The Evangelical Universalist Forum

You worship the wrong Jesus and have a different gospel

Evangelical Universalism Arguments against Evangelical Universalism
#1

I’ve heard this thrown around many times over the last month. It is said that, because one person holds a different theological position on a particular thing (hell) that they worship a different Jesus, preach a different gospel, and will therefore go to hell. The question is this: According to JESUS, who is or isn’t worshiping Him? There are solid bible believing Christians who have differences and still consider each other Christians. This is why denominations exist (though not the only reason). There is a point where a person does begin to worship a “different Jesus” but what is that point? At what point does the real Jesus say, “You say you are worshiping me, but I don’t accept your worship since your concept of me is wrong.”?

You see, ALL of us are heretics to some degree because we do not have a perfect view of who Jesus is. We are all wrong to some extent. So it’s not a matter of being wrong since none of us are completely right. How wrong is too wrong? Jesus is the one who decides. I’m not saying that you can believe whatever and it will be fine. I’m just saying that we can be a bit arrogant sometimes in assuming that we know the point where a different Jesus is being worshiped.

If UR is wrong, I don’t think Jesus will say that I was worshiping the wrong Jesus. I’ve been on the fence, leaning toward UR for a short time, while having been an ECT believer for 41 years. The difference between UR and ECT?

  1. Both believe in the authority of the scriptures as the Word of God (Evangelical Universalist)
  2. Both believe in the Trinity
  3. Both believe in the fall of man and man’s subsequent depravity
  4. Both believe in the deity/manhood of JC
  5. Both believe he lived a sinless life as Messiah, died for our sins, rose from the dead bodily on the 3rd day and ascended to the Father where he makes intercession for us.
  6. Both believe that you must be born again to enter the kingdom of God, and that there is no other name by which a man must be saved.
  7. Both believe in the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the lives of the believers
  8. **Etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. **
  9. Both believe in hell and that the wicked will go there.
  10. They only disagree on the duration of man’s stay in hell and this disagreement is based on a different interpretation of the “hell texts” and giving greater weight to the “universal reconciliation texts”.

So…will Jesus say, “You had all the right theology except you wrongly interpreted my judgment. Even though you called on me for salvation and believed and confessed me as “lord”; Even though you accepted your fallen state as a sinner in need of a savior; even though you accepted my Holy Spirits work in your life, accepted my deity and position as messiah; even though you had faith in me, I don’t accept your confession as applying to me because you were wrong about the number of people going to heaven and the duration of hell. Depart from me for I never knew you.” Is that how it will go?

#2

To be fair, trinitarian ultra-universalists restrict (9) to meaning, at most, that we are (in effect) already in hell and no one post-mortem will be more in hell that we already are. And they make up a solid proportion of us (if not necessarily a majority.)

But otherwise they’re good to go with that list, too. :slight_smile:

And nope, I’m pretty sure Jesus says something quite different than that about those He sends away from Him at the judgment. :mrgreen:

#3

I am glad I worship a different Jesus than those who believe in ECT, because they are the ones who lost touch with the Head. :slight_smile: Though, in the end, Jesus will wipe away all those tears (of fear and pain) which religion caused.

#4

Hey Jason, about this:

" we are (in effect) already in hell and no one post-mortem will be more in hell that we already are."

What do you mean by this? In my reading, which isn’t extensive at all, I haven’t found this. I found some to say that the punishment may be very long and painful, but not eternal. It may take eons, but it won’t take forever. Where does the position that “we are already in hell” come from? How come you have made no distinction between now and the Lake of Fire? What am I missing here? :question:

#5

Chris,

What we call Ultra-Universalism is a universalist variation. The short version is: physical death is the consequence of sin, hell is the negative effects of sin we experience in this life, and that on resurrection, all people will find themselves reconciled to God.

At least I think that’s how it goes.

Aaron has been our most outspoken proponent of this view here, and he hasn’t posted for awhile. Here’s one thread where he discusses this view: The Resurrection to Judgment There’s probably better threads-- I think he and Jason had an extended discussion somewhere-- but that one was easy for me to find.

Sonia

#6

You said: “So…will Jesus say, “You had all the right theology except you wrongly interpreted my judgment. Even though you called on me for salvation and believed and confessed me as “lord”; Even though you accepted your fallen state as a sinner in need of a savior; even though you accepted my Holy Spirits work in your life, accepted my deity and position as messiah; even though you had faith in me, I don’t accept your confession as applying to me because you were wrong about the number of people going to heaven and the duration of hell. Depart from me for I never knew you.” Is that how it will go?”

Who determines heresy? Us? On what basis? And once we determine, by whatever standard, what we consider to be heresy, what are we to do about it? Does God actually need “heresy police”? I think people need to look at 2000 years of Christian history. The last thing we need is “Christian Fundamentalist Jihadists” running around the place denouncing people, like we are back in the Middle Ages!

