The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Sonia's commentary on "Raising Hell" by Julie Ferwerda

Studies Books
#21

Raising Hell, Part 2: Love Never Fails – Chapter 8: Love Never Fails for Children

I love the verse Julie heads this chapter with: “Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you!” –Isaiah 49:15

Julie argues in this chapter that we can understand God’s love for His children – the human race – by looking at the love of human parents for our children. She asks, “Does God ask earthly parents to do what He Himself is unable or unwilling to do?”

As human parents, we use corrective and restorative punishment with our children. There’s nothing our children could do that would make us (assuming we are normal, loving, stable people) stop loving them, give them overly harsh punishment, or never ending punishment.

Julie writes, "If God is truly the perfect Parent who supposedly loves and longs to be intimately connected to all of His children—His very own offspring—is it really possible that He is going to throw most of them away or lock them away in a fiery dungeon? Wouldn’t that suggest that I have more love than God does? God says His love is unfailing, patient, and never ceasing, but if in fact it does fail and cease for most of His children, that would make Him nothing more than a liar.

“God is no liar; He IS love and all His children since the creation of mankind are a continued expression of that love. Our opportunity to participate in parenting was so that we could more fully understand His unfailing love for and His attachment to each and every one of us.”

Julie lists some of the characteristics of loving parents:

*]Loving parents only intend good for their children.  Julie quotes Thomas Wittemore who wrote that to say that God created some of His creatures knowing that they would be miserable forever is “to charge Him with the utmost malignity.”/*]
*]Loving parents make sure the punishment fits the crime. We don't wish an eternity of hell on our children because of a season of rebellion./*]
*]Loving parents understand that there are factors behind disobedience.  We offer understanding and help when we know there are conditions affecting our child's behavior: pain, exhaustion, others' mistakes, disabilities, imbalances, illness, etc.  How much more must God be able to understand and help His children overcome?/*]
*]Loving parents demonstrate fair and consistent character.  We try to treat all our children with equal love and fairness, showing no favoritism.  Julie tells a real life “Cinderella” type story about a boy who was singled out by his mother for harsh treatment, while his siblings were given every comfort, and compares that to how mainstream Christianity presents God to the world.  This particularly brings to my mind the Calvinist picture of a God who arbitrarily picks some of His children to love and demonstrate His goodness to, and others of His children to show wrath and judgment to./*]
*]Loving parents ultimately long to be restored in relationship. This is our goal in disciplining our rebellious children.  Julie quotes Thomas Talbott writing in The Inescapable Love of God, “So what, specifically, does perfect justice require? What sort of  thing would make up for, or cancel out sin? If we accept the Christian  view, according to which sin is anything that separates us from God  and from each other, then the answer to our question is clear: Perfect justice requires reconciliation and restoration.”/*]
*]Loving parents never give up.  If we human parents would never set a time limit on our children's repentance, why should we think that God draws a line of no return at our physical death?/*]

Some will object that God’s Fatherhood only applies to believers, but Julie rightfully points out that the scriptures teach that all people have come from God through Christ, who is called “the first born of all creation” in Col 1:15. (You can also see: Rom 11:36, Eph 3:14-15, Heb 2:10, Heb 11:3)

I also imagine people objecting that it is not right for us to use our experience as parents and children to interpret God’s behavior. But I’d like to point out that Jesus makes a similar appeal in Matt 7:11, talking about asking and receiving from God, “If you, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in Heaven give to those who ask Him.” In this case, God’s ways are higher than ours in that His ideal of goodness is much more good than ours.

Julie says that the reason God gave us our own offspring was so that we could understand how we come from Him and our value to Him. This is evidenced simply by the fact that He teaches us to call Him our “Father.” We could not understand what that meant if He had not given us the relationships on earth.

Julie concludes this chapter writing: “Jesus always esteemed children because He came to show the heart of the Father toward His children. A true father’s love cannot be earned, and it cannot be done away with. Just as we would never give up on our children, God will never give up on His children; His love will not fail them.”

