Love Wins: Part 3, "Our eschatology shapes our ethics."

After raising a lot of questions in Chapter 1 of Love Wins Rob Bell turns to a discussion of heaven in Chapter 2.

The title of Chapter 2 captures the gist of Bell's discussion of heaven: "Here is the New There." Or, in the words of Jesus: "May your kingdom come and will be done on earth as it is in heaven."

At root, Chapter 2 of Love Wins is trying to combat the other-worldliness in much of contemporary Christianity: The obsessive focus on the Judgment Day: The fetish of your ultimate destiny: The notion that the most important thing in the world, well, isn't even in this world. As Bell writes:

For all of the questions and confusion about just what heaven is and who will be there, the one thing that appears to unite all of the speculation is the generally agreed-upon notion that heaven is, obviously, somewhere else.
Bell, of course, isn't the first person to insist that heaven should have a lot more to say about this life than the next. Good places to begin dipping into this view are Moltmann's Theology of Hope and N.T. Wright's Surprised by Hope. For my part, I think Bell should get a lot of credit for getting some of this theology out to a wider audience. This is popular theology doing what popular theology should be doing.

The best line of Chapter 2 might be the best line of the whole book:
Our eschatology shapes our ethics.
Your view of heaven and hell influences how you treat people. In my tradition, this has meant privileging bible study over feeding the hungry. Marginalizing justice in order to save souls. And in one sense, I can't blame the people I've known who have felt this way. They are just enacting their eschatology. Avoiding hell is the most important thing. Even if you are starving. There is more important than Here. But if we pray "Your Kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven" we have a very different view. Here is as important as There.

I agree with all this, but I'd like to sharpen Bell's point. The dialectics that Bell uses are temporal and geographical. The relevant contrasts are Here vs. There and Now vs. Then.

I think those are fine but I believe they hide a deeper problem. The more fundamental contrast is Easter vs. Death. As I've written about before, the root problem behind the dysfunctions of Christianity isn't other-worldliness per se but a death-centered theology. Other-worldliness, in my view, is just a symptom of a death-centered faith.

The real problem is the idolatry of death.

This entry was posted by Richard Beck. Bookmark the permalink.

94 thoughts on “Love Wins: Part 3, "Our eschatology shapes our ethics."”

  1. I don't view this issue with a dualistic either/or logic. But I see it as both/and. I know you are going to disagree but bear with me. I think the Gospel is about the here and now as well as the afterlife. God's wrath and my sin obstruct my vision of me seeing and savoring Divine Beauty. I can't see and savor Christ as my all satisfying Treasure while I am full of sin and God is full of wrath. The removal of this sin and wrath is part of what I believe the Gospel is for. At the cross Christ removed God's wrath from my vision so that I can see and savor the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. By God's grace the eyes of my heart   

  2. I see where you are coming from. One thing I'm struggling with is when you say "The removal of this sin and wrath is part of what I believe the Gospel is for." I'm wondering what you mean by "removal of sin." What I think you mean is the removal of wrath. The sin itself, if I'm reading you right, isn't actually removed. Is that correct?

  3. Well, I don't mean to imply that I have become perfect. Someone in the Bible said: Lord, I believe. Help my unbelief. I do think there is a change though. I think that when anxiety goes alot of sin is uprooted. Not all but alot of it. But yeah, your other statement is correct in that I believe God's wrath has been removed from my vision.

  4. As I understand universalism (ala Mike Gannt), all souls are eventually going to heaven, and hell is here on Earth, now -- as well as the Kingdom of God.  Sinfull behavior Now simply determines our place in heaven Then (the first shall be last and the last shall be first).  Jesus has already come again (hence the Kingdom is Now), and no one is going to end up in hell eternally.  Not even Adolph Hitler.  To think otherwise is to second-guess God's Justice and our own "righteousness". 

    I think this is what Rob Bell is saying as well.  And is (partially) why I remain so utterly confused.

  5. One problem I have with theology based on ideas like "God is full of wrath" is that it feels like the cart has been put before the horse. We've got this message, "Jesus has saved us"... but now we need to invent something people need saving from to make our message more compelling. So we concoct a problem (God's wrath) to fit our solution (Jesus' death). 

    But can you see why this is not a compelling message to a non-believer? It sounds like Christians are making up a problem and selling the solution.

    I think perhaps the gospel should focus on the actual problems people face in their daily lives just like it would have in the first century A.D.

  6. That's sort of what I'm trying to get at. When wrath becomes decoupled from sanctification you have a lot of the other-worldly dysfunction we find in Christianity today. But you're right, its not an either/or, but the pendulum is pegged to one side in many sectors of Christianity. I'm trying to bring it back to the middle.

    You can't create a healthy Christianity when, at root, you believe you're being saved from God rather than sin.

  7. I'm unfamiliar with Gannt's work so I can't comment on it.

    Bell's take is a bit different. He leaves the possibility of salvation open but, ultimately, the choice is ours. Borrowing from C.S. Lewis he basically says that the door of heaven can be closed but it is locked from the inside.

  8. Richard.
    A note of encouragement.  Greatly enjoying the three main threads you have going right now (Slavery of Death, Walden and Love Wins).

    "Marginalizing justice in order to save souls."  In this phrase, I believe you may have captured what is a growing perception amongst many Christians - at least it provided the best summary I've yet seen for the confliction in my gut I sometimes feel about how my faith should be lived and how we as a (Christian) people should be focused.  I do, however, see positive signs emerging, at both the individual and corporate (Church) level.  Micah 6:8 indeed.