  1. The Bible (no one version is best)is the only reliable source of God revealing Himself to man, and the only guide to truth and saving faith, and righteous living.
  2. God is creator and redeemer, the source and sustainer of life.
  3. There is only one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, by which all men can be saved.

These to me are the non-negotiables of Christian belief. Over the years my theology has developed and changed and what was once very important to me, has now become more centred. Every time I overly focus on something, God has a way of bringing back to the centre of His will and purposes. It reminds me of the old adage:“For every mile of road, there are two miles of ditch.” I am trying to avoid the ditches on either side.

There will and there are those who will disagree with me, and that is OK. I stand on my understanding of the Bible, and what I have learned through thoughtful study and reflection. Like Luther, I can steadfastly declare with a clear conscience before God and man, “Here I stand, I can do no other.” Such are my convictions. To those who will disagree, who are brothers and sisters in Christ, and who differ in their understanding, I consider them dear brothers and sisters of the faith. I know I do not have a theology that is 100% correct, no one does. Besides theology itself is man’s attempt to systematize beliefs about God and the universe. This is simply my own understanding at this time in my life. I will hold these truths until I am convinced by Scripture that I need to correct and change them. It will not be by the persuasive arguments of men, but by Scripture alone, that I will change. Like Luther, I stand here and cannot do otherwise.

It is regrettably unfortunate that some people put a premium on what they consider to be essential, in a sense “majoring on minors” instead of “focusing on the fundamentals”, having the “i’s” dotted a certain way and the “t’s” crossed in a particular way, otherwise they break fellowship with you.

Why does a particular non-essential belief in the mystical body of Christ have to cause such division?
Why does the embracing of a particular author presume the acceptance of all they teach in their writing?
Why do some believers demand adhearance to some beliefs that others are not in the least concerned about?
Why must I conform to a particular belief that is not my own, just to maintain relationship and fellowship?
Why such demands?
Would Jesus place that kind of demand on a person?
Does He demand that we have all the right theology or He will cut Himself off from us?

I constantly have to remind myself and others, that we are not “saved” by our statements of belief, but upon Whom we believe. Doctrine has always divided believers and non-believers alike. I choose to believe upon the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, as He is the sole Mediator between God and man and the only hope of salvation for all mankind. He is the rock upon Whom I stand, and like Luther, “here I stand, I can do no other!”

Have we Christians not learned from history? When will be stop trying to police the Church for God, and persecute people who do not believe as we do? When? Please tell me, when?

Grace and peace

#7

I know next to nothing about Rob Bell so I can’t comment on whether or not he worships a different Jesus or not, but I read this on the Macarthur article comments:

**Matthew’s (#4) question is a good one, though. Is the denial of eternal punishment enough to certify heresy / apostasy?

I suppose I’ve not entirely landed that plane yet, but I suspect that the answer is yes. A rejection of eternal punishment betrays a failure to understand the absolute and infinite holiness of God, and therefore a failure to understand the nature and depth of our sin before God. This leads to a failure to understand the nature of both Christ’s person and His atoning work on the cross for that sin of ours that we don’t understand. This leads to our trusting Him for a righteousness before God that is at least quantitatively different than the righteousness that we actually need.

So: a wrong view of God (indeed, the essence of God’s character), a wrong view of sin, a wrong view of ourselves and our need, a wrong view of Christ’s sufficiency as Savior and the depth and breadth of His atoning sacrifice, and a wrong view of faith. That’s quite a lot of doctrine at the very center of the Christian faith and the Gospel to get wrong and still be considered merely a misguided brother.

Further, one might reserve judgment on those who are simply misguided because of lack of sound instruction. But Bell is proposing to be a teacher of this stuff. I think that’s quite a lot of substantiation for MacArthur’s comment on Matt 23:15 above. **

Once again, don’t we all get it wrong to some degree? Even if we believe in ECT, don’t we get our view of sin wrong all the time? Would we truly sin as much as we do if we “understand the absolute and infinite holiness of God, and therefore the nature and depth of our sin before God”? Simply accepting ECT doesn’t mean that we, ipso facto, have a correct understanding of our sin, God, grace, atonement, faith, life, the universe, and everything. If we do accept ECT does it mean that we have all those things correct and understand them rightly? I dare say that our view “through a glass darkly” weakens our understanding of all those things which is why we battle with sin so constantly.

We are all heretics when contrasted with the pure truth that is YHWH. I’m not saying that we can’t make judgments concerning bad theology, or that we shouldn’t watch out for false teachers, etc. I just think that some folks are way too willing to cut off a potential brother in the name of “you worship a different Jesus” when Jesus hasn’t, in fact, cut him off. Perhaps we speak too often for Jesus when we should remain silent and let him speak for himself.

