before. It almost made her unrecognizeable to me, like who is this angry person I’ve never seen before.

I agree that faith is a gift. Although, you can almost say the same about God’s judgment, right? Judgement could fit all of this you have about faith, too. We don’t ask for judgement - if even our actions do,God is faithful to give it, whether we’ve been corrected profoundly effects how we live and treat others, and the more corrected we are the more we are empowered to love others.

I totally agree that judgment is in reference to what we do and how we live, but aren’t our actions a direct result of our faith? Can you have one without the other?

Sherman, I’d be interested in hearing more about your book, “God is a divorce too!” I dont’ want to get too off topic, talking about divorce and judgement on this thread. Oops, I tend to do that! Is there another place you’ve talked about your book on this site? By the way, I enjoyed reading your experience of coming to UR by becoming convinced of the texts.

Hi Amy, next year I’ll be glad to start a new thread on MDR and share there what I’ve come to believe. Until then, Happy New Year to you all!

Blessings,
Sherman

God must love and condemn simultaneously, as the verse in the Gospel of John states that he who does not believe is condemned already AND God so loved the world…right?