  9. Penal atonement theory, that sin is to be punished (rather than destroyed), paints God as divided into wrathful Judge on one hand, and loving, redeeming Father on the other. It's not reconcileable. As MacDonald wrote, God cannot be both merciful and just unless it is merciful to be just, and just to be merciful. And justice can't mean one thing to God, and something else to us, for Him to require us to "do justice and walk humbly" with Him. If you ask any loving parent, the point of punishment is never to destroy the child - it's to destroy the inclinations to wrong, because it's the wrong itself that destroys the child. If sin is like a deadly addiction, you can't save the person from the death the addiction produces without the cooperative work between the doctor and the patient, and maintenance work for a lifetime. The theology that provides a get-out-of-hell-free card as a result of passive belief of theological tennets, rather than taking up one's cross to follow Jesus, is how the other-worldliness takes hold in some of the best, well-meaning Christians.

  10. Yes! I had a similar thought recently: that evangelism is like an advertiser tasked with generating demand for a product.  This is why I am uncomfortable with traditional evangelism: it requires so much time and effort to convince someone that they are sinful enough to deserve eternal punishment.

  11. Yeah, I don't use dualistic thinking when it comes to God because He is the Ultimate Paradox. It's both/and. I don't believe God does or will punish His redeemed. As I already stated, it's God's grace that transforms the eyes of the heart to see the glory of God in the face of Christ. He is most precious and beautiful above all. Especially in His humility and trust that He had in the Father. Just as He trusted and relied upon God I do the same. When my faith is in a sovereign God who promises to work all my circumstances together for good, anxiety, anger, impatience, greed etc. is broken

  12. Well, I don't know about anybody else but it's definitely a problem I had. I think the Gospel does focus on the actual problems. Well, it has in my life anyway. Christ's glory is infinitely lovely and precious to me. Indeed, I love Him more than anything. 

  13. Cole, I hear a lot of ethereal statements, but I also have seen in churches and in individual Christians that promote that otherworldly "God's doing this in me" how such etherealism plays out differently in real life than it does in theory, especially when tested by life's realities.
    Blessings.

  14. Well, it works in my life. I'm a recovering drug addict and I also go to A.A. They're quite happy to hear me speak. I'm not saying I'm perfect. Lord, I believe help my unbelief is the cry of my heart.

  15. You have my full support in your recovery, Cole. I've had 3 family members addicted to prescription drugs, so I know rehab is a lot of hard work. And I think we're on the same page with "help my unbelief." Blessings to you.

  16. God's glory is most beautiful and precious. Indeed, God's glory is infinite in value and worth. When I fail to place supreme value on that which is of infinite value I grieve God. I belittle the infinite worth of His glory and therefore deserve infinite punishment. The Bible teaches that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. It's also my understanding that it teaches that one day God will judge the reprobate and they will suffer eternal justice.

    And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlating contempt. Dan.12:2

    It's true that everlasting does not always mean everlasting. But in this context it seems to because it points to a decisive division into joy or misery after death and resurrection. As the life after death is everlasting so the contempt is everlasting. The words used to describe the plight of the lost imply ongoing existence in which this abhorrence continues to fall on them. The text makes no sense if non-existence was implied. It makes no sense for God to resurrect people only to annihilate them again after He resurrects them. The natural meaning of the text is that they are raised from the dead bodily so that they can be assigned bodily and conciously to their appointed destinies. Jesus tells us:

    Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels....And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. Matt. 25:46

    Here the eternal fire is explicitly called eternal punishment and its opposite eternal life. It does not honor the full import of "eternal life" to say that it only refers to a quality of life without the connotation of everlasting. Not only that but when you compare this text to Rev. 20:10, the case for concious eternal torment becomes clear.

    The devil who had decieved them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. Rev. 20:10

    This is just a small sampling of texts from the Bible that teach eternal punishment. There are more. But to me these are the strongest.

  17. Thanks Patricia. It is hard work but it's easier for me when I have faith in God and His promises. When my future is in the hands of an all wise, all powerful, God who promises to work all my circumstances together for good, my anxiety and anger is severed. I have hope. When my future is secure I can live in the "Naked Now" as one author calls it. Don't get me wrong. I do mess up every now and then with my sin but God "chastises" or disciplines me or corrects me and I make amends if needed and repent and God restores to me the beauty of holiness.

  18. I'm not sure I understand what you mean. When I sin God convicts or chastises or disciplines me and I repent and make amends if I need to but He never punishes or condemns me. There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ. God is the one who justifies. Satan the accuser tries to condemn me to steal my joy but I am in Christ.

  19. Above you say you are being saved from God's wrath and not, at root, from sin. That seems pretty clear to me: You're being saved from God and not sin.

  20. I see it as being both/and not either/or. I am now a child of the Father. My Father doesn't punish or condemn me. He convicts or disciplines me. I am in Christ. In mystical union with Him. All of God's punishment was taken away at the cross. Removed from my vision.

  21. Sam, my understanding is that all will eventually be in God's presence. How one experiences that (as heavenly or hellish) will depend on the bent of one's heart and will. That someone could eternally reject God's mercy seems unfathomable to me, but I do not believe that it will be forced upon anyone. I think sinful behavior now diminishes our life now.   

  22. Sorry -- I spelled his name wrong; it's Mike Gantt.  I happened upon his blogs through his response to yours on Original Sin, I believe.  He has an online book entitled "Everyone Is Going to Heaven", and I must say I am impressed with not only his scholarship but also his exquisite simplicity of style.  He comes under heavy fire from Christan traditionalists and fundamentalists as heretical, but I have yet to read one angry word from him in response.  I have enjoyed reading his work tremendously.

  23. This was my least favorite chapter of Bell's book because I can't stand the thought of being trapped in this life forever. You mean what I went through here goes on and on and ON...  Blech!

    Bell and NT Wright are white males.  This might be "heaven" for them but it'll never be "heaven" for me.

  24. Having been a part of the Bible study generation, I am reluctant to excise or mitigate verses about death and the judgment, heaven and hell to boost concern for this worldly matters which are where we are and need to be the salt and light as instruments of God'sKingdom righteousness. Nonetheless, the new perspectives are extremely challenging and fruitful for getting our priorities in order. Keep stirring the pot....let the discussions continue and increase!

