Carlton Pearson

[SisterMoon]

Did anyone hear Carlton Pearson, a former big time charismatic evangelical preacher in Tulsa who has denounced hell? He was on This American Life on public radio. If you missed it, go to

thisamericanlife.org/

or download it this week from itunes.

Gosh, I just wish this guy had heard about the Catholic faith. Maybe there’s still hope. Any comments?

SisterMoon

 

[Jaypeeto4]

Pearson is teaching the heresy that all people, even if the died blaspheming and in horrific mortal sin, will, in the end, be in Heaven.

His rationale is that the blood of Christ is more powerful than all sins. While this is true, of course, it is equally true that human beings have the freedom to reject the grace of God offered to them and thus merit Hell.

Pearson’s movement is not of God and it won’t go very far.
It will snow some people, but not the majority.

We should pray for him, because I saw him interviewed and he is very genuine and sincere and really believes he is right about this.

Jaypeeto4 (aka Jaypeeto3)

 

[Zooey]

Sadly, this goes beyond one man. There are a growing number of people who are embracing this idea…
The saddest thing, of course, is that the more this is taught, the more people are in danger of going to hell.
A lot of prayer is needed, for sure!!!

 

[ahimsaman72]

Did anyone hear Carlton Pearson, a former big time charismatic evangelical preacher in Tulsa who has denounced hell? He was on This American Life on public radio. If you missed it, go to

thisamericanlife.org/

or download it this week from itunes.

Gosh, I just wish this guy had heard about the Catholic faith. Maybe there’s still hope. Any comments?

SisterMoon

He isn’t the first one to teach this.

It began to be taught in the late 1700’s in England and later came to America. Up until the early 1960’s there was the Christian Universalists who were a small but growing group of universalists. They merged with the Unitarians in the early 60’s and became the UU’s. They have since pretty much forgotten their early heritage of Christian thought.

this is now a growing movement again among evangelicals. Just notice:

Christian Universalism

and also: Tentmaker

I know others in the movement as well.

Peace…

 

[Ahimsa]

The Generous Orthodoxy blog (17 Nov. 2006 entry) gives more details of Pearson’s theology. A blog-contributor also did an interview with another evangelical universalist (see “Leaving Munster”, below).
*
As promised weeks* ago, I’m finally getting round to posting my interview with Gregory Macdonald, the author of The Evangelical Universalist. I’ll post it in a couple of parts as there’s so much content, but it’s all good. In short, the aim of The Evangelical Universalist is clear - to demonstrate that there is no inconsistency between being an Evangelical and a Universalist. I think Gregory achieves that aim commendably. I’ll post a few reflections, including an assessment of the book, following the interview. However, I should mention up-front that one of my criticisms is that the book assumes too much from the reader, in terms of an understanding of the topic. Ironically, the same could be said of this interview, that reads more like a conversation between people who’ve read the book, than an interview on behalf of those who haven’t.

Either way, enjoy!

**
Gregory, firstly, thank you for agreeing to this interview. **
**Let me start by asking you, When, why and how did you become a Universalist? (Was there one particular Biblical passage, logical argument or author that finally clinched it for you?)

**
I became a universalist about five years ago. It was not an instant conversion but a slow process drawn out over two years. It was not until about five years ago that I felt able to say that I believed in universal salvation.

The real roots of my journey began, I think, reading William Lane Craig’s attempt to defend hell (Craig is a first rate philosopher who I like very much). I really wanted to find his arguments convincing and I was terribly worried by the fact that they did not seem to me to carry much weight. So ironically here was I, a believer in the traditional view of hell, reading an agument defending what I already believed and coming away concerned by how weak the case seemed to be. So I read more defences of hell (at this point I had not thought to question my interpretation of Scripture so all the things I read were philosophical books and articles.) It might sound weird but I really wanted to be convinced that the traditional view of hell worked - it was an important element in my faith - but the more I read the less convinced I became.

Eventually I got to the point that I believed that God could have saved everyone without violating their freewill if that was what he wanted. I also believed that God would not do this and many would be damned forever. This conjunction of beliefs (God could save all but won’t) brought me major spiritual problems and I found it hard to believe that God really loved the world (only the elect). I found worship difficult.
It was Keith DeRose’s online article on universalism and the Bible which first raised the thought that perhaps God not only could save all but also that he would save all but I was not very convinced by his arguments…

So I spent the next two years reading and thinking and gradually my confidence grew that it was possible to conceive of a biblical version of universalism. I still believe that people go to hell but I believe that all will be redeemed from hell.

 

[ahimsaman72]

The Generous Orthodoxy blog (17 Nov. 2006 