Next up, Chapter 9: Love Never Fails the Helpless and the Hopeless

#22

Raising Hell, Chapter 9: Love Never Fails the Helpless and the Hopeless

Julie begins this chapter talking about the firemen who risked and gave their lives to save people on 9/11. She writes, “One of the two greatest commands is to love your neighbor as yourself. How could God ignore the sacrifices of these rescue workers in light of His own measuring stick? It would be completely contrary to His nature and His name! I believe that when these people are resurrected, they will stand before the Judge and He will declare that, because they learned how to love, they are justified as doers of the Law (of Love) and they have become sons of Love. Love truly never fails, whether in accomplishing its mission or in receiving its reward.”

Next she talks about widows and orphans. All through scripture God requires people to take care of the needy among them, particularly widows and orphans, making provision in the Law for their care, condemning Israel in the prophets for neglecting these people, Jesus condemning the Pharisees because they attend to the smallest detail of the legal requirements of the Law, careful to tithe even of their herbs, yet miss the “weightier things” – judgment, mercy, faith, and the love of God. Those tithing requirements were intended to ensure provision for the poor, helpless, and strangers, yet they managed to meet the legal requirements without achieving God’s purpose – the spirit of the law – the taking care of those in need.

Julie argues that if God was planning to send them to hell forever for not believing, you wouldn’t expect Him to so strongly care about their physical needs during the few short years of this life, but that God cares about their physical needs because He loves them. Rather than intending to reject them, His intention is to demonstrate the Father’s love through our provision for them in obedience to His will. She reminds us that we are all orphans in a way, separated from our Father by our sin, needing to be adopted as His children. God who cares so intensely for the helpless will not fail to help all who need His help.

Lastly she talks about the blind, deaf, lame, and sick that Jesus came to heal. We see Jesus physically healing all who came to him, but the deeper sickness of the spirit is what He really came for. Julie mentions the paralytic in Mark 2 and Matthew 9 who was lowered through the roof by his friends. The first thing Jesus says to him is “Your sins are forgiven.” Then he deals with the physical condition.

We all need this healing–this forgiveness and restoration, and the people most in need of it are the ones who don’t even realize they do. In our day, just as in Jesus’ day, it is religious leaders who take pride in their knowledge, spirituality, position, sinlessness, who are most blind to their poverty and need for healing.

She concludes, “In the end, it always comes down to love, and God’s love never fails for the weak of heart and spirit.”

And in the end, that’s all of us.

Some further reflections … As I began reading this chapter, I could hear my former way of thinking whispering in my head: “sentimentality! … God doesn’t condemn them for the good things they do, but for their sins and for rejecting His son as their savior … only truly saved people can really love from pure motives … no amount of good deeds can balance out a person’s sins … people don’t understand the seriousness of sin …”

My thinking has dramatically changed over the last 7 years, but I have not forgotten. Now I see with a different perspective and different set of assumptions. I see that Jesus said that it was not everyone who called Him “Lord” who would enter the kingdom of heaven, but the ones who do the will of the Father who will enter. He says we will know people by their “fruit” – that is, the things they produce will show what kind of person they are. One who lays down his life for his neighbor shows himself a follower of Christ, because he is in a practical way taking up his cross and walking in the footsteps of the Savior.

Even when people do not know that they are serving Him, He counts their good deeds as done unto Him. Jesus illustrates this in the parable where the nations are separated on judgment day and He says to some 'Receive your reward!" And they say “But when did we ever serve you?” and he answers, “Whenever you did it for one of the least of these my brothers.”

Instead of looking at people who do good and thinking as I once did, “They aren’t Christians, so they must be operating out of selfish motives.” I now take my Lord at His word and say, “They do so much good, it shows me that the Spirit must be at work in their hearts, even if they don’t know it yet. Someday they will know who they are serving and get their reward from Him.”

We are to judge people by their fruit, not their name tags.

This is not the same as an “inclusiveness” belief that says that “all roads” are the same. One is not “saved” by just being a good religious person. – Far from it! I say rather that the only road, door, Way is Christ, and the things that belong to Christ are those who are genuinely walking with Him. Jesus says that He knows His sheep, and they know Him and follow where He leads.

Julie pointed out in the chapter that Paul is addressing a very similar issue in Romans 2: “For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them…But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.”

In the same way, our faith is a matter of the heart, not a mere proclamation of the lips. If the heart of a man follows Christ, it will be shown outwardly as they do the things which are of Christ, and they will receive their reward from Him who judges the heart.