  25. Well, I believe that we are being changed from glory to glory. As I see it:

    Salvation = salvation

    Salvation = sanctification

    Salvation = glorification

    At the same time we are covered in the robes of Christ's righteousness. Those of us who have the robe of righteousness can approach God with a bold humility. We will stand in the fires of God but it will not harm us. Instead, it will purify us and burn away all sin. When my faith is in God and His promises my future is secure. When my future is secure I can live in the Now. The way I see it is that the Kingdom of Heaven is within us in the Now. But it's also a future reality. I see it as being both/and not either/or.

  26. To complete discussion with Cole:

    1. examine euthyphro dilemma.
    2. notice irreconcilable difference of opinion about the nature of goodness and the moral obligations of a god.
    3. move along, nothing to see here.

  27. Could it be true that "Our eschatology shapes our ethics" and 'our ethics shape our escatology'? I feel like it's more of the second or at least some of both.

  28. Eschatology also seems to shape language. There's a programmed feel to ethereal, spiritualizing religion-ese that goes in circles. But that may just be a subgrouping under how eschatology influences Now.

  29. Sorry again, but what difference does it make on which side a door is locked?  I skipped ahead in my reading and read Paul Tillich (Ultimate Concern) -- and that plus your comments on our primary purpose in life are leading me more and more to the conclusion that the past 50+ years of my life have been all about my Doubt.

    Whereas others can point to their Faith or Hope, I have my skepticism, and it really does define me as a person.

  30. "When my future is in the hands of an all wise, all powerful, God who promises to work all my circumstances together for good, my anxiety and anger is severed."

    Does He promise to do that for everyone, or only for the "elect," or only for those like yourself who apparently were better than the rest at meeting His "requirements?"

  31. "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ."

    How did you get "in Christ?" Was it an act of God, or a personal accomplishment?

    Rom. 5:18  Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. 1Tim. 2:1 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. 

  32. Well I am saved by grace through faith. And this is not of my own doing but a gift from God. So that I may not boast.

  33. Do you love God because you are somehow more loving (better) than others? Or because He has chosen to make Himself known to you... chosen to reveal Himself to you?

    1John 4:8 The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love. 

  34. Rom. 5:6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

    What a great declaration. But does it apply to all sinners, or only some "elect?"

    1John 4:19 We love, because He first loved us. Since we can only love AFTER God first loves us, are we to say that God has chosen to NOT love the non-elect? If so, why SHOULD they love Him when He has chosen to hate them?

  35. John 1:12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 

    But were you "born again" by your choice - an act of your will - or God's? And if it was God's choice why do you assume that He may have chosen NOT to give new birth to ALL of His creation, but only to some "elect" few? What "good news" do you have for the non-elect?

  36. Well, nobody deserves grace. It's unmerrited favor and therefore never owed. God is never obligated to be gracious to sinners who reject Him and don't want to have anything to do with Him. Why does God save some and not others? I don't know all of God's reasons why He does what He does. But I think God's ultimate goal may be to glorify Himself for the joy of His people. God doesn't delight in evil and suffering in and of itself. What He delights in is justice and mercy.

    Jonathan Edwards captures what I'm saying in His answer to God's ultimate goal and reason for permitting human suffering and evil:

    It is a proper and excellent thing for infinite glory to shine forth; and for the same reason, it is proper that the shining forth of God's glory should be complete; that is, all the parts of His glory should shine forth, that every beauty should be proportionably effulgent, that the beholder may have a proper notion of God. It is not proper that one glory should be exceedingly manifested, and another not at all...Thus it is necessary, that God's aweful majesty, His authority and dreadful greatness, justice, and holiness, should be manifested. But this could not be, unless sin and punishment had been decreed; so that the shining forth of God's glory would be very imperfect, both because these parts of divine glory would not shine forth as the others do, and also the glory of His goodness, love, and holiness would be faint without them; nay, they could scarcely shine forth at all. If it were not right that God should permit and punish sin, there could be no manifestation of God's holiness in hatred of sin, or in showing any preference, in His providence, of godliness before it. There would be no manifestation of God's grace or true goodness, if there was no sin to be pardoned, no misery to be saved from. How much happiness soever He bestowed, His goodness would not be so much prized and admired....So evil is necessary, in order to the highest happiness of the creature, and the completeness of that communication of God, for which He made the world; because the creature's happiness consists in the knowledge of God, and the sense of His love. And if the knowledge of Him be imperfect, the happiness of the creature must be proportionably imperfect.

  37. "God is never obligated to be gracious to sinners who reject Him and don't want to have anything to do with Him."

    Was it not God who first "rejected" the non-elect by predestining them to unbelief and eternal hell? How does someone "reject" God when it was God Himself who refused to reveal Himself to them? How does someone "reject" that which they are unaware?

    Considering Jonathan Edwards:  "The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you,"

    Is it "good" news that God "abhors" us? Why would I love Him when He abhors me?

  38. "I take God's message to everybody."

    And just what is God's message - that He has chosen to "love" some and hate all the rest?

  39. No. I don't believe God POSITIVELY predestines anybody to sin. God PERMITS people to sin. He gives them over to their reprobate hearts and ALLOWS them to act according to their own wills. They do what they WANT to do. Which is reject God by belittleing the infinite worth of His glory.

  40. "He gives them over to their reprobate hearts and ALLOWS them to act according to their own wills. "

    So then, by an act of your will you chose to believe in Christ, repent of your sins, and be "born again"?

  41. I have read it and I don't see God abandoning mankind to eternal torment. In fact, I see Him restoring all things to Himself. I see Hm reconciling the world to Himself. I see Him demonstrating His love for us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us.

    What do you see?

  42. Well if you read the Gospel you will see that those who want help are seeking God. This means that God is working in their hearts drawing them to Himself. If they don't want it I see no reason to force it on them.  

  43. Let me suggest you go back and re-read what I've already stated. You are asking me something I've already answered. I feel a little bit of hate comming from you.

