Hi all, I just have two questions about UR and was wondering whether someone could help me. As a bit of an introduction, I’m fairly young and rather new to the idea of accepting UR – even though my two biggest and oldest influences are Jacques Ellul and Adin Ballou. While I have long accepted their convictions on non-resistance (pacifism), their UR has taken me many more years to even consider considering – probably due to the fairly strong eternal-hellfire church (highly independent Baptist church) I have attended for much of my life.
I entirely agree that God possesses both the power and desire to save all, and in this way I can affirm with UR what my Calvinist and Arminian brothers respectively deny. But I’m still very hesitant with denying an eternal hellfire. I’m just not there yet. I do feel the unavoidable approach of UR though – and in retrospect, UR has for many years been covertly knocking – of which I am both immensely fearful and excited by.
I was wondering whether anyone could recommend a book that deals with hellfire proof-texts properly. I’ve read a couple of UR books already, and most of Hanson’s Bible Threatenings Explained, but, well, I found this book a little strained. I think I’m familiar with the basic affirmations of UR. But is there another book that deals specifically with the denial of eternal hellfire threats? If not, perhaps I should just read Hanson a bit more attentively, and continue my reading elsewhere.
My second question is: does your church tolerate UR well? I am already a borderline-heretic within my local church because of my unwavering pacifism/anarchism. If I publicly affirmed UR, I would most probably be asked to leave as a disgraced heretic (-- pacifism and universalism? God forbid such love!). This doesn’t worry me altogether because I expect I must leave soon anyway, but I do fear that there will be no one left to gather with who shares similar minority convictions. Because you hold a minority faith (and one largely considered more heretical than just pacifism), I am interested to know whether this affects your assembly with other believers.
Your thoughts on my questions would be greatly appreciated.
God bless,
Andrew
I would recommend looking at the 
), the Southern Baptists, are not formally tolerant of universalistic soteriology, even though they foster tolerance and mutual respect between Arminians and Calvinists. (The convention’s recent Resolution “On The Reality Of Hell” sets their position for the foreseeable future.) I am well regarded by my teachers for being a contextual resource, and as an apologist for trinitarian theism and historical Christianity, but I have no expectations that I will ever be allowed to to make a public case for universalism in church, or even to teach. (I don’t resent that; I understand why they’re doing it, and agree with them on the principles, if not on the application. 
Too bad we’re all in different locations. I keep thinking there have to be more of us around, that are asking these questions. Maybe we just have to find them? There are a lot of alienated people from church in general that could probably use a group that allows for more thought.
) That shouldn’t be surprising, though; the doctrinal set combines positions taken in both the other doctrinal sets, so depending on the emphasis someone without discipline in keeping the points in mind will naturally simplify to one or the other. I expect this is less of a problem, though far from entirely mitigated, for congregations with strong creedal and/or catechetical affirmation programs and training. (This is aside from the question of whether modalism or unitarianism is true compared to ortho-trin.)