#23

Have just downoaded from Amazon to my Kindle so will be frantically trying to catch up with you Sonia :slight_smile:

#24

Amen! from a younger brother (who unfortunately is still tending the swine).

#25

Shouldn’t be too hard – this is taking me longer than I expected. :sunglasses:

Sonia

#26

Raising Hell, Chapter 10: Love never fails for enemies

Does God expect us to show more love than He does? Does God tell us to forgive our enemies, when He ultimately will not forgive His? Is God’s love conditional and limited? These are some of the questions addressed in this chapter.

Jesus taught us to forgive those who wrong us as often as they sin against us. Jesus sets an example of forgiveness while he was on the cross, by praying for forgiveness for those who had condemned Him. Julie points out that He would not have prayed so unless he truly desired them to be forgiven, and if He expected that His request would be granted.

Julie makes a case that the Jews were appointed to kill the Messiah in order to bring about the salvation of the world, citing Romans 11:15, 25-32: “For if [the rejection of the Jews] is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? …For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, ‘The deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob. This is my covenant with them, when I take away their sins.’ From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience, so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy. For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all.”

Some will argue that God hates his enemies, using such verses as:
Hos 9:15 “All [Israel’s] evil is at Gilgal; Indeed, I came to hate them there! Because of the wickedness of their deeds I will drive them out of My house! I will love them no more…”

But as Julie points out, if you keep reading you also find … “I will heal [Israel’s] apostasy (unbelief), I will love them freely, for My anger has turned away from them.” (Hosea 14:4)

This is a typical pattern in the prophets, and I’ll add another example to Julie’s:
In Jer 7:15 we find the Lord speaking to Israel: And I will cast you out of my sight, as I cast out all your kinsmen, all the offspring of Ephraim.

Then we read this promise in Jer 31:9,18-20: "With weeping they shall come, and with pleas for mercy I will lead them back, I will make them walk by brooks of water, in a straight path in which they shall not stumble, for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn… I have heard Ephraim grieving, ‘You have disciplined me, and I was disciplined, like an untrained calf; bring me back that I may be restored, for you are the LORD my God. For after I had turned away, I relented, and after I was instructed, I struck my thigh; I was ashamed, and I was confounded, because I bore the disgrace of my youth.’

Is Ephraim my dear son? Is he my darling child? For as often as I speak against him, I do remember him still. Therefore my heart yearns for him; I will surely have mercy on him, declares the LORD."

Julie writes, “The fact is, a hateful person is still someone’s child, and ultimately God’s child. Any truly loving parent could never give up on loving that child and hoping to see their child overcome hatred, insecurities, and fear. As devoted and unfailing the love of a typical earthly parent for their children, it’s only a minuscule, infinitely inferior representation of the heavenly Parent’s love.”

One frequently asked question is: “What about Hitler?”

The answer is that, like all of us, he will face God’s judgment and receive a just sentence. We have no right to decide that some given person is too corrupt to save. We don’t understand how his particular circumstances, upbringing, and environment contributed to his wrong choices and evil deeds. Julie points out that the Church also has a history of persecuting and killing Jews, and that Hitler very likely got his anti-Jewish sentiments from the church.

To take another angle on the issue, Julie asks: Does it seem fair that the unsaved Jews killed by Hitler should receive the same punishment from God as Hitler himself for killing them?

Julie is implying, of course, that an equal punishment would not be fair, but I have to point out that many Christians believe in degrees of punishment in Hell, so while they say the punishment will continue forever just the same, the punishments received will be different in severity.

I think the best argument Julie gives here is that if we understand that we are all saved by grace, we cannot grudge that same grace to Hitler or anyone else. To do that is to say, ultimately, that we at some level are saved because we are deserving. Because we’re not really that bad. But someone else, like Hitler, doesn’t deserve salvation – he’s not “good” enough to save. But none of us deserve to be saved on the basis of our own merit. We are all saved by grace, not by works, so that no one can boast.

Julie asks, “As you contemplate those who have significantly hurt you in your lifetime, which would be more satisfying to you—knowing these offenders were put away for endless, torturous punishment, or knowing that they will be accountable to God and to you for their actions, to the point that they are brought to brokenness and a desire to reconcile all their wrongs?" The second option fits better with the ideal of forgiveness and love for one another that the Bible describes, and Julie writes that if we desire anything less than to see our enemies become redeemed children of God, then the love of God is not yet perfected in us.