#8

This is a question that I ask all universalists that I meet because I don’t believe all universalists aren’t Christian just spiritually immature. The question is would you love and worship a God that sends people to go to hell and be tormented for all eternity? yes or no and why would or wouldn’t you? God Bless!

#9

Actually, I worshipped and loved God for 47 years (well, 41 years because I was 6 when I gave my life to the Lord) believing that He did send people to hell and torment them for all eternity. In the last 2 years though, from my study of scripture, experience with the Lord, after hours and hours of study, prayer, meditation, fasting, discussion w/ others, etc., I’ve grown to believe that Jesus is in reality the savior of all - not just some, that the Atonement is not limited in either scope (Calvinism) or power (Arminianism), that God consigned all over to sin so that He might have mercy on us all. And I dare to say that most Christian Universalists believed in Christ for their own salvation long before their faith grew to believe in Christ for the salvation of all others too!

#10

I understand that but would you love and worship a God who sends people to hell for all eternity, yes or no?

#11

No.

Based on my understanding of God; the answer is no. Ultimately, He wouldn’t love me and that would render him not God, for God loves the world and everybody in it.

I still loved God when I thought Eternal Damnation was a true doctrine, I defended the doctrine and God - then I grew up, and out of it, and grew into the arms of God. As it stands, if I had to return gleefully to believing in Eternal Damnation I would effectively cease to exist, my spiritual heart would end itself. There would be no more Lefein to return to, and no Lefein for God to have. Living would be a gross mockery, and living forever a hideous, cruel, irony filled prison. Heaven would become Tartarus, and my robe and crown would be my chain.

I might by some sheer, dark miracle grow to be fond of him, or love him via familiarity…but I don’t suspect that love would flower in a heart turned to dead stone, certainly not without such a dark miracle as would be required.

The comparison of who he is to me now, my Omnivictorious Saviour, to the feeble or selective god of the Damnationalist is a vast comparison that only Jesus could have so aptly described; “There is a gulf fixed between us”.

#12

First of all. Thank you for your honesty. I am not here to say, I am right and you are wrong because I can’t as maybe you are right that hell is not eternal (personally I don’t see it) so I am not dogmatic about it. Both sides have different presuppositions and only one is right so IF and I mean, “IF” the eternal doctrine is true then by your own admission you couldn’t and wouldn’t love the God of the bible but the god of your own choosing and making thus changing the character and nature of God. Again I am not here to say you are wrong but only to answer the question how we are separate in our theologies. God Bless!

#13

Oh, worry not. I love the God of the Bible, or rather - the God of the prophets who wrote the scriptures that became the Bible.

I just don’t love the Damnationalist view of him.

I didn’t make the “god” I worship. God made me, and I worship him. The name he gave to the Hebrews was “YHWH”, it is this god (the only god) that I worship.

“If” Eternal Damnation is true, there won’t be any “Me” - I will cease to exist, a poor, povertous, over-glorified husk or shadow of me will take my place. But I will cease to exist. Something that does not exist, cannot love. Therefore, I wouldn’t love him, and he wouldn’t love me.

#14

That’s fine. Think whatever you want. I am only answering the thread of how we are different as we both can’t be Christians. God Bless!

#15

I’m very sorry to hear that you aren’t a Christian. Worry not though, you will be soon. I promise. :slight_smile:

#16

Why would I have to worry? For me it’s a win win scenario. If I am right I am good and if I am wrong, I am good. God Bless!

#17

The Good News is pretty wonderful like that. :smiley:

#18

That’s not the good news but a theory

#19

You can think that if you want. Jesus is the saviour of all mankind through his death, burial, and resurrection; all shall be reconciled and made right and all things made new and beautiful. That’s the good news.

You will be good - that seems like a bit of good news to me.

#20

**
we both can’t be Christians**.

Statements like this are the point of this thread. There is only one God and he either accepts both, one, or neither of you. So what makes a Christian? Specifically, what makes one a Christian worshiping the “right Jesus”? More importantly, what is Jesus’ opinion on this? Of course, we don’t know, but the “you worship a different Jesus” is thrown around as if we really know where the dividing line is. I’ve met some who drew the line where many modern conservative Christians would be excluded. I’ve met some that thought those not baptized would go to hell. I’ve met those who thought those who didn’t speak in tongues would go to hell. I’ve met those who thought it didn’t matter what you did or believed – God would accept you. In the meantime, there sits (or stands, or floats :smiley: ) Jesus either accepting you or rejecting you. Everyone is in error to some degree, everyone. How much error does Jesus tolerate?