The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Kevin DeYoung on "A doctrine that must be believed"

Evangelical Universalism Arguments against Evangelical Universalism
#1

thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kev … s#comments

Some of my favorite comments from below the post:

“If someone confesses to be a christian, and doesn’t believe in hell. They have nothing to be saved from. I can’t even count them a brother or sister in Christ.”

“A good reminder to relinquish hope that God will save most of humanity.”

As someone who is leaning towards UR, (though still hung up on those clobber verses that were taught at a young age) reading things like this make me feel less and less Christian. Even in moments, less and less Christ-like because of my utter rejection of so much of what my old idols teach and believe. Its hard to disagree with those you learned from and still feel completely justified in my beliefs. Cognitive dissonance of a sort i suppose.

#2

Dude, I need a retreat to just let Christ pull me close to his heartbeat again so I don’t get sidetracked by comments like DeYoung’s. They are SO grevious. I honestly feel sorry for him. God have mercy.

Tom

#3

The fact that the “natural heart” revolts against something cannot be taken as proof of its truth. The natural heart revolts against injustice toward the helpless, against child abuse, domestic violence, and genocide — as well against the injustice of infinite punishment for finite crime.

Sonia

#4

“Relinquish hope” and “God will save most of (if not all :mrgreen: ) of humanity” are just not words that belong in the same sentence. :open_mouth:

#5

This seems to have turned into an obsession with Kevin. It could be counter-productive though. A thinking reader of his blog might be led to research the alternative view and see if it is really so bad and dangerous as Kevin and co keep on insisting.

#6

That is a good first step in that you recognize there is a distinction between universalism and evangelicalism. Both cannot be Christian.

I find this comment very intriguing. I noticed you said, you are leaning toward UR but remember those “clobber” verses you were taught. Are you saying, the interpretation of those verses hold you back or the verses themselves and secondly if those verses are somehow causing you to be ambiguous then what exactly is leaning you towards UR? God Bless! :slight_smile:

#7

“Truth” can be counter-productive :question:

Kevin can only preach the truth as that should be the obsession of any soundly biblical man of God. His job is to preach the gospel and allow God to lead the individual to the truth and if that individual is receptive then God will give them even more light. I am surprised you would say that? God Bless! :slight_smile:

#8

This statement demonstrates to me that 1) We both can’t be Christian as you have just deemed the God that we love and serve “unjust” 2) the bible is right that women should not be pastors as women are led by their feelings which is good and better than men in other areas but not for teaching the word and 3) You have allowed feelings to dictate how you interpret scripture. God Bless! :slight_smile:

#9

I found this statement to be very interesting. You said, a “thinking” person would question eternal punishment alluding to the others as not thinkers. Let’s follow your logic. You believe a cosmic Jew came down here in human to die for everyone’s disease of an alien nature because a man and a woman conjured up from nothing listened to a talking serpent in a garden to eat a fruit from a tree? Should a thinking person believe such nonsense? and if yes then why?

I like to think of myself as somewhat intelligent and apply that to a systematic theology. As a Calvinist I do struggle with the God of bible and revealing to others how I see Him for fear it may turn people off but that is my fallen state talking. I quickly realize that if this is the God of the bible I see in scripture then I can only teach what I see in scripture. I can’t use my intellect devoid of scripture interpreted correctly to somehow mold God into something I can fully understand because to do that would be judging God and His word and as a fallen creature I have not the ability nor the right. God Bless! :slight_smile:

#10

Here’s section from my article “Orthodoxy and Gregory of Nyssa’s Universalism.”
theoperspectives.blogspot.com/2007/10/orthodoxy-and-gregory-of-nyssas.html

VI: OPPOSITION FROM HODGE
In 1871, Charles Hodge represented many in the Reformed tradition by appealing to the Analogy of Faith to assert that 1 Peter 3:18-20, 4:6 cannot teach that Christ preached the gospel to spirits in prison because such an interpretation is contrary to the rest of Scripture and “the faith of the whole Church, Latin, Lutheran, and Reformed”. Hodge also says the whole Church teaches that preaching the gospel for salvation is confined to this present life. And he says, “It is certainly a strong objection to an interpretation of any one passage that it makes it teach a doctrine nowhere else taught in the Word of God, and which is contrary to the teachings of that Word, as understood by the universal Church.” [11]

We respect Hodge’s enormous contribution to systematic theology, but Hodge is mistaken about the Early Church and Eastern Church Father’s in regards to the limits of the gospel. And Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev says that contemporary Eastern Orthodox churches believe Christ preached the gospel to the dead. [12]

Rejecting that Christ preached the gospel to unsaved dead requires more than Hodge appealing to the Analogy of Faith while denying the truth about the first five centuries of Church doctrine. And it requires more than Augustine saying that Christ offering salvation to those who rejected him in earthly life is absurd. Both Church history and Scriptures referenced in this paper indicate that the possibility and hope of universalism is orthodox.

11Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology II, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1940), 615-21.
12 Alfeyev.

#11

Oxy, I think you misunderstood my point. I was just saying that KDY’s obsessive, almost Sauline pursuit of these terrible followers of the universalist “way” might lead some of his own followers to want to read the other people’s point of view for themselves. Do you agree?