God is very concerned in scripture with Justice – and this has implications for all of us. This is really the crux of the matter, for we have all sinned, and have all been the enemies of God. For justice to be fully accomplished means that all offenses be dealt with, all wrongs made right, all relationships restored, all evil repented of and forgiveness sought and given. The iniquity of us ALL has been borne by Him and by His stripes we will be healed.

Julie writes that there are two obstacles that are difficult for people to get past in considering the possibility of the redemption of all. The first is that all people are redeemable. Some people seem beyond hope but the apostle Paul is an example of an apparently hopeless case, a persecutor of the church, who was turned around by a direct revelation of God. In his own words, he was shown mercy as an example of the extent of God’s patience and as a pattern of others who would also be believing (see 1 Tim 1:12ff).

Another example is King Nebuchadnezzar in the book of Daniel. Filled with pride in his empire and taking all the credit to himself, he was certainly not seeking God. Yet God humbled him for 7 years, causing him to go insane and live like an animal, with the result that at the end of that time of discipline, Nebuchadnezzar was restored and declared, “Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise, exalt and honor the King of heaven, for all His works are true and His ways just, and He is able to humble those who walk in pride.” (See Daniel 4)

Julie writes, “This was not just a nice little story with an inconsequential happy ending. This is the story of our enemies. This is our story. What is good for Nebuchadnezzar, and Paul, and Hitler, is also good for you, and me, and everyone we know that ever wandered in darkness, searching for anything but God. Everyone is infinitely valuable and ultimately redeemable to God, no matter how seemingly hopeless.”

The second major obstacle that people raise in regards to the redemption of all is, “Can people really get another chance to believe after rejecting God in this lifetime?”

Julie will explore this in Chapter 11: Love Never Fails for Any … or All

#27

First I would like to say how much I’m enjoying your review of Raising Hell. I have read the book and I really think that you are doing a great job :smiley:

But I was wondering … what happened to chapture 4 Who’s responsible for Lost Souls?

Am I missing it somewhere?

#28

Looks like I forgot it! Thanks for pointing that out. So, out of order, here’s the missing chapter:

Raising Hell, Chapter 4: Who’s responsible for lost souls?

Julie asks, “If hell is real, who is ultimately responsible for spreading the word and preventing billion of people from going there?”

How you will answer that depends on your theology. Calvinists, who according to Julie make up 10-30% of American Christians, will say that depends on God. God has chosen his elect, and nothing can prevent them from hearing the Gospel from some source, and responding to it.

Arminians – the majority of Evangelical Americans – believe salvation depends on the free will of each man. Christians have the responsibility to spread the good news so that each one has the opportunity to make an informed choice by faith.

Julie writes, “If we really believe that most of those people we know of and care about—our next door neighbors, our “lost” family members, our beloved friends, the people of our community, and the 147 million orphans of this world not to mention many millions of other destitute—are going to a never-ending, terrifying, fiery hellhole of torture where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth, why are we not out 24/7, sharing the love of Jesus with the lost multitudes…or at least trying out a few parables on them?

Why are we going about life as usual, attending soccer games, church socials, Super Bowl parties, luxury Christian cruises, shopping sprees, beach vacations, beauty appointments, and even expensive Holy Land tours? ……For those of us who have adhered to the notion of salvation by free will, how many people over the course of our lives have we been responsible for sending to a never-ending BBQ, just because we were too lazy, or too scared, or too preoccupied to help them find their way? Why does the thought of hell not deeply affect most of us, changing the way we live our everyday lives? ”

This is a thing that has troubled me greatly in my life – even coming from a mostly Calvinist background. Something’s wrong with this picture. Possibly, deep down, we don’t really believe in hell — or it’s too terrible to think of so we don’t. Or perhaps it seems a futile effort, or perhaps we are reluctant to bring bad news to people.

Julie points out that “gospel” literally means “good news.” Luke 2:10 says that this good news of great joy is “for all the people.” But how can it be good news for everyone, if most people will not benefit? If most people who ever lived will end up in hell, isn’t this “good news” really “bad news”?

