And what would those be? On the issue at hand. From Origen to Robin Perry and the hundreds that have believed in universalism in between. I could find issue with and disagree with other points of their theology. But that does not make me throw out EU based on the other issues that person may or may not hold.
EU stands on its own evidence. e.g.I did not say, “well, Origen is a wack-job on doctrines C, F and G, therfore I will not believe in the reconciliation of all people”. HELLO!!!
MacArthur and company need to stop the smoke and mirror show. They do not have the corner on truth.
If thier house of cards is so fragile that if you remove ECT, it comes crashing down, then something must be wrong.
Here is one of MacArthur’s quotes of Bell (I admit here that the greater context might be missing here, but for the sake of argument, let’s roll with it.):
Rob Bell, Ooze Interview (July 2007): “I don’t know why as a Christian you would have to make such declarative statements. [Why would you] want there to be a literal hell? I am a bit skeptical of somebody who argues that passionately for a literal hell, why would you be on that side? Like if you are going to pick causes, if you’re literally going to say these are the lines in the sand, I’ve got to know that people are going to burn forever, this is one of the things that you drive your stake in the ground on. I don’t understand that.”
“[Why would you] want there to be a literal hell?”
He makes it sound like it is entirely a choice as to what we believe about hell. Is that the modus operandi, we just choose what to believe about Jesus? Is the Christian faith something that we create by “choosing” teachings? A disciple of Jesus accepts what his/her Master teaches, not what we want Him to teach!
Rob Bell is not my master I’ve never read anything he has written. I would agree that he might be out in left field with some of his views. But I do not base my belief in EU on Rob Bell’s definition.
MacArthur is using this argument as a smoke and mirror, saying see the crazy ideas he has, therefore EU must be wrong. No! MacArthur is not refuting anything here.
And If I were you, I would review again what Jesus really said about Gehenna in the context of the people He was speaking to.
Clue “Gehenna” does not = ECT. That is the spin of the traditions of men.
Nothing to do with this Bell thing, but my husband just said to me this afternoon that MacArthur is a false teacher. He grew up in MacArthur’s church, was involved in lower level leadership positions, did a semester at their seminary, etc, and it all made him very cynical, I guess. I was a member there too for several years, but wasn’t privy to the “insider” stuff that my husband got to see which apparently led him to doubt and distrust the teachings of that church.
MacArthur teaches that a woman should follow her husband’s spiritual lead and look to him for direction. So I’m wondering if he would tell me I should listen to my husband and join in declaring him a false teacher, or if I should rebel against my “head” on this manner and listen to MacArthur instead?
What’s a woman to do?? The “evangelical pope” tells me to listen to my husband, my husband tells me the “pope” is a false teacher… I’m soooo confused! (or maybe I’m kidding )
I just told him I wasn’t willing to call MacArthur a false teacher, even if I think he’s mistaken on a lot of things. (And he laughed and said, “I’m way past that point.” )
MacArthur would probably do well to be careful in his accusations against others … accusing others of arrogance and damnable egotism because they disagree with your opinion of scripture … brings to mind something about logs and specks … and it just possibly might be a little bit arrogant, and – dare I say it? – it might even be arrogant to the point of “reflecting a damnable egotism.”
Anyway, regarding your post…
What I see here is a paradigm clash. It seems plain that what is happening is this:
Bell sees different possible ways of understanding the “hell texts” in scripture, and in light of that he questions what reason a Christian would have for latching on the the literal hopeless endless torment option and proclaiming it with dogmatic certainty, when there are other options which make sense scripturally and are more in line with Christian principles–the teachings of Christ to love and forgive one’s enemies, the concept that God is love, the teaching that God is reconciling all to Himself in Christ, and that He is the saviour of all men.
MacArthur on the other hand, can conceive of no possible way of understanding those texts in a non-literal fashion without desecrating the scriptures. So in Bell’s questioning, MacArthur views him as a man unwilling to believe what is plainly stated in scripture. He then concludes that Bell wants to pick and choose what he will believe in the Bible and discard even the plain teachings of Jesus if he doesn’t like them.
