"If God is Love"

[James]

The topic above is the title of a book by Phillip Gulley. I am about half way through with the reading. There is much to like in the theology revealed in the book and much I believe, but there is one big point of contention. Gulley is a Quaker Universalist. I have no quarrel with the Quaker. I do have disagreements/reservations about the Universalist. I have always believed that grace is free. All we have to do is accept it w/o reservation, but we do have to accept it. In Gulley's belief, all humans are being saved through God's grace whether or not they are Christian or Atheist or any belief in between.

I'm not having a crisis of faith here, but I am interested in comments from you about universalism, especially if you are familiar with Gulley and his specific belief system.

[Dave Roberts]

I am not familiar with Gulley's book. If there is a person on this board who is, it will be Haruo.

[Sandy]

Well, hold up just a minute, Dave.

If you want to understand specifically what Phillip Gulley believes when it comes to universalism, you need to read If Grace is True: Why God Will Save Every Person, by Phillip Gulley and James Mulholland. That one, along with Gulley's If the Church Were Christian: Rediscovering the Values of Jesus are very well written, soundly documented, including scripture explained and supported from their perspective.

I can't speak for Gulley and Mulholland, but from having read their work, including the one you are discussing, I think their response would be to say that having to "accept grace" would be a condition which would then nullify it as being grace. I must admit that the way they write, and state their theological perspectives, makes me re-think and study to confirm my own position, and I must also say that I have changed my mind about a lot of what they've addressed, particularly when it comes to the practice of the core values of Christian faith as Jesus is recorded as stating them.

Gulley's position is not unique among Quakers, but it's also not common. It's hard to put Quakers on the same theological spectrum as we do most Protestants and Evangelicals because they just don't fit. Their interpretation of Biblical faith is something that the plainly, and rather intensely, characterize as simplicity, integrity, peace, community, equality and stewardship, which makes them look quite conservative. However, in the practice of those values, they are also quite intense, intentional, and they go way beyond where most Christians stop and draw conclusions. It's a position of "do something about it" rather than stand in condemnation and judgement, so rather than making a fuss about legislation regarding abortion rights, for example, or "taking a stand", Quakers simply see the need in the person who has either been through an abortion or contemplating one as something to which they need to commit their resources and energy to meet. So when it comes to social justice, war, racism, and other hot button issues that also put people into categories, the Quakers appear to be way over to the left liberal. Those are things which resonate with me, to the point where I've investigated other aspects of Quaker faith, such as their worship, and the theological perspectives within Quakerism, and I'm comfortable enough with it at this point to attend a Quaker meeting. In fact, it's probably only a family consideration that keeps me from joining it as a member.

Gulley is seen, even among many Quakers, as being to the left. But while Quakers disagree on many things, disagreement over theology does not very often result in exclusion or expulsion.

[Tim Bonney]

While I believe in free grace, I've never been able to cross the line into universalism because I also believe in free will and that God doesn't violate our free will. Methodists (and American Baptists largely I think) believe in the availability of salvation for all without a guarantee that everyone will receive.

[James]

Thanks for the quick replies. The other two books Sandy mentioned are on my reading list. This whole thing started with our first big occasion in our new building. Dr. Gulley is on a speaking tour and agreed to come to Hampton to speak in our new fellowship hall which seat 400 for a sit and listen type of event. The place was almost full. He spoke of his growing up and had us laughing almost constantly. He also preached last Sunday. On both occasions he mentioned his universalism.

Sandy, I do not see that our having to accept grace denies the reality of grace. If someone wants to give us something, it will not be ours unless we accept the gift. My father went to a Georgia Tech football game and took me along back in the 50s. He always had two blocks of season tickets. One set was for his use. The other was to comp employees or potential customers. On this day, he had no takers for the other block so he had them in hand when we walked toward the stadium gate. As we walked, Dad noticed five army enlisted men sitting on the curb of the street looking glum. He walked up behind them and to each in turn he held out a ticket. They had their back to him which was the point for Dad. Each in turn took a ticket from Dad's hand. They did not reject the gift. They took it and presumably enjoyed a great game won by the home team. The point is they had to accept the gift in order to benefit from it.

[James]

Timothy, I did not overlook your response. I just had to go to supper. I agree with you on grace. Some Southern Baptists still do. Not all of them are Calvinist. The Kentucky Baptist Convention at its last meeting put together a panel discussion of predestination and free grace, in part, to try to try to head off a schism between the two parties of the convention.