Some will object here that everyone was already going to hell anyway – the good news is that God has provided a way out: everyone who believes in Jesus can go to heaven. That’s good news for all people isn’t it? Or is it? The problem with that is that not everyone has a chance in this lifetime to hear this news. (This is not a problem from a Calvinist mindset: everyone deserves hell, and only God’s picked ones will be saved. The work of Christ only applies to the chosen few.)

Turning to the Bible …. according to Julie, “good news” appears in the bible 52 times as an action and 72 times as a noun. What will surprise many people is that unlike in our modern gospel presentations, in none of these places is it used in connection with hell, everlasting torment, or even judgment.

Julie looks at two examples of New Testament preaching from Acts, both of which make no mention of hell. In Acts 3:19ff, Peter preaches repentance “so your sins may be wiped away and times of refreshing come from the presence of the Lord.” In Acts 17:22ff, Paul preaches to the pagan Greeks, concluding his speech with, “Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to all people that everyone everywhere should repent, because He has fixed a day in which He is about to be judging the inhabited world in justice through a Man whom He has appointed, furnishing belief to all by raising Him from the dead.”

Many people assume that “judgment” is the equivalent of “eternal hell,” but is that idea found in scripture? Isaiah 26:9 gives a reason for God’s judgment: “For when the earth experiences Your judgments the inhabitants of the world learn righteousness.”

If the New Testament preachers left Hell out of their gospel presentations, why is it so difficult for us? What do we tell people to be saved from? What’s the motivator for anyone to be saved?

The fact that we have difficulty leaving out “bad news” out of the “good news” tells me there is some discord between our modern belief systems and that of the first preachers. Is the true gospel really supposed to be about hell and getting out of hell?

Perhaps, like our examples in the Bible, our gospel should be not about fear, but about relationship with our Father through Christ. The gospel is about the reconciliation of man to God through love. Not about salvation from hell, but the about the salvation of every man from the finality of death (the curse) and the coming of the kingdom of God where enemies are conquered by love and brought into joyful agreement under the rulership of Christ.

Jesus lived an unhurried life: He invested Himself in a few disciples, ignored many people, and spoke in riddles to the crowds so that only those with “ears to hear and eyes to see” could understand Him. According to scripture, these are both given by God:

Deut. 29:4: “Yet to this day the LORD has not given you a heart to know, nor eyes to see, nor ears to hear.”
Proverbs 20:12: “Ears that hear and eyes that see—the LORD has made them both” (NIV).
Rom. 11:8: “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes to see not and ears to hear not, down to this very day.”

If hell, as we have been taught really exists, what kind of Savior does that make Jesus? Calvinists accept the idea that God only ever intended to save a few, but if you believe God wants to save everyone, you’ll be wondering what Jesus was up to. If heaven and hell were really at stake, why didn’t he speak more openly and give people a real chance?

If we should be preaching a better message than hell – as our New Testament role models show us – What about hell and where does it fit into the picture?

Next we’ll look at Julie’s claim that hell isn’t even found in the scriptures: Chapter 5 – The Missing Hell

#29

:wink:

Good to see an updated picture of you on here…

#30

Thanks Melchi - just don’t let it frighten the children :astonished:

#31

Thanks for the chapter 4 review Sonia - great review of an excellent chapter. The fact that the Church’s first preachers and evangelists did not warn of hell at all in their preaching is very revealing indeed!

#32

I am just coming to the end of the book now and I have thoroughly enjoyed it. I particularly was struck by the change of emphasis in the greek interlinear translation of the following verses illustrating the continuous present tense (of course they don’t say anything about anyone getting out of the lake of fire :wink: )…

John 10:9
“I am the door, if EVER anyone may be entering through me he shall be being saved…”

Romans 10:9
“That if EVER you should be avowing with your mouth Jesus is Lord and should be believing in your heart that God rouses him out of the dead ones, you shall be being saved.”

‘EVER’ capitalised for emphasis as it is in Julie’s book.

#33

Raising Hell, Chapter 11: Love Never Fails for Any … or All

Is the opportunity for salvation limited to this lifetime? Most Christians assume it is, but Julie argues in this chapter that there is no limit on the offer of salvation.

