Reading All of Scripture

Reading Scripture is one thing. Building a sound Biblical theology is another. 
I enjoy the challenge of forming a sound theological position on many Biblical topics and spend hours and hours in my retirement engaged in the pursuit of a clearer understanding of God, his purpose for his creation, and his dealings with us.

The fact that many different theologies can be derived from the same portions of Scripture surely demonstrates the extent of that challenge. How many books are written debating and contesting different theologies? How many Bible Colleges teach opposing theologies? How many different churches espouse different "statements of faith"?

With regard to the extravagant grace of God theme of this BLOG, and my website, it is disappointing that this particular view of Scripture is not believed by the majority of mainstream churches and theologians.

For example, the mainstream believes the eternal judgement/punishment/torment verses like

Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.
[Matthew 25 : 46  NIV]

as applying to those who end their time on this planet as unbelievers are foundational, the starting point, and dismiss or explain away the salvation of the world verses like

For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him [Christ], and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
[Colossians 1 : 19, 20  NIV]

that challenge them.

This BLOG does the opposite. It believes the salvation of the world verses like

God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people's sins against them.
[2 Corinthians 5 : 19  NIV]

are consistent with the extravagant grace of a loving, sovereign God and then explains, rather than dismisses or ignores, the judgement/punishment verses like

Anyone whose name was not found in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
[Revelation 20 : 15  NIV]

as part of the process God uses to achieve that salvation result.

Clearly your starting point is vital to a correct theology; but so is your willingness to address and explain how other verses, that seem to challenge that theological position, might in fact be part of it.

Most of the posts on this BLOG over the past 15 years or so have promoted and explained the salvation of the world verses in various ways, but posts discussing the verses which might seem to oppose this view are also included. 

Indeed a whole series of 13 posts here titled "Response to Universal Reconciliation Opposition", together with Chapter 5 in "The Really Good News About God" and the Judgement and Questions sections on the IBTechservices.com.au website, all address opposing views and seemingly opposing verses rather than ignore or dismiss them.

I am open to any polite dialogue/debate in the Comments section of any post on the BLOG should readers feel there are some opposing verses or ideas that have not be given due consideration or BLOG space.

I might not have answers to all the questions that may be asked, but I have great confidence in the love, grace and sovereignty of the God I serve to achieve his purpose for all of his creation.

This is a good and acceptable thing before our savior God, who intends all human beings to be saved and to come to a full knowledge of the truth.
[1 Timothy 2 : 3, 4  DBH]

Blessings, Barry 

The Case of Adolf Hitler

Most people, including Christians, believe that Hitler should pay severely for his crimes against God and humanity. "God's justice demands it," they say. "Burn him in hell forever", "toss him in hell and throw away the key" and "the worst you can think of is too good for him" are commonly heard expressions.

The Christians in this group would probably change their verdict completely if they discovered that Hitler, on his death bed, repented of his sins and found faith in Christ as Saviour.

Their previous stern judgment would change to rejoicing and celebration - as long as Hitler came to this point BEFORE he died.
 
What about if he came to this point immediately after he died and was confronted with the same Jesus who confronted Paul on the road to Damascus? 
"Too late," most of them would say.
 
I don't think the God of love and mercy would agree that one minute would make such a huge difference to a person's ultimate relationship with him.  I don't think God's love for any of us, including Hitler, changes when our time on this planet is finished.  He is still the prodigal Father waiting with open arms for his wayward children to return.

Where do we get such horrid pictures of a mean, vengeful God when the Bible describes a loving, forgiving and merciful Father who sent his Son to be the Saviour of the whole world?

Indeed, I can't help thinking that if God did torment Hitler forever, or annihilate him, then God would be acting the same way Hitler did.  And that from the One whom Jesus said is our model of kindness and mercy?

It's hard to figure how Christians who have been forgiven their sins and reconciled to their heavenly Father want to limit what God will do for others whose circumstances and history are a bit different to theirs.

Universalist William Barclay

I AM A CONVINCED UNIVERSALIST

by William Barclay

Professor of Divinity and Biblical Criticism at Glasgow University and the author of many Biblical commentaries and books, including a translation of the New Testament, "Barclay New Testament," and "The Daily Study Bible Series."

---

I am a convinced universalist. I believe that in the end all men will be gathered into the love of God. In the early days Origen was the great name connected with universalism. I would believe with Origen that universalism is no easy thing. Origen believed that after death there were many who would need prolonged instruction, the sternest discipline, even the severest punishment before they were fit for the presence of God. Origen did not eliminate hell; he believed that some people would have to go to heaven via hell. He believed that even at the end of the day there would be some on whom the scars remained. He did not believe in eternal punishment, but he did see the possibility of eternal penalty. And so the choice is whether we accept God's offer and invitation willingly, or take the long and terrible way round through ages of purification.

Gregory of Nyssa offered three reasons why he believed in universalism. First, he believed in it because of the character of God. "Being good, God entertains pity for fallen man; being wise, he is not ignorant of the means for his recovery." Second, he believed in it because of the nature of evil. Evil must in the end be moved out of existence, "so that the absolutely non-existent should cease to be at all." Evil is essentially negative and doomed to non-existence. Third, he believed in it because of the purpose of punishment. The purpose of punishment is always remedial. Its aim is "to get the good separated from the evil and to attract it into the communion of blessedness." Punishment will hurt, but it is like the fire which separates the alloy from the gold; it is like the surgery which removes the diseased thing; it is like the cautery which burns out that which cannot be removed any other way.