  44. There is no hate my friend. But I do see contradictions on your part: that you were "dead" in your sins and yet God saved you, but others who are "dead" in their sins must come to God and save themselves.

    You don't merit God's grace but got it anyway, while others must earn it.

  45. "This means that God is working in their hearts drawing them to Himself. "

    But for others He is apparently NOT drawing them to Himself, and yet you blame them for not coming to God. Why is this?

  46. There is no contradictions. You just misunderstand. Because the fallen human heart is in bondage to sin the spiritually dead don't want to have any thing to do with God. They reject God and are therefore justly condemned. It's not until God circumcises the heart and opens it up by His grace that fallen humans repent and place their trust in Christ for their salvation. The glory of Christ is revealed and we become enthralled with His beauty above all. The joy of the Lord becomes our strength.

    God has granted repentence that leads to life (Acts 11:18)

    Repentence and conversion is a miraculous gift that leads to life. We will never choose God unless He performs this miracle called regeneration. Salvation is of the Lord. We will not repent and trust God unless God does His work on our hardened hearts. The scriptures promised long ago that God would devote Himself to this work in order to create for Himself a faithful people:

    And the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live. (Deut. 30:6)

    John teaches that regeneration preceeds and enables faith:

    Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God. (1 John 5:1)

    The verb tenses make John's intention unmistakable: "Everyone who goes on believing that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God." Faith is the effect of the new birth not the cause of it. We are saved by grace through faith and this is not of our own doing but it is a gift of God. So that no man can boast.

  47. Because the fallen human heart is in bondage to sin the spiritually dead don't want to have any thing to do with God. They reject God and are therefore justly condemned. It's not until God circumcises the heart and opens it up by His grace that fallen humans repent and place their trust in Christ for their salvation. The glory of Christ is revealed and we become enthralled with His beauty above all. The joy of the Lord becomes our strength.

    God has granted repentence that leads to life (Acts 11:18)

    Repentence and conversion is a miraculous gift that leads to life. We will never choose God unless He performs this miracle called regeneration. Salvation is of the Lord. We will not repent and trust God unless God does His work on our hardened hearts. The scriptures promised long ago that God would devote Himself to this work in order to create for Himself a faithful people:

    And the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live. (Deut. 30:6)

    John teaches that regeneration preceeds and enables faith:

    Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God. (1 John 5:1)

    The verb tenses make John's intention unmistakable: "Everyone who goes on believing that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God." Faith is the effect of the new birth not the cause of it. We are saved by grace through faith and this is not of our own doing but it is a gift of God. So that no man can boast.

  48. "Because the fallen human heart is in bondage to sin the spiritually dead don't want to have any thing to do with God."

    It was God who made us "spiritually dead" and therefore God who must make us spiritually alive. You want to give God all the "credit" but refuse to give Him the "blame" that must go with it.

  49. Well, I believe we are responsible for our actions. God PERMITS us to sin against Him. Fallen man doesn't WANT to have anything to do with God. He willfully rejects Him and God is therefore just in executing His justice.

  50. After thinking over this I have to say that I must remain open to Christian Universalism. I just can't square eternal punishment with the fact that the Bible often speaks of different punishment for different people. This seems to me to be inconsistent with "eternal" punishment. The Bible tells us that God has a remnant chosen by grace as His firstfruits. This implies that there are second fruits. Indeed, God's judgments in the Bible are not only punitive but they are also corrective and remedial. We often see God destroying with His eternal punishment only to send forth His Spirit and restore that which has fallen under His eternal judgment. Take for instance Isaiah 32:13-17 where Israel comes under God's judgement:


    13 for the soil of my people
    growing up in thorns and briers,
    yes, for all the joyous houses
    in the exultant city.
    14 For the palace is forsaken,
    the populous city deserted;
    the hill and the watchtower
    will become dens FOREVER,
    a joy of wild donkeys,
    a pasture of flocks;
    15 UNTIL the Spirit is poured upon us from on high,
    and the wilderness becomes a fruitful field,
    and the fruitful field is deemed a forest.
    16 Then justice will dwell in the wilderness,
    and righteousness abide in the fruitful field.
    17 And the effect of righteousness will be peace,
    and the result of righteousness, quietness and trust FOREVER.

    Israel suffers ETERNAL PUNISHMENT until the Spirit is poured out and it is restored to peace, justice, and righteousness FOREVER.


    Indeed, God will have all men to be saved. Christ gave Himself as a ransom for all and God will bring salvation to all for the fierce anger of the Lord will not turn back until He accomplishes the purposes of His heart. (Jer. 30:24)

  51. Hey Cole,

    Thanks for the stimulating exchange with Jim731. I have thoroughly enjoyed it. I thought I might just make a few comments since your exchange seems to have run its course. By the way, Jim and I had a similar extended email exchange and we ended on the best of terms and completely disagreeing on universalism.

    "We often see God destroying with His eternal punishment only to send forth His Spirit and restore that which has fallen under His eternal judgment."

    The English Bibles use the term 'eternal' a lot and leave it up to the reader to fill in the 'meaning' from the context. The Hebrew phrase, ad olam, in both Isaiah 32 verses 14 and 17 is what is translated 'eternal.' However, it clearly can not be 'eternal' in verse 14 because verse 15 begins with 'until.' No such modifier occurs after verse 17. And, taken with all of Scripture, we know that there is a time of peace coming for Israel that never ends when Jesus takes His seat as their king. So, the same set of words can have quite different meanings given the context. My bottom line is that God has not yet begun the 'eternal' judgment phase of His plan.

    Jeremiah 30:24 clearly states that God will accomplish 'the intent of His heart' as it relates to judgment. And, this is talking about Daniel's 70th week, the tribulation. I don't believe there are any passages that would dispute this. On the other hand, to apply this verse to salvation when there are so many verses that can be used to either support or refute universalism seems dangerous.

  52. I'm not sure I understand what you are saying in the first part. The poing I was trying to make is that "eternal" doesn't always mean "eternal." I then gave a scripture where this is the case.