On examination, the verses used to support a limited opportunity for salvation are found to not actually say that. One of the verses used to support this idea is Hebrews 9:27 “And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment.”

As Julie points out that there’s nothing mentioned here about heaven and hell. People assume that “judgment” means deciding if a person will go to heaven or hell for all of eternity. This is an idea that comes from other passages – such as the parable of the sheep and goats in Matt 25, in which the Greek adjective “aionios” is inaccurately translated “eternal.” Julie will be discussing the translation if that word in Chapter 14, so we’ll set that issue aside for the time.

Many passages attest that we are judged according to our deeds, but we know that salvation is by grace, not by works.

Another verse used to promote the idea of “only one chance” is John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish [literally: “be perishing”], but have eternal life [literally: "be having life eonian].” As Julie notes, this is not about what happens at some point after this life, but what is currently happening now. Apart from Christ, we are all “perishing” but with Christ we have “eternal life” right now. I like Julie’s comparison to a plant withering for lack of water or thriving near a source of water.

I suspect many will not find this short survey of two texts convincing since there are many other passages from which the idea of “no second chances” is built. But at this point Julie moves on to the positive case for salvation in the future ages, and anyone who wants to discuss those other passages with me in the comments or privately is welcome to.

Julie makes the case that Jesus, the second Adam (as Paul puts it), came not to remove the consequences of Adam’s sin (since we still all have to die) but to “reverse the effects of sin and death by conquering their permanence. Through Jesus, our perfect sacrifice, all the sons of Adam (all people) will be raised again to imperishable life.” This allows us to make better sense of verses like these:

Romans 5:18: “So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.”

1 Corinthians 15:22–23: “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order…”

1 Timothy 2:5–6: “For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given in its own due season” (MLT).†

The doctrine of a “chosen people” also figures into this discussion of whether this life is the only chance for salvation. The “chosen people” is a constant theme in the Bible. The usual way of thinking is that God picked a few to be saved, and the rest are damned, but throughout scripture, the “chosen people” are the ones through whom salvation is carried to the world. God’s promise to Abraham was this: “In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.” (Gen 22:18)

Julie writes of these chosen: “They are a faithful few, referred to as “priests,” who will be reigning and judging with Christ, restoring true justice and order in the ages to come, especially during the Judgment Age.”

The job of a priest is to make atonement for the people. Julie writes, "I believe Revelation 22:2 offers a symbolic picture of this: “On either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.”

Jesus, the tree of life offers healing leaves (priests) to the nations as an extension of Himself. The result? Fruit is being yielded every month as people flock to Jesus and His priests for this healing."

This is the fulfillment of 1 Corinthians 15: 24ff: Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death…When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all."

This “subjecting” of things to Christ is usually seen as a King conquering his enemies by force, but that’s not how Christ has taught us. Instead he says, “The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and those in authority over them are called benefactors. But not so with you. Rather, let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves…” (Luke 22)

The rulership of Christ is one of humble service and sacrifice.

That the “subjection” in question is a willing subjection is also seen in that the same thing is said of the subjection of Christ to the Father.

Another issue Julie covers is that not everyone gets a fair chance for salvation in this lifetime. Depending on where and when a person is born, they may never even have an opportunity for salvation at all. Because God is just it would seem that the opportunity for salvation would need to extend beyond this age.

Julie makes an interesting point from the Old Testament law. It says, “If a man opens a pit, or digs a pit and does not cover it over, and an ox or a donkey falls into it, the owner of the pit shall make restitution” (Exodus 21:33–34)

She argues from this that since God “set up” Adam for the fall – placing the tree and the snake in the Garden – God also takes responsibility for the consequences.

I think traditionalists would affirm this as well, pointing to the sending of Christ as a sacrifice for sin, but Julie takes it farther arguing that God will restore all through Christ, not allowing any of creation to suffer eternal consequences. Justice means the restoration of everything to it’s right state.

Next, she discusses the question of the word “All.” When verses that indicate that “all” people will be saved are brought up, the usual response is that “all” does not always mean “each one without exception.” But as Julie points out, the parallelism of some of these verses makes it very difficult to interpret them as meaning less than that.

Romans 5:18: “So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.”

Rom. 11:32: “For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all.”