But I want to set down not the arguments of others but the thoughts which have persuaded me personally of universal salvation.

First, there is the fact that there are things in the New Testament which more than justify this belief. Jesus said: "I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself" (John 12:32). Paul writes to the Romans: "God has consigned all men to disobedience that he may have mercy on all" (Rom. 11:32). He writes to the Corinthians: "As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:22); and he looks to the final total triumph when God will be everything to everyone (1 Cor. 15:28). In the First Letter to Timothy we read of God "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth," and of Christ Jesus "who gave himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim 2:4-6). The New Testament itself is not in the least afraid of the word all.

Second, one of the key passages is Matthew 25:46 where it is said that the rejected go away to eternal punishment, and the righteous to eternal life. The Greek word for punishment is kolasis, which was not originally 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 word for eternal is aionios. It means more than everlasting, for Plato - who may have invented the word - plainly says that a thing may be everlasting and still not be aionios. The simplest way to out it is that aionios cannot be used properly of anyone but God; it is the word uniquely, as Plato saw it, of God. Eternal punishment is then literally that kind of remedial punishment which it befits God to give and which only God can give.

Third, I believe that it is impossible to set limits to the grace of God. I believe that not only in this world, but in any other world there may be, the grace of God is still effective, still operative, still at work. I do not believe that the operation of the grace of God is limited to this world. I believe that the grace of God is as wide as the universe.

Fourth, I believe implicitly in the ultimate and complete triumph of God, the time when all things will be subject to him, and when God will be everything to everyone (1 Cor. 15:24-28). For me this has certain consequences. If one man remains outside the love of God at the end of time, it means that that one man has defeated the love of God - and that is impossible. Further, there is only one way in which we can think of the triumph of God. If God was no more than a King or Judge, then it would be possible to speak of his triumph, if his enemies were agonizing in hell or were totally and completely obliterated and wiped out. But God is not only King and Judge, God is Father - he is indeed Father more than anything else. No father could be happy while there were members of his family for ever in agony. No father would count it a triumph to obliterate the disobedient members of his family. The only triumph a father can know is to have all his family back home. The only victory love can enjoy is the day when its offer of love is answered by the return of love. The only possible final triumph is a universe loved by and in love with God.

---

[Quoted from William Barclay: A Spiritual Autobiography, pg 65-67, William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, 1977.]

John the Baptist's clue to the future?

Hi Rog
This one is really out of left field.  It dropped into my mind during my morning reading of Luke's gospel and I immediately wrote it down to think about.  However, I thought you might like to think about it with me.  What do you think?  I'm not sure what I think yet :-)

John the Baptist's Clue to the Future?

Luke 3 : 16 - 17

"Jesus will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and fire," said John.
What did he mean?
Although the crowd was unlikely to fully understand, we have the advantage of rear vision.

Jesus was Israel's promised Messiah. He had come to bring them the salvation God had promised.
Salvation has two components - judgement and forgiveness.
Judgement brings conviction of sin and repentance, immediately or sometime later.
When judgement achieves its objective, forgiveness is received and reconciliation with God enjoyed.

As John said, judgement was to be effected by a baptism with the Holy Spirit or with fire.
In Israel's case, only a relative few were convicted of their sin by the ministry of the Holy Spirit through Jesus and the apostles, and so few repented, received forgiveness and enjoyed reconcilaition with God.
A profound example of this Holy Spirit baptism process is described in Acts 2.
However, the majority received judgement by fire in AD70, at the end of the age, when the nation was destroyed.

So a baptism by the Holy Spirit was effected first, and, since that didn't bring conviction and repentance, a subsequent baptism by fire was used.

Notice also how John further illustrates this process using the wheat-chaff example.
The wheat will be gathered into the barn, but the chaff will be burnt up by fire.

Although this was John speaking directly to the nation of Israel in the first century AD, I wonder if this principle, which was employed at the end of the old covenant age, will also be used at the end of the new covenant age(s).

During the New Covenant age(s), the Holy Spirit will continue to bring judgement to humankind, both Jews and Gentiles, through the ministry of Christians and through direct spiritual revelation.

Those who are convicted of their sin and repent, will receive forgiveness and be reconciled to God.

This will again be a minority of humankind, by the looks of things.
The majority will leave this planet unreconciled to God and heading for a baptism of fire.

John the Apostle (not the Baptist) in the Revelation calls this the lake of fire.

This baptism of fire is to bring formerly unresponsive and rebellious people to repentance, so they too will receive forgiveness and reconciliation at the end of the ages.

The lake of fire is not torturous punishment for ever, as many assume, but is forever available to ensure all are brought to repentance so God can have mercy on all, as Paul informs us in Romans 11.

So eventually, one way or the other, by Holy Spirit or by fire, God will be all in all, having reconciled all to himself through Jesus Christ.

needs to be rewritten for web, and reposted