[Tim Bonney]

[Sandy]

[Haruo]

[KeithE]

Isn’t Gulley great. I’ve read most (maybe all) of his books including the Harmony Series. Sandy is right that If Grace is True: Why God Will Save Every Person, by Phillip Gulley and James Mulholland is the most direct discussion of universalism.

As for universalism, I hope it is true but not counting on it. There is plenty of biblical support for it (but probably not as much as for the traditional some-will-be-saved, some-will-suffer-eternal-torment views). Another possibility is annihilationism which simply says God will only grant eternal life to those that have accepted Him while leaving those that don’t alone (dead, unconscious but not in eternal torment in hell).

Haven’t a real clue which is correct, but I do hope for universalism.

William Barclay was a universalist. The best scholarly book that have ever read on the subject is , by Thomas Talbot. I guess this a second edition of book as of Nov 14 which I think I’ll order.

[John Sneed]

I am a Calvinist. We don't do free will or universalism. But then, y'all knew that.

John

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed; It is disappointing to find that Gully is a life time Hoosier, but not surprising to find him listed as a distinguished graduate of CTS, in Indianapolis.

[Haruo]

[Tim Bonney]

[James]

Tim, I think you and I are in total agreement on free will. Maybe you and I should make a pilgrimage to Appalachia and find a Free Will Universalist Baptist Church and check those folks out.

[Tim Bonney]

[John Sneed]

Harou,

John Calvin was a gifted theologian and teacher. He is not Jesus Christ. Your implication that Calvinists hold John Calvin to be equal to Christ is simple viciousness and spite. I rarely agree with anything posted in these forums but I have come to expect better from the regulars who post here. But that is me.

John

[Haruo]

[James]

Haruo, leave it in. I almost know what you are talking about. More for me to think on.

[Tim Bonney]

I'm sure Haruo didn't mean to imply anyone thinking Calvin was Jesus. But I do find that as a now Methodist some people claim that Methodists talk about John Wesley more than Jesus. So I get the concern.

Hauro, I'd not characterize universalism as "heresy." I just don't think it works that way.

[Sandy]

I've lived in an area where Reformed Christians exist in fairly decent numbers for about six years now, and have worked with a number of families in a Christian school setting. They take their theology pretty seriously. I got Haruo's tongue in cheek remark, though.

I think I'm on board with free grace, always there, and intended by God to be received by all, and free will, which is the image of God in us. And I think salvation is both the receiving of grace in a moment of repentance and restoration, and the continued receiving of it across the rest of your life. But I think that, because its grace, once received, it can't be taken away, or it's not grace. And likewise, I don't think it can be given back, and since it's grace, it's not a violation of free will. That's probably closer to universalism than those who believe you can fall from it.

I don't think holding a universalist view is heresy.

[Haruo]

I think God knows how to bring each of his erring children, Adam's progeny, to repentance, or how to use Creative Accounting techniques (God being after all, the consummate Creator and the final Judge), such as accounting faith as righteousness, to satisfy his own righteousness and fulfill his own salvific intent. But how exactly this is to be brought about I don't know. I don't think anyone "in his right mind" would deliberately choose to condemn himself to eternal punishment, and I think God is more merciful than I can imagine, so I find it blasphemous to believe in ultimate endless punishment. I vote for annihilation of whatever is ungodly in us, and salvation and perfection of what is of God in us. I don't believe anyone is completely devoid of that which is of God, and which therefore shall and must be saved.

[Tim Bonney]

Haruo I don't believe in an eternal hell either. Eventually any punishment that is eternal will be unjust. But I believe God's gift of free will just will not end up with everyone in relationship with God. That is our loss but I see in as a consequence of giving us choice. Not everyone will choose well even in the most loving gracious situation.

Because I view (and my new faith tradition views) the Christian life as a journey and not an event you can also choose to walk off the path if that is what you want to do. You can also choose to walk off the path and never come back. So "once saved always saved" doesn't work for me. That isn't new. I've not believe in OSAS in probably more than 20 years. Being a free will Baptist probably made it easier for me to be where I am now.

[James]

Now we can all be "No Heller" Primitive Baptist Universalist. They do not believe in a literal hell. They believe in a hell created by each one of us. The more we sin-the bigger more severe our personal hell is.

[Haruo]

I have been in the hell the No-Hellers preach, and God saved me from it. Jesus releases the damned from their cells. To do what Timothy suggests (i.e., of their own free will, being in their right mind, to condemn themselves to what feels like an eternity of torment) does not seem to me a possibility. I think he overstates the power of the creature and understates the salvific creativity of the creator. But of course we'll have to wait to find out.