Is MacArthur wrong to condemn Bell for this? I don’t know. IMO, only God can judge these things. If MacArthur really believes Bell is compromising the teachings of Jesus, is he not justified in trying to stop him? Maybe… maybe not. Maybe MacArthur’s unwillingness to allow room for other perspectives is just evidence of an attitude of “arrogance and damnable egotism.” (Sorry, just couldn’t resist that. ) Maybe he’s so steeped in the traditions of men that he honestly can’t see any other way to look at things. Maybe he considers the traditions of the church [at least the ones he specifically affirms] as too sacred to question. Maybe it’s something else? God knows.
At any rate, I don’t think MacArthur has presented, so far, much of case against Bell. Not only does he often seems to miss the point of what Bell says, but he spends a lot of time quoting Bell and assailing him with various charges and little time explaining why Bell is wrong to say what he says. For instance, in the quote you provide above, Bell questions why we would want a literal hell and why we would be dogmatic about who is in the literal hell forever. Instead of addressing those points from scripture, MacArthur charges Bell with rejecting the teachings of Jesus and thinking we can pick and choose what to believe about Jesus.
The fact is: we do have to choose what to believe about Jesus. We do have to choose how to understand His teaching. We don’t have to cave to others who think they have the authority to tell us what it was that the Master really taught. We all have one Teacher, and we are all brothers.
That MacArthur condemns Bell’s questions is a big strike against him, in my book, and more likely to incline me to call him a false teacher than any of his actual teachings. Why should we not be allowed to question? (Dang, Roofus, you’d get blasted for all your questions! ) But, seriously, why the “thought control”? And why should he view Bell as a threat if he really believes the following:
"] (4) God’s saving purpose cannot be thwarted (John 6:37), meaning none of Christ’s true sheep will ever be lost (John 10:27-29). That is because (5) God assures the perseverance of His elect (Jude 24; Phil 1:6; 1 Peter 1:5).
So, he believes none of Christ’s sheep will ever be lost, yet he still writes:
Anyway, that’s way more than I meant to write, so I guess I better stop.
Sonia
If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that religion is a means of gain (1 Timothy 6:3-5).
Excellent. Let’s get rid of Eternal Damnationalist doctrine then. It is a different doctrine from what Christ preached; “Come all ye who are heavy laden and I shall give you rest” - “I came to save the world”, “lost sheep found”, “lost coin found”, “harlots and publicans enter the kingdom before the pharisees do”, “your faith has saved you”, etc, etc.
ETC doesn’t conform to Godliness, it doesn’t agree with any sound logic or words or teaching of God’s love, mercy, grace, justice, or purpose.
It causes envy (Ugh…you just wait, you might be having sex and fun and getting drunk now, but just you wait! Atleast I’M going to Heaven when I die. Then I’ll have all the fun I want while you BURN!).
Strife (NO! BAPTISM is required - NO! Its the sinner’s prayer! - Its works! Its Grace! MY denomination is going to Heaven…yours isn’t).
Abusive language (you’re going to Hell! Where you’re going to burn forever haha!), evil suspicions (witch trials, heresy hunts, and the like).
It causes morbid interest in controversial questions (I wonder how many people are going to Hell per second, what kind of tortures will be there, what sort of demons will inhabit the infernal realm…hmmmn…Demonology, I should study in this area, for God of course!..yeah…for God…).
Constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that religion is a means of gain (nothing more fought over in all of Christendom than who is saved and who is not; I give you Calvinism vs. Arminianism; I give you televangelists who will give you blessings for profit, I give you indulgences, I give you pastors in the protestant churches who use “Hell fire” as a means of controlling their flock, I give you parents who threaten their children with Hell if they don’t obey, I give you forced conversions in Spain for the sake of revenue, I give you pagan converts to Christianity who used it after Constantine as a means of political advancement, ).
PS: Evangelical Pope? Not mine. I have only one pope, and he is at the right hand of the Father.
Is it “faith” in Christ, or “faith” in an eternal hell that makes us true Christians? The Apostle Paul pleaded with us in these words: “I implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing tolerance for one another in love, being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.” (Ep. 4:1-6 NAS)
A central doctrine that has divided the Church for generations has been the teaching on “election.” It has created two major camps – those who say God only predestines some to salvation, and those who say God desires all to be saved. How many have been the debates on this theme! They called each other “heretics” at one time and the lines were clearly drawn.