    As for your second point I believe God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Since He desires all to be saved, and no purpose of His can be twharted then it follows all will be saved. God's justice in the Bible is not only punitive but it's also remedial and corrective.

  53. Thanks for your honesty Cole... not that you are necessarily agreeing with universalism, but that you are willing to keep an open mind, consider other views, and continually re-evaluate your opinion based on what scripture reveals to you. 

  54. By your diligent study you have found what many miss: that much of what is supposedly ETERNAL, only lasts UNTIL. By his own words Jonah was in the belly of the fish FOREVER.... UNTIL he wasn't. Sodom and Gomorrah will burn FOREVER, UNTIL they are restored to their former glory.

    Jer. 30:24 The fierce anger of the LORD will not turn back, 
    Until He has performed, and until He has accomplished 
    The intent of His heart;  In the latter days you will understand this. 

  55. Matt. 25:46 contains the clue that this may be the case. The word punishment is kolasis and it carries with it the idea of correction. As Barclay notes:

    The Greek word for punishment here is kolasis, which was not orginally an ethical word at all. It originally meant the pruning of trees to make them grow better. I think it is true to say that in all Greek secular literature kolasis is never used of anything but remedial punishment.

    The Thayer's Greek Lexicon defines the terms this way:


    Kolasis

    Definitioncorrection, punishment, penalty

  56. If I am understanding you rightly then you are saying that the fact that Greek secular usage of kolasis did not imply 'eternality,' then it is sort of an assumed 'until.'  Let me know if I've got that right.

    In the mean time, how about this.  This word only appears in the NT twice.  Once here with the adjective 'eternal' and once in 1 John 4:18.  In the latter passage, the idea of 'eternal' is not present.  So, this usage would seem to coincide with secular usage of that time.  Not much data to go on.

    If we just go back a few verses to Matthew 25:41, we again come to our 'eterrnal' word.  No kolasis here.  Just a 'fire' that is called eternal and I don't see any 'until' either implied or stated.  What I find is that these people (who are accursed of God!) are to go into it and that it was prepared for 'the devil and his angels.'

    Do we find anywhere in Scripture where the idea of anything less than 'never ending' punishment is intended for the devil?  Sorry; but, I don't think the Greeks, who had no idea who our God is or what eternity is, can make this kolasis temporary.  The goats are in for a very long punishment; to no satisfaction on my part.

  57. "eternal" doesn't always literaly mean "eternal." Even in the same passage where it is used twice. The word is a relative term and it's duration depends upon that which it is associated. When it is refering to God's judgment in Is. 34:8-10 it doesn't literally mean "forever."

    For the Lord has a day of vengeance, a year of recompence for the cause of Zion. And the streams of Edom shall be turned to pitch, and her soil into sulfur, and her land shall become burning pitch. Night and day it shall not be quenched; it's smoke shall go up forever.

    This is the exact same language used in Rev. Notice the text says that the fire will not be quenched day and night. It's smoke is said to ascend forever even though Edom isn't still burning today. It went out long ago.

    We see also in Ro. 16:25,26 where the word is used twice in the same context referring to something temporal and also to God.

    Now to Him who is able to strengthen you....according to the mystery that was kept secret for LONG AGES. but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the ETERNAL God.
    Here's another in Hab. 3:6He stood and measured the earth;he looked and shook the nations;then the eternal mountains were scattered;the everlasting hills sank low.His were the everlasting ways.The hills aren't everlasting but God's ways are.The word is a relative term depending on the subject with which it is associated.
    We also see this in a number of other passages. Here's only a couple:Jonah was in the fish forever until he left three days later (Jon. 1:17; 2:6)Sodom's fiery judgment is eternal until God returns them to ther former state (Ez. 16:53-55; Ju. 7) Based on these passages I think we can conclude that when "eternal" and "forever" is used with God's judgments it doesn't have to literally mean "forever"Even if the punnishment is forever it may be referring to God's wrath being "eternal" That is, hell is a place of "eternal punnishment" but this doesn't prove that people will be there forever. Either interpretation seems warranted.

  58. Paul tells us that all will be justified and made righteous:


    Romans 5:

    18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.


    Clause 1 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men

    Clause 2 So one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men

    Clause 3 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners

    Clause 4 So by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.


    Since everyone agrees that all were made sinners, clause 1 refers to all men. Clause 2 argues from clause 1 and even states that all men are in view. In clause 3, Paul expounds his thought further, he points out Adam had affected the lives of the multitudes of mankind (the many). No one will argue that the many in clause 3 is not all men. So also, in clause 4, the exact comparison is being made except that the One affecting the lives of the multitudes of mankind (the many) is Christ. The many of clause 4 must be the many of clause 3 because nothing is stated to the contrary. The "for as" followed by the "so" requires the agreement.
    Indeed, God will have all men to be saved. Christ gave Himself as a ransom for all and God will bring salvation to all for the fierce anger of the Lord will not turn back until He accomplishes the purposes of His heart. (Jer. 30:24)

  59. Cole, you are turning into quite the Christian Universalist. Perhaps you were just one in disguise before.

  60. Well, the more I think about it the better it sounds. I'm just showing the strongest arguments for it. But yeah, I'm thinking of heading that direction.

  61. All will bow and confess Him as Lord and be saved. There is no other God beside me, a just God and a savior; there is none beside me. Look to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other. I have SWORN by Myself; the word has gone out of My mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, that to Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall take an oath. He shall say, "SURELY IN THE LORD I HAVE RIGHTEOUSNESS and strength. To Him men shall come, and all shall be ASHAMED who are incensed against Him. In the Lord ALL the descendents of Israel shall be JUSTIFIED, and shall GLORY.1. "SURELY IN THE LORD I HAVE RIGHTEOUSNESS" (vs. 24) Only a genuine believer could say this. Note also it is stated as an oath (vs.23) making it especially pertinent.2. ALL THE DESCENDENTS OF ISRAEL SHALL BE JUSTIFIED AND SHALL GLORY( vs. 25) Justification and glory are undeniable evidences of genuine repentance.3. It also tells us in Ps. 66:3-5 - How awesome are your works! Through the greatness of your power YOUR ENEMIES SHALL SUBMIT THEMSELVES TO YOU. ALL THE EARTH SHALL WORSHIP YOU AND SING PRAISES TO YOU.