1 Corinthians 15:22: “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.”

Jesus himself says that that by his death he will draw ALL men to himself in John 12:32. In Romans 14:11 and Philippians 2:10-11, Paul quotes Isaiah that “every knee will bow and every tongue confess.”

If we begin with the assumption that there is no possibility of salvation after this life, we have to deal with these passages by saying they cannot really mean what they seem to at face value. On the other hand, if we take these passages at face value, then we much conclude that these prophecies will be fulfilled in the ages to come.

What does all this mean for us in a practical way? Julie writes, “Until we understand that love really will conquer all, that love could not possibly fail (1 Cor. 13:8), that mercy will triumph over judgment (James 2:13), and that every single person who has ever lived is a unique, infinitely valued expression of their true Father (and will someday fully act like it), we will never truly know what it is to love as our Father loves. But when we do finally get it, we will realize that all of His children are worth keeping. Every single person we meet in our day—in our life—will then become deeply valued to us, and we will realize the great accountability we have in the way we treat them, knowing that they will be a part of our future. ”

I just love that because it reflects my own experience of coming to understand the scope of God’s redemption, and seems to be a common experience to those who come to believe it. I’ve heard so many tell of how, like me, their attitude towards others changed dramatically. Now whenever I meet another, he is a brother – even if he’s living like the prodigal son – I know the Father is loving him even now and eager for his homecoming. I don’t wonder if God wants to save someone – I can pray for anyone and everyone without reserve, without trying to guess what God’s will is for that one. I know His will for everyone is their salvation, and I can pray for them in complete confidence and faith that my prayers will be answered. Every one I meet I think of as someone I will know better in the coming ages. Every one I meet I respect as one who, regardless of his current state, is of infinite worth to my Father in heaven, and whom I will one day see revealed as a perfect child of God.

Julie goes on to talk about the picture in Rev 22, at the end of the ages: Outside the gates of the New Jerusalem, are sinners – and they are being invited to wash their robes and take the water of life, so that they can enter the city. The gates of the city (the Bride of Christ which is the Church) are always open, the water of life is always flowing from the Throne and out of the gates. The opportunity for salvation is always available.

Next up, Julie will be looking at the history of this doctrine in the church in Chapter 12: Tracing Gospel History.

#34

I will be respectful and not point out the abundance of errors, but nice commentary, Sonia. :wink:

I guess Julie doesn’t realize that Rev 22:6 is the close of the letter and that anything after that is not meant to be seen chronological, but only to our present situation now on earth. This verse in Rev 22:17 and other verses in Rev 22 are used incorrectly to point to a post mortem salvation call in the LOF. :wink: Seems to be a good story, though.

#35

Thank you, Aaron. Yes, I suspect Julie would disagree as much as I do with your opinion about Revelation.

Sonia

#36

Raising Hell, Chapter 12: Tracing Gospel History

So is universal salvation a new belief, or is there a history of it in the Church?

It may be surprising to some to learn that universal salvation was widely believed in the early church.

When I refer to “universalism” I’m sure some reading this are making instant unwarranted assumptions about what I believe. I’d like to remind the reader that the term in it’s proper and broad sense means simply that in the end, all sinners will be saved. The term itself encompasses a variety of beliefs, just as the term “Christian” includes many belief systems: Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, all the variations of protestantism, Seventh Day Adventists, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, etc.

When I say I believe in “universal salvation” or “universal reconciliation” this is not the same as Unitarian Universalism, pluralism, or inclusivism. I do not believe that all religions are true, or that all paths lead to heaven, or that it doesn’t matter what a person believes. I believe that all sinners will be saved by grace through faith in Christ – that there is a special salvation happening now in this age, and that through judgment, all the rest will come to repentance and salvation in the ages to come – till “all things are made new.”