But I believe that EU is the key to uniting the Christian world and truely freeing Christ’s servants as divine messenger’s of really GOOD NEWS to a hurting world! A message that exalts and honors and glorifies God’s holy and loving character before the world. With this message, no longer can God be accused of being cruel, unloving and unjust. He is fair to all peoples in all nations and throughout all ages (Acts 10: 34-36)! Now, all Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, tribal peoples, and Native Americans can be assured that their deceased ancestors and family members are NOT going to be tormented in hell forever! This single truth should and will transform Christian Missions! It will elevate Jesus to His rightful place as “Savior of the World” (John 4:42) and through Him as such, bring GOOD NEWS of great joy to all people – Luke 2:10. “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). “I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world” (John 12:47). Did He succeed? Absolutely! “I accomplished the work you gave me to do” (John 17:4). “The Son of God came to earth with the express purpose of undoing the devil’s work” (1 John 3:8 Phillips Modern English). Did He succeed? Absolutely! “Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God” (Phil. 2:9-11). “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world” (1 John 2:2). “We testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world” (1 John 4:14). “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the Gospel of Peace, who bring glad tidings of good things!” (Rom. 10:15). How beautiful are your feet? Jesus is the “Savior of the World!”
EU is a historical, Biblical, and legitimate theological position just as much as Arminianism (God loves all, but can’t save all) or Calvinism (God can save all, but chooses to only save some). To brand EU as heretical is unjustified.
Matthew Slick, a Reformed theologian, with a master’s of divinity from Westminster Theological Seminary and president of Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry has said:
“[Christian] Universalism is the teaching that God, through the atonement of Jesus, will ultimately bring reconciliation between God and all people throughout history. It is important to note that holding to [Christian] universalism in itself does not make one a non-Christian". This quote is particularly weighty since he says, “Studying cults and apologetics is a passion and I have spent more than 26 years doing it.”
Our traditions have indoctrinated us to reject anything outside our theological “boxes.” Everything outside is labelled heresy. It’s the same with Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and Christian denominations (Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Pentecostal, Non-Denominational, etc.). We are all locked into our systems, and only when we question and investigate our beliefs, do we discover greater truths about God. The Lord commanded us to judge for ourselves what is right (Luke 12: 57). And the Apostle Paul exhorts us to test all things (1Thess. 5:21). Will we obey the Lord and not allow the fear of man to influence or control what we choose to believe? (See Gal. 1:10)
Let me be specific about my faith. I accept God’s love as most Arminian believers do, and God’s power and sovereignty as many Calvinist. Jesus came in the flesh, lived and died for our sins, was resurrected, and is coming again. He is the only begotten Son of God, the only way of salvation. Christ and the Father are one. All things have been made by Him, for Him, and through Him. I worship Christ as I do the Father. I believe He fully destroys the devil’s works and accomplishes all His will for mankind! Do you? The only difference between Calvinism, Arminism and myself is that I don’t believe that Hell or the Lake of Fire (whatever they are) are going to be eternal in duration. Now really, does this make me a heretic?
It is tragic that most believers have no biblical understanding of the true basis for Christian unity. We mistakenly, unjustly, and all too often harshly reject members of Christ’s body. By rejecting His members, we reject Him. Whatever we do to the “least of these,” we do unto Him. It would be better to be thrown into the sea with a milestone around our necks, than to offend one of His little ones. (Mt. 18:6; Mk. 9:42; Lk. 17:2)
I believe that Christian unity is NOT optional and that EU could go a long way to bring this to pass.
When Christians recognize and acknowledge the comprehensive biblical basis for our hope, and are assured that it is a viable theological position, stripped of any disrespect and scorn, I believe it will once again become the prevailing theology of the Church as it was in the early centuries. If you do not hope in your heart of hearts that this theology is true, I can only pray for you. In the very least, please do not judge or condemn those who accept it.
Apparently this anti-Bell series is already over. I’m disappointed. I expected a man of MacArthur’s standing to be able to offer a much more substantial critical analysis.
I’ve never read anything he has written. I would agree that he might be out in left field with some of his views. But I do not base my belief in EU on Rob Bell’s definition.
He grew up in MacArthur’s church, was involved in lower level leadership positions, did a semester at their seminary, etc, and it all made him very cynical, I guess. I was a member there too for several years, but wasn’t privy to the “insider” stuff that my husband got to see which apparently led him to doubt and distrust the teachings of that church.
I’m soooo confused! (or maybe I’m kidding 
)
(Sorry, just couldn’t resist that. 