  62. God's punnishment in the Bible often has the purpose of correction.

    When Your judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness. (Is. 26:9)

    Behold, happy is the man whom God corrects; Therefore do not despise the chastening of the Almighty. For He bruises, but He binds up; He wounds, but His hands make whole. (Job 5:17 -18)

    You laid affliction on our backs....You brought us to rich fulfillment (Ps. 66:10-12)

    The fierce anger of the Lord will not turn back until He fully accomplishes the purposes of His heart. In days to come you will understand this. (Jer. 30:24)

    You have appointed them for judgment; O Rock, You have marked them for correction (Hab. 1:12)

    My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord, nor detest His correction; for whom the Lord loves He corrects. (Prov. 3:11-12)

    According to this verse God corrects those He loves. He loves everybody. Therefore He will correct everybody.

  63. You can do everything...no purpose of Yours can be witheld from You. (Job 42:2)He does whatever He pleases. (Ps. 115:3)

    God desires and is willing that all be saved. No purpose of His can be thwarted. It folloes all will be saved.My word shall not return to me void, but it shall accomplish what I please. (Is. 55:11)Jesus is the Author and Finisher of our faith. (He. 12:2)

  64. Richard, I am glad we are both having fun 'saving' others.  OTOH, I am sure you have better things to do than that.  Why don't you just ask me to stop commenting here.  All the errors will go away in a flash.  Well, except for the ones . . . well you understand.

  65. The point I was trying to make is that all will have faith.  If someone is justified then that means they have faith. Look at it again:

    Romans 5:18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.Clause 1 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all menClause 2 So one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all menClause 3 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinnersClause 4 So by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.Since everyone agrees that all were made sinners, clause 1 refers to all men. Clause 2 argues from clause 1 and even states that all men are in view. In clause 3, Paul expounds his thought further, he points out Adam had affected the lives of the multitudes of mankind (the many). No one will argue that the many in clause 3 is not all men. So also, in clause 4, the exact comparison is being made except that the One affecting the lives of the multitudes of mankind (the many) is Christ. The many of clause 4 must be the many of clause 3 because nothing is stated to the contrary. The "for as" followed by the "so" requires the agreement.
    You are correct that no faith no justification. But there is justification therefore there must also be faith. You haven't said anything here.

  66. "The point I was trying to make is that all will have faith."

    I wish I were smart enough to follow you on this. At least we agree that without faith there is no justification. Let me modify clauses 2 and 4 to take account of what is said about justification in verse 1.
    Clause 1 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all menClause 2 So one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men who have faithClause 3 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinnersClause 4 So by the one man's obedience the many who believe will be made righteous.It is only the ones who believe who are justified. It is NOT that all are justified and so they must have believed."In fact the Bible does teach that Christ died for all:"I agree. The difference we have is that this is not enough. One must trust that to receive justification. The fact that it happened is not enough to save anybody who does not believe it saves them.You introduce 1 John 2:2 and 1 John 5:18-19Again, I agree with your interpretation.Now, you introduce 1 Tim 4:10:"For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers"And, you conclude from this verse that "Since God wills all to be saved and His plans cannot be thwarted then it follows logically that all will be saved. In this life or the next."Nowhere does it say that God has a plan to save all men. He does have a plan to save all men who believe. Which is exactly what the verse you introduce says. Do you think ‘Savior of all men, especially of believers’ means ‘Savior of all men even if they don’t believe???’ AND, what is belief? I am sure you know what Hebrews 11:1 says about that. When a person dies, there is no more ‘not seeing.’ The dead person does not have faith; they have sight and know exactly what the score is. That is not faith and it is too late. Where do you see any Scripture that talks about people being ‘saved’ after they have experienced physical death????
    Clause 2 So one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men who have faith
    Clause 3 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners
    Clause 4 So by the one man's obedience the many who believe will be made righteous.
    It is only the ones who believe who are justified. It is NOT that all are justified and so they must have believed.

    "In fact the Bible does teach that Christ died for all:"

    I agree. The difference we have is that this is not enough. One must trust that to receive justification. The fact that it happened is not enough to save anybody who does not believe it saves them.

    You introduce 1 John 2:2 and 1 John 5:18-19

    Again, I agree with your interpretation.

    Now, you introduce 1 Tim 4:10:

    "For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers"
    And, you conclude from this verse that "Since God wills all to be saved and His plans cannot be thwarted then it follows logically that all will be saved. In this life or the next."

    Nowhere does it say that God has a plan to save all men. He does have a plan to save all men who believe. Which is exactly what the verse you introduce says. Do you think ‘Savior of all men, especially of believers’ means ‘Savior of all men even if they don’t believe???’ AND, what is belief? I am sure you know what Hebrews 11:1 says about that. When a person dies, there is no more ‘not seeing.’ The dead person does not have faith; they have sight and know exactly what the score is. That is not faith and it is too late. Where do you see any Scripture that talks about people being ‘saved’ after they have experienced physical death????

  67. Well, you just twisted the scripture. It clearly says that all mankind will be justified and made righteous. This shows that they will have faith. To recieve something means that we have it. God gives it to us as a gift. Savior of all means that He is the Savior of all. He does have a remnant in this lifetime chosen by grace that are His firstfruits. This of course implies that there are second fruits. He's not willing that any should perish and no purpose of His can be thwarted. If you agree that Christ died for all then you should conclude that all will be saved. You don't understand atonement and how the blood expiates and cleanses sin.

