Month: October 2016

Responses, Uncategorized

6 Myths Christians Actually Need to Shatter About Hell (A Response to Lesli White and Beliefnet)

In a recent Beliefnet article titled “6 Myths Christians Need to Shatter about Hell,” author Lesli White makes a case for the doctrine of eternal torment by rebutting six myths about hell.1The article is actually from a few months back, but I and others still see the Beliefnet page pop up on Facebook and so the conversation is apparently still going. Needless to say, we at Rethinking Hell disagree with White’s conclusion. The doctrine of eternal torment in hell, frequently called “traditionalism” or the “traditional view,” is not biblical. Rather, the Bible teaches that only those in Christ will have life in any sense of the word. The unsaved will die the second death and be destroyed forever, unable to know either joy or pain because they will be gone forever.

Below are six myths that we really do need to shatter. These all have some connection to the Beliefnet article, although some are more loosely connected than others. Continue reading “6 Myths Christians Actually Need to Shatter About Hell (A Response to Lesli White and Beliefnet)” →

 

References
￪1 The article is actually from a few months back, but I and others still see the Beliefnet page pop up on Facebook and so the conversation is apparently still going.
Book Reviews, Guest Author, Systematic Theology, Universalism

Book Review: The Evangelical Universalist

Gregory MacDonald. The Evangelical Universalist (Second Edition). Eugene: Cascade, 2012.*

In 2006, then editor for Paternoster, now with Wipf & Stock, Robin Parry published the first edition of The Evangelical Universalist (hereafter simply TEU) under the pseudonym Gregory MacDonald (combining Gregory of Nyssa and George MacDonald, both notable theologians who were universalists). The goal was to present a case for universalism which was compatible with evangelical commitments to the Gospel and biblical authority. In the preface to the second edition, Parry describes the reasoning behind the pseudonym, and the reasoning behind coming clean that he was the author of this volume. At the time (and to a signficant extent still now, a decade later) being a universalist was taboo in evangelical circles. Perhaps in the so-called “liberal mainline”, but certainly no conservative evangelical Christian who accepts the authority of Scripture could hold this position… right? Parry did not want to raise questions or criticisms for his employer, but, after a few years of blogging under the pseudonym, and interacting with various individuals, he did “come out” in 2009, and in 2012, Wipf & Stock/Cascade published the second edition, with a new preface by Parry, a forward by Oliver Crisp of Fuller Theological Seminary, as well as a few new appendices addressing concerns arising since the first edition, including a response to those who challenged his criticisms of Calvinism, a response to the Rob Bell Love Wins controversy, and a study guide for groups wishing to interact with the book together. Continue reading “Book Review: The Evangelical Universalist” →

Uncategorized

Don’t Be Afraid to Disagree with Great Theologians on Hell (Especially Since You Already Disagree with Them on Other Doctrines Anyway)

In discussions about hell, sometimes an appeal to personality and authority is made. After all, conditionalism is certainly a minority view, and so conditionalists find themselves disagreeing with many highly venerated theologians and leaders of the Christian faith throughout its history. To someone who isn’t really thinking about it, it can be rhetorically powerful to call out someone who would be so arrogant as to challenge great men of the faith on the topic of hell.1This is not the same are the simple numbers argument, the argument that surely the Holy Spirit wouldn’t allow so many Christians throughout time couldn’t be wrong about hell (the way he did with salvation by faith alone vs. works, according to Protestantism…). This numbers argument can be coupled with the authority argument (“surely this many great men throughout time couldn’t be wrong about hell!”), but the authority argument is in many ways its own element. It can also give some people pause to say that this or that theologian (or many of them) whom they highly respect was wrong on such an important matter of theology.

However, conditionalists don’t even have to make a good case that any given theologian or group of theologians was wrong in order to diffuse this argument. We just need to remind everyone that people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Continue reading “Don’t Be Afraid to Disagree with Great Theologians on Hell (Especially Since You Already Disagree with Them on Other Doctrines Anyway)” →

 

References
￪1 This is not the same are the simple numbers argument, the argument that surely the Holy Spirit wouldn’t allow so many Christians throughout time couldn’t be wrong about hell (the way he did with salvation by faith alone vs. works, according to Protestantism…). This numbers argument can be coupled with the authority argument (“surely this many great men throughout time couldn’t be wrong about hell!”), but the authority argument is in many ways its own element.