Deadworm
Well-Known Member
I served as an informal advisor for a PhD thesis on universalism in Paul's theology that became the foundation for 2 books on the subject. What the evangelical critics of this thread don't realize is that the many church fathers cited rightly interpreted Paul, Jesus, 1 Peter, and the Book of Revelation on this urgent question. Because of this thread, I hope to start a corollary thread on the biblical case for qualified universalism. Qualified universalism implies the more limited claim that God's love pursues the wicked even after death and gives them a chance to repent and be restored to Him. But they will never be coerced into conversion.
This version of universalism does not undermine the urgency of the Gospel. Why not? Because the wicked must still be separated from God in Hell and must be urged to make the right choices that will allow them to escape temporary awful judgment and thus to find and fulfill their life purpose. Thus, as a younger man, I was actively involved in street evangelism.
So anti-universalists here, are you actually willing to shelve your bias on this subject and actually get into what the Word teaches? Stay tuned for my new thread.
There is a more serious flaw in the evangelical disregard for what the early church fathers taught on this question. Those with a high view of biblical infallibility cite NT claims about biblical inspiration. What they fail to realize is these texts have the inspiration of the OT in mind; the NT cannot comment on its own inspiration. Why not? Because there was no consensus about our NT as a completed canon until around 200 AD at the earliest. We need to depend on the Holy Spirit guiding patristic tradition to make the right book selections for the canon. If the early fathers were not divinely guided on this issue, then we have no grounds for embracing our current biblical canon!
This version of universalism does not undermine the urgency of the Gospel. Why not? Because the wicked must still be separated from God in Hell and must be urged to make the right choices that will allow them to escape temporary awful judgment and thus to find and fulfill their life purpose. Thus, as a younger man, I was actively involved in street evangelism.
So anti-universalists here, are you actually willing to shelve your bias on this subject and actually get into what the Word teaches? Stay tuned for my new thread.
There is a more serious flaw in the evangelical disregard for what the early church fathers taught on this question. Those with a high view of biblical infallibility cite NT claims about biblical inspiration. What they fail to realize is these texts have the inspiration of the OT in mind; the NT cannot comment on its own inspiration. Why not? Because there was no consensus about our NT as a completed canon until around 200 AD at the earliest. We need to depend on the Holy Spirit guiding patristic tradition to make the right book selections for the canon. If the early fathers were not divinely guided on this issue, then we have no grounds for embracing our current biblical canon!
Upvote
0