For further disambiguation on “universalism” I recommend Robin Parry’s excellent article, “Bell’s Hells: seven myths about universalism” baptisttimes.co.uk/bellshells.htm

Robin Parry coined the term “Evangelical Universalist” with his book of that title (written under the pseudonym “Gregory MacDonald” – a name combined from Gregory of Nyssa and George MacDonald – both believers in universal salvation). This term describes a Christian whose beliefs are basically the same as that of an evangelical Christian, with the exception of believing in the eventual salvation of all. In general I dislike labels, because my loyalty is not to the label but to Christ, but if you insist on categorizing me, that label is probably the closest fit. :slight_smile:

Back to “Raising Hell” … Julie quotes from the 1899 book, by J.W. Hanson, Universalism: The Prevailing Doctrine of the Christian Church During its First Five Hundred Years: “An examination of the earliest Christian creeds and declarations of Christian opinion discloses the fact that no formulary of Christian belief for several centuries after Christ contained anything incompatible with the broad faith of the Gospel—the universal redemption of mankind from sin…The four great General Church Councils held in the first four centuries—those at Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon—gave no expression of condemnation of Universal Restoration even though that doctrine had been prevalent all along."

Julie also uses Dr. Stephen Jones’ book Creation’s Jubilee to provide a glimpse of the universalistic views of some of the early church fathers: Clement of Alexandria (150-213 A.D.), Origen of Alexandria (180-253 A.D.), Gregory of Nazianzua (329-389 A.D.), and Gregory of Nyssa (335-394 A.D.).

Julie writes that of the six theological schools known in the first few centuries, only the Latin school taught the doctrine of endless torment. And from the writings of Augustine we have evidence that there were many in his day that did not believe in eternal torment. (My favorite quote on this from Augustine is one in which he calls such believers “perversely compassionate persons.”) This belief was largely suppressed during the Dark Ages.

Well known people throughout history have believed in God’s plan to save all: Pantaenus, Didymus, Basil the Great, Eusibius, the Anabaptists, William Law, Sir Isaac Newton, Victor Hugo, Anne Bronte, Lord and Lady Byron, Robert and Elizabeth Browning, George Washington, Florence Nightingale, Abraham Lincoln, Hans Christian Anderson, Harriet Beecher Stowe, George MacDonald, Hannah Hurnard (Hinds’ Feet on High Places), William Barclay, and Andrew Murray.

Julie particularly mentions Hannah Whitall Smith. Most editions of her book The Unselfishness of God omit the three chapters where she tells how she came to believe in universal reconciliation. Here’s one of the quotes Julie provides from the last chapter: “My own feelings as a mother, which had heretofore seemed to war with what I had believed of God, now came into perfect harmony. …Most of my ideas of the love and goodness of God have come from my own experience as a mother, because I could not conceive that God would create me with a greater capacity for unselfishness and self-sacrifice than He possessed Himself…”

Next up, in Part 3 we’ll take a look at “Hebrew Perspectives on Scripture”

#37

Hey Sonia

Its funny how UR talks about all the early church fathers teaching this doctrine, but did you or Julie know that UR was never the predominant position of the church? It was never considered the orthodox position of the church, and like the other false doctrines of the period, was eventually condemned by the church? Why didn’t she write about that? Now that is some history. :blush:

P.S. It is very dangerous to view who you think God is “by your feelings”. God bless.

#38

Revival,

We are all very aware that after the 3rd Century the Romans began to Secularize the Church and force their doctrine of Fear upon it. Julie is refering to the first two centuries when UR was the Predominant view according to more than one source. Before it was secularized. Have you read any of the writings from Origen or Clement of Alexandria?

The early Creeds and documents before the third century includes many statements of Major Doctrine but nothing at all regarding eternal Torment.

Can you cite even one source that can support your view. Or should we just take your unfounded opinion :slight_smile:

It is well documented that the early Church Members prayed for the dead. How can that be??? Why would they do such an unorthodox thing? :slight_smile:
The Catacombs also revealed thousands of Tombstones that pictured Jesus carrying both Sheep and Goats on his shoulders.

Sonia,

I am enjoying your writeup,looking forward to your writeup when it gets to the gathering of wheat, Barley and Grapes. I found those Chapters interesting. And the Chapters on the two Covenants: Abrahamic and Mosaic.

#39

Good story, Steve. :wink:

#40

No don’t try and actually address the historicity of Steves post, but just dismiss it by implying its a made up story. Par for the course revival. You are becoming quite predictable. Your lack of ability to address anything outside your 4 or 5 points you keep hammering is tiresome. I’m trying to help you here revival. You are winning nobody over except yourself in your mind. Maybe all you’re here to do is chafe, but if you ever want to influence people toward your POV you might consider actually addressing what people say.