#12

What does that exactly mean, “possibility and hope”? in what context. God Bless! :slight_smile:

#13

Yes I agree and that is a good thing. The apostle Paul says, to examine ourselves. Jesus said, Love God with all our heart, our MIND etc…When God was revealing His light to me I wanted to make absolutely sure that Christianity wasn’t just another coat I was putting on only to shed it later. I started reading up on atheism and pitted the greatest atheistic thinkers against the greatest theistic thinkers.

Any responsible, biblical pastor would challenge anyone to go behind him and see if what he says is truth, to not take his word but to be like the Bereans and study and search the scriptures to show thyself approved. AMEN!! God Bless! :slight_smile:

#14

In many cases, the possibility of universalism and the hope of universalism are the same thing. The possibility of universalism refers to the Bible teaching everybody in hades or hell will always have a chance of salvation in the name of Jesus. And the hope of universalism is a modern term that mostly means the same thing, but it emphasizes that a believer in the hope of universalism has active hope for universalism. I have two reasons for distinguishing the terms:

  1. I refer to many in the ancient church believing in postmortem conversion as the possibility of universalism because the term hope of universalism is a modern term while I want to be careful about projecting modern terms on the ancient church.

  2. Some people might have a hard heart and do not want everybody in hell to get saved, even though they believe that is possible.

#15

I’ll ask you kindly, for I am a Christian (Jesus is Lord, he came in the flesh, he is the Son of God, he died on a cross, was buried, and rose again and ascended to the right hand of the Father. He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. The only saviour under which Man must be saved) for you to cease and desist this separatist practice of yours, calling anyone who believes that Jesus will save everybody a eternally damned, lost soul (which is exactly what you’re saying when you try to steal the Christian distinction from a Christian Universalist).

It is more than insulting, it is high-judgement that belongs to The Lord alone; and you are rebelling against The Lord by seating yourself in the White Throne of Judgement where it doesn’t belong.

I am a Christian, and so are many others here. You will not so boldly attempt to steal that from us. So stop it.

And by the way, if you’re a Calvinist as you say; why don’t you leave the “Christian” stuff in the hands of God who pre-elects, and assures the salvation of said elect? (rhetorical question) Also, I leave you with a meal for thought; if these persons which you damn as non-Christian for their doctrinal differences are not Christians pre-elect…Then under your own accepted theology; why not consider the exceedingly possible truth that not only are you not one of the elect, but you are one of those who have been predestined by God to be damned? And your damnation is absolutely assured, as is the salvation of the Elect?

Consider it, if you will. You might not be a real Christian at all, just another non-elected pretender who like many other pretending non-elect go around doing miracles, doing good works, and doing the Christian thing saying “lord lord”, but for sheer sake of not being elected, are doomed. In essence, you might talk the talk, and even walk the walk; but consider that it might all be a cruel illusion, and you’ll never see the gates of Heaven open for your reception beyond the casting out into fire that is your predetermined lot. You might love God and even act like it, but yet you are nothing more than a damned soul living in a damned body, who will live forever in a damned land without hope for God’s remorse, or remedy, or even his mercy in the never ending, exponential, ceaseless torment you cling so fastly to as an immutable organ and foundation of the faith.

Here is a proper, contextual, and more literal translation of 1 Timothy 2:12 straight from the Greek (supported by Strong’s Concordance).

‎"Let a wife learn in tranquility (in peacefulness) in every subjection, yet I (Paul) do not permit a wife to domineer or teach (domineeringly) a husband, but to be in tranquility."

I would also ask that you not make snide side remarks at Sonia, or Sonia’s witness for her being a woman.

#16

I may get in trouble for this comment, but here goes… :unamused:

A couple thousand years of the doctrines of organized religion doesn’t have a lot of authority in my view. The views held by the church does give those views some authority - but for me, not a whole lot. There are several religions older than Christianity; does the long standing views of those traditions wield any authority?

I think it’s incredibly important to study out the doctrines that are traditionally held because there is much value found in them, but the final authority must be the scriptures and the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the believers heart.

As a scriptural basis for this concept; take a look at Jesus’ rebuke of the Pharisees. He often rebukes them for having the “Law and the prophets” but having completely missed the point. It would seem to me that popular Judaism at the time of Christ is analogous to popular Christianity today; the point of what God has accomplished and is accomplishing in Christ has been entirely missed.

God bless, I’m absolutely sure He will! :smiley:
-Aaron

#17

I believe Oxy is a troll. I think he does this for fun.

#18

That does seem to be the most logical conclusion, especially given that he disappears after Jason (or someone else) takes the time to refute him point-by-point. All he seems to do is find creative ways to repeat, “You guys aren’t Christians. Your presuppositions are wrong,” often in run-on sentences.

Can’t do anything but love him, though. :unamused: :mrgreen:

#19

You are actually gonna go there :frowning:

That is a worldly concept. I have learned a long time ago that people deem others who don’t agree with them; judgmental, intolerant, racist, bigot, TROLL The only thing I love is truth and love to teach truth and if that makes me a troll then guilty as charge.God Bless! :slight_smile:

#20

I don’t have time. Do you have any idea if I responded to every response the time that would take up? I will eventually get back in my own time. I was upfront about this at the beginning and please stop with the troll talk as it is not scriptural and just plain worldly which doesn’t place your sense of spiritual discernment in a good light. God Bless! :slight_smile: