The Narrow Path Ministries

This post is more of a reflection, an experience, a take it for what its worth kind of diary excerpt.

I ghost around most of the time on this board and have been for 1.5 years now. My spiritual background is like the story of many "church" raised kid steeped in traditional theology, I even went to Bible College. Nobody, Not one person EVER mentioned the UR position for ANY of the scriptures that I studied. Not a single Sunday School Class, not one Bible Study Leader, Not one pamphlet or article of THOUSANDS that i read within my circle of life Mentioned UR as Plausible.

In fact a GOOGLE search link first did!

I don't intend to debate the issue here, to me i have found that this is more of a heart issue rather than the objective of systematic theology. I don't deny that it can come from a desire for a consistent theology. For me...my journey into the UR position started 3 years ago. As i looked into the faces of those that i loved I couldn't help wondering what "love" was and to what extent love would go to save.

Save? save from what. In my theological circles that was an obvious question. But how powerful is love, where does love extend and how far would it go? To me it was a question of love. Plain and simple. I really didn't care if my Systematic Theology (E.T view) held together because it didn't seem to reflect the deepest sentiments and joys of love and life. So I mentally started over.

Yes. From Genesis to Revelation. I picked and pried with the theme of "love"and the possibility of UR in the back of my mind. Months later and many hours of brooding.....I finally flipped the last page of Revelations and pondered what I had read, mentally combing the blur of themes, images, and statements..... I began to smile. YES SMILE. A great hope washed over me. A fairy tale dream of a God of endless Love and Forgiveness which extended beyond and over the grave and the curse of sin peaked my imagination.

And of course later came doubt and tradition. doubt about my deepest hopes, my greatest dreams for the world, the most stunning and seemingly impossible outcome of the Universe. RECONCILIATION.

Do I believe UR to be true? I am not convinced but let me tell you that it is one of my greatest hopes in life. Does this hope come from the wickedness of my heart. I think not. but others have told me otherwise. Like I said before I have found this to be a heart issue.

When I read the headlines, When i stand on a crowded street and watch the masses pass me by, When I walk quietly walk through a cemetery and look upon the thousands and millions of dead, a smile sometimes creeps across my face.

Because now......



I dare to hope for them.

Nice post, Philman.

I wonder how things might be different if the Bible clearly taught UR.

How would Christians be different, how would the world be different, how would the way churches function be different.

If the conclusion is that things would be very different, then one must wonder why the Bible does not clearly teach it if it is true.

of course, some believe the Bible clearly teaches it, but even they would have to admit if it does then it is in a very roundabout way (i.e. not clearly).

TK

TK wrote:I wonder how things might be different if the Bible clearly taught UR.

TK,

I'm not going to say that the Bible clearly teaches UR, but I think that our understanding of the scriptures is governed by the assumptions we make about the meaning of some of the terms. We are taught that "salvation" or "being saved" is all about escaping a post-resurrection punishment. Is that the correct Biblical meaning? I think salvation is more about this-life than the after-life. Also, the same could be said about the term "eternal life"; is that really referring to "living forever in heaven" as almost everyone assumes? I'm not so sure. If it means experiencing the true God-given joys of this life by knowing Him, then maybe the Bible does clearly teach UR.

Todd

If the conclusion is that things would be very different, then one must wonder why the Bible does not clearly teach it if it is true.

Hi TK,

Perhaps this is another example of us wanting the Bible to speak to things which the authors didn't intend? It seems to me that our Western Tradition of Christendom has over-emphasized the afterlife (particularly Hell) whereas the authors throughout the Bible seemed much more focused on the here-and-now on earth.

Maybe what makes the difference is what we choose to focus on.

good points, Todd and Danny.

that being said, how do you think things would be different (now) if lets say from the 1700s on UR was the dominant accepted view and ET was rarely heard of?

TK

TK wrote:good points, Todd and Danny.

that being said, how do you think things would be different (now) if lets say from the 1700s on UR was the dominant accepted view and ET was rarely heard of?

TK

TK,

I would think that if people realized that the focus of Jesus' teaching was about this life rather than the after-life they might be less proned to be judgmental and more proned to be loving. It seems to me that the belief in ET tends to promote a feeling of "us-them" instead of "we're all in this together".

Todd

.

how do you think things would be different (now) if lets say from the 1700s on UR was the dominant accepted view and ET was rarely heard of?

I would like to speculate about this. I suspect that, if universalism were the dominant view in the church, that, within a short time, the church would be smaller—but none the poorer. In this present life, I think, the majority of carnal people will always be looking out for themselves. If they heard the universalist message, most of them would reason, "If I will be saved anyway, someday, I will gladly take my chances and live for myself now, rather than for God." Thus they would demonstrate that they really don't love God—only themselves. However, since the message of eternal torment has been dominant, these people who don't love God any the more for it (after all, who, if they do not love the universalist's God, could possibly find the eternal torment God more lovable?) would have no reason to fool themselves (and us) by pretending to have God in their concerns.

Many of these people have been frightened, by the threat of eternal torment, to make a minimalist, verbal commitment to Christianity, just to hedge their bets. These people can hardly be called "Christians" any more than if they had stayed outside the church under universalist teaching. In my opinion, the church is not supposed to be populated with non-Christians. Their presence confers no benefit to the interests of the church, and is (I believe) a great detriment. It may be reassuring for us, by seeing full pews on Sunday morning, to be deceived into thinking we are among saints, but deception typically leads to disillusionment. I would much rather know what I am dealing with in the crowd with whom I fellowship.

If universalist preaching had prevailed (not that I am saying it should, but just answering the hypothetical question), I suspect that church's loss of the fake Christians, who currently pretend to be lovers of God for the sake of fire insurance, would be partially made-up for by the inclusion of people who do not currently love the God that the church has advertised, but who would love a God who was said to be a lot like Jesus. Thus, there would be fewer fake saints, and probably more real ones in the church. That is my speculation.

You know, I have been saying here and on the air for some time that we should be equally eager to serve God whether there is a hell to avoid or not, and I actually was surprised to find my statements treated here by some as if they were controversial. I guess I have assumed that all real Christians were of the same mind—namely God-centered. The conviction that the appeal of "salvation" is not so much to be saved "from" something as to be saved "for" God has resided in me since the early seventies. I recently realized that my convictions on this point, and the similar convictions of most of the Christians I knew in the seventies, had been partially informed by a famous sermon by Paris Reidhead (a friend of A.W. Tozer's, who preached Tozer's funeral). The semon we had all heard in the seventies was not the Tozer funeral sermon, but another, called "Ten Shekels and a Shirt." This message can still be heard at sermonindex.org, and is still very influential. Reidhead challenged his hearers to do missionary work for God-centered motives, rather than humanistic motives. He told a story that inspired us all thirty-five years ago, and still inspires. I found a transcript of that story from his sermon, and though I assume it is familiar to many here, I thought I would paste it below for the convenience of others who might not otherwise go looking for it:

Two young Moravians heard of an island in the West Indies where an atheist British owner had 2000 to 3000 slaves. And the owner had said, "No preacher, no clergyman, will ever stay on this island. If he's ship wrecked we'll keep him in a separate house until he has to leave, but he's never going to talk to any of us about God, I'm through with all that nonsense." Three thousand slaves from the jungles of Africa brought to an island in the Atlantic and there to live and die without hearing of Christ.

Two young Moravians heard about it. They sold themselves to the British planter and used the money they received from their sale, for he paid no more than he would for any slave, to pay their passage out to his island for he wouldn't even transport them. As the ship left its' pier in the river at Hamburg and was going out into the North Sea carried with the tide, the Moravians had come from Herrenhut to see these two lads off, in their early twenties. Never to return again, for this wasn't a four year term, they sold themselves into life time slavery. Simply that as slaves, they could be as Christians where these others were. The families were there weeping, for they knew they would never see them again. And they wondered why they were going and questioned the wisdom of it. As the gap widened and the housings had been cast off and were being curled up there on the pier, and the young boys saw the widening gap, one lad with his arm linked through the arm of his fellow, raised his hand and shouted across the gap the last words that were heard from them, they were these, "MAY THE LAMB THAT WAS SLAIN RECEIVE THE REWARD OF HIS SUFFERING!"

This became the call of Moravian missions. And this is the only reason for being, That the Lamb that was slain may receive the reward of His suffering!

I'm going to say to you dear friend if you're out here without Christ, you come to Jesus Christ and serve Him as long as you live whether you go to Hell at the end of the way BECAUSE HE IS WORTHY!

I say to you Christian friend you come to the cross and join Him in union, in death, and enter into all the meaning of death to self in order that HE can have glory. I say to you dear Christian if you do not know the fullness of the Holy Ghost, come and present your body a living sacrifice, and let Him fill you so that He can have the purpose for His coming fulfilled in you and get glory through your life. IT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET OUT OF GOD, IT'S WHAT'S HE IS GOING TO GET OUT OF YOU.

Let's be done, once and for all, with utilitarian Christianity that makes God a means, instead of the glorious END that He is...let's come and cast ourselves at the feet of the nail pierced Son of God and tell Him that we're going to obey Him, and love Him, and serve Him, as long as we live BECAUSE HE IS WORTHY!

I agree with Reidhead that Jesus purchased something of which He is currently being deprived, in the lives of most people. We evangelize them because we are on His side, and can not stand to see Him cheated of what He has paid for.

Steve,

You wrote:

(after all, who, if they do not love the universalist's God, could possibly find the eternal torment God more lovable?)

But would you love Him as much if your concept of "ET" is correct and judgement is final? If not, wouldn't you be judging God? When I hear people say the God of the Calvinist is a monster, I shudder inside; I would be fearful if I said that, and pray I never have in a careless moment. However it turns out, praise God for He is just!

Another thing I puzzle over is why universalists take the statements about hell more literally than traditionalist thinkers do. Isn't "outer darkness", being "cast out", and separation a more frequent motif?

I realize, as John wrote, "God is love", but are we sure of what that means? How many times is He referred to as "love" compared to the thousands of times He is referred to as Lord?

God bless, Homer

I realize, as John wrote, "God is love", but are we sure of what that means? How many times is He referred to as "love" compared to the thousands of times He is referred to as Lord?


UR or CU is glad to acknowledge both with no difficulty because a Lord who loves us will do what is best for his creation which means whatever justice entails, it has a purpose and a plan all directed toward having God's will accomplished.






People say UR is not clear in the bible but some things are clear but we see it through our grids,

God's will is that none should perish
God will accomplish his will
Jesus is the Savior of the world
Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess Jesus is Lord

These are plain statements , perhaps they are to plain to be believed?