  68. Faith comes from God:

    Fot to you it has been granted for Christ's sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake. (Philippians 1:29)

    The term granted means "to give as a gift". And what has been granted is faith. God has granted to us: to believe in Christ.

  69. "But, yes, this remnant is then all of Israel, after most of them have been killed!!! "

    So what. We all die David. Why do you have so little faith in God's power to resurrect?

    1Cor. 15:21-26 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 
    For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, 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. My friend, read that last line over and over until you believe it. If you don't, then in your own mind death has defeated God. There is no faith in that. ALL will be made alive... but each in his own turn... the firstfruits, the second, third... however many it takes until the end comes and DEATH is destroyed, including the "second death" which you insist is eternal. You claim to have faith in God, and yet your insistence that death has defeated God shows that you have little to none.

  70. I said: "But, yes, this remnant is then all of Israel, after most of them have been killed!!! "

    You said: "Why do you have so little faith in God's power to resurrect?"

    Forgive me; but, you lost me here. I really don't see the connection between these two statements. My view of resurrection is that all humans who die (the good and the bad, whatever that means . . .) are resurrected by God.

    You said: "The last enemy to be destroyed is death. My friend, read that last line over and over until you believe it."

    Jim, I believe it; that's not our area of disagreement. The question is 'what does it mean?' You and I just look at that rather simple set of English words and see a different message. Now, try not to snicker as I give you my take on this.



    This 'destruction of death' takes place at the entrance into the eternal state, after Christ has reigned on the earth for the thousand years and finally put satan in the lake of fire. For, while you (I still believe this about you even though your theology is well . . . so different from mine.) and I will have gone through that experience in resurrected bodies, many on earth will still be in bodies of flesh, like the ones we have today. It is for those who are righteous at that time that death is finally put away.

    You say: "ALL will be made alive... but each in his own turn... the firstfruits, the second, third... however many it takes until the end comes and DEATH is destroyed, including the "second death" which you insist is eternal."

    Wow, you have packed a lot into a few words. I can't possibly do it justice here. So let me just ask one question. In the passage you quoted there are only two resurrections mentioned as far as I can tell. Where do you find in Scripture these others (i.e., 'however many it takes')?

  71. Cole,

    "Well, you just twisted the scripture. It clearly says that all mankind will be justified and made righteous."

    Sorry you feel that way. I have no intention of twisting Scripture and I am also sure that you have no such intention either.

    Please, where does Scripture teach that 'all mankind will be justified?'

    "Faith comes from God:"

    Not sure why you said this; but, I fully agree.

    "John teaches that regeneration preceeds and enables faith:"

    Again, I believe that regeneration precedes or is in fact the 'means' of receiving saving faith.  (I don't think the verse you quoted is supportive of this, however.)  Regardless, the new birth, as you say, comes after the person is in possession of saving faith.  I think there may be some confusion here between 'saving faith' and the 'spiritual gift' of faith.

  72. "It is for those who are righteous at that time that death is finally put away."

    When death is destroyed there is NO MORE DEATH but only LIFE -- real life in Christ. Anyone who had been dead will be ALIVE... the only condition available when death is defeated. Your assumption that the eternal state of unbelievers will be eternal conscious torment in the Lake of Fire (the second death) defies simple logic and divine truth. When one is dead they are not even UNconscious, let alone conscious enough to be tormented. They are simply dead -- feeling nothing, seeing nothing, experiencing nothing. When the last enemy is defeated ALL will be ALIVE... NOT eternally tormented or eternally dead.

    "Where do you find in Scripture these others (i.e., 'however many it takes')?"

    For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn...

    The same "all" that die (every one of us) is the same "all" who will be made alive. ALL... not some, not just the "elect", but ALL. And each one of that same ALL will be given life in his own turn. You seem to accept that Adam's sin condemned ALL, but why will you not accept that Christ's obedience will free ALL? Christ will destroy the dominion, authority, and power that Satan, sin (which includes unbelief), and death have held over mankind. These are the enemies of mankind and He was manifested to destroy them. Why do you assume that He will not?

    1Cor. 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. God will not be all in "some"... but in ALL. 

  73. "Do you think ‘Savior of all men, especially of believers’ means ‘Savior of all men even if they don’t believe???’"

    In order to conform to your theology we will need to rewrite scripture: 

    1Tim. 4:9-10 It is a trustworthy statement deserving full acceptance. For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is NOT the Savior of all men, but ONLY of believers.The correct writing does NOT limit salvation to only believers, but makes it ESPECIALLY for them -- that they get to know it NOW; that they get to be the ones to share in the salvation of the world by knowing that it is God's will that all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the TRUTH -- that Christ is the Son of God and that He died to take away the sins of the world; that God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself, and is NOT counting their sins against them; that God demonstrated His love for us, in that whie were were STILL sinners (unbelievers) Christ died for us.Concerning 1Tim. 4:9-10, why do you not TRUST this statement? Why do you not FULLY ACCEPT it? Is it because you want credit for believing -- credit for your salvation? But of course not, you would never take personal credit for the GIFT of faith would you? But you would limit it to a few "elect," thus limiting the grace and love of the creator of ALL to only a FEW of His creation. Christ exhorts us to call God "Father." And while no earthly father would limit his love to some of his children neither would our Heavenly Father (who made us in His image) limit His love to only a few. The "elect" does not refer to the "only ones chosen for eternal life," but to those few given the knowledge in this life that God's will is that all of mankind will be saved.

  74. Jim731,

    "When death is destroyed there is NO MORE DEATH but only LIFE -- real life in Christ."

    This is an assertion that is not supported by Scripture (IMHO, of course). We are not agreeing on what 'death' is. I am sure we agree on death as it applies to a cat or a dog. But, what does death have to do with humans having the image of God with spirits and souls? Now, that is the pole we are getting wrapped around here.

    In addition to our differing definitions of death we get to the definition of all. You make the assumption, I believe, that everyplace where the word 'all' appears in Scripture, it means the same simple obvious 'all.' That has to be proven and not just asserted. If you have been following what Cole and I have been saying about 'eternal' you know that we agree that it does not always mean the same thing. How can you be so sure that 'all' is not treated in Scripture in the same manner. Sorry, to beat this drum again; but, if context is missed, then the meaning is also.

    What is your understanding of Revelation 20:10-15 as it relates to death being destroyed but not people?  For example, is death only destroyed for a while?

  75. Jim731,

    You said:
    In order to conform to your theology we will need to rewrite scripture: 1Tim.
    4:9-10 It is a trustworthy statement deserving full acceptance. For it
    is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the
    living God, who is NOT the Savior of all men, but ONLY of believers.

    Now, now.  No need to rewrite Scripture.  Romans 1:16 has already taken care of this:  "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is God's power for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek."

    What Scripture says it so clearly for the one who does not believe?
     

  76. Very simply my friend, I believe that Christ is the savior of ALL men and you do not. I believe that God reconciled the world (all) to Himself and you do not. I believe that God demonstrated His love for us (all), in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us (all), and you do not. You believe that Christ died only for the "elect" - who were predestined from before the foundation of the world to be the only ones loved and "saved." This would then imply that God also chose to hate a predestined "non-elect" from before the foundation of the world -- a thought utterly reprehensible to me, but apparently perfectly acceptable to you for you claim to love and worship the "god" who has chosen to do so.

    It is impossible for me to "prove" anything to you for in your own words you are "absolutely convinced" that only a remnant will be saved. But what is your purpose in trying to "prove" this to me or anyone else? To prove that God hates most of His creation, and that I should "love" Him for that? Or is it just an intellectual exercise to "prove" that your interpretation of scripture trumps mine? Are you trying to bring me "glad tidings of great joy" in spreading your "gospel" of limited salvation? Well, it doesn't, and so I soundly reject it.

    As always, peace to you.

  77. "It is impossible for me to "prove" anything to you"

    Actually, I wish you would try to prove your view to me instead of just stating it repeatedly and then quoting verses out of context.  For example, in my last post I asked for your view of Revelation 20:10ff.  You chose to give me this response instead!

    "But what is your purpose in trying to "prove" this to me"

    I am not trying to prove anything to you.  Least of all that one should love God (whatever one may think that means) because He hates most of His creation.  If memory serves, you started this round of comments.  Are you trying to prove something to me?

    "Are you trying to bring me "glad tidings of great joy" in spreading your "gospel" of limited salvation?"

    I don't have a gospel; God does.  And His gospel has nothing to do with limited salvation.  It has to do with believing Him.  Period.  Scripture does not say 'love God unless you don't like what He does.'  But, I know, 'consequences' is a four letter word for many.

    And, I do sincerely wish you peace.

  78. My friend, that "Christ is the savior of all men," and how God is working that out in reconciling all things to Himself, IS the context, at least to me... but I know it is not to you. I counter your arguments only to show others who may be observing the discussion that there are valid scriptural and logical viewpoints other than the Calvinism which you support. I have already learned that I can prove nothing to anyone who has already made up their mind, so please forgive me if I gave you the impression that I was trying to prove anything to you.

    As far as "believing God" is concerned as the "gospel," the reason I ended our personal email conversation was because I saw the futility in trying to show you the contradictions in compatibilism when you had already convinced yourself that it made "scriptural" sense, even though you could not rationally explain how it worked. You would first claim that God is "just" in condemning unbelievers to eternal hell because they DID have the ability to believe, but would then contradict that by asserting that man can only believe AFTER God has regenerated him and that God only regenerates the "elect." You would first say that God "decreed" that Adam would sin but did not "cause" him to, but when I asked you to explain how God ensured that His decrees would come to fruition your own conclusion was "So, I guess it is fair to say that He causes it." You assert that "GOD separated man from Himself spiritually when Adam sinned," but that MAN is responsible for being spiritually dead. Each one of these is a complete contradiction, and yet you assert that they make perfect sense. When you cannot see the contradictions in your own "reasoning," thus nullifying it, it is impossible for me to use reason to convince you, so I simply gave up trying to do so.

    While I know that you don't consider yourself a "Calvinist," your beliefs are essentially Calvinism, though you try to separate yourself from the notion of "limited atonement" while still asserting that "only a remnant will be saved." I reject your conclusions, and those of Calvinism, not only because I believe that they malign the character and purposes of OUR heavenly Father, but because they are nonsensical and contradictory.

    I wish you nothing but peace as well, my friend, and I will do my best not to further interject my opinion into your conversations with others.

  79. I remember Brian McLaren referring to the adage that "Architecture always wins" meaning a group conforms to the space in which it gathers. He likened architecture to eschatology, saying "Eschatology always wins" which he unpacked to mean that what we believe will happen in the end determines how we order our lives. 
    It's a shame that there is so much bad eschatology out there, because unfortunately it is winning too.

    I'll have to catch up on your other posts to understand your last line in this post... But as one who greatly appreciates what little I know of Eastern Orthodox theology, I can dig that. 

  80. "Here vs. There and Now vs. Then" contrast matters, a lot. Or rather, it is important to dissolve that contrast.
    It is my understanding that Jews were not bothered much with eschatology, in fact there is very little on that in the OT. They also expected a "Kingdom of God on Earth" which come to think of it, isn't such a bad idea if spun out of a nationalistic context.Christ while preaching to Jews, at least, knew that. In other words, reading the NT's references to Heaven other-worldly can't be right. It makes sense to us, because that's how we're taught to think, but it surely makes no sense to think that's how jews at the time of Jesus understood it, and so it makes little sense to think Jesus meant it that way.In my opinion, this mental step back needs to be taken by many Christians, I appreciate that the book puts a spotlight on it.By the way, I share your appreciation that a popular theology book on the subject is finally available. Awareness of Universalism has been confined more to academic debates and evangelical apologetics concerned with refuting it for quite some time now. I'm personally thankful this book is out, now :)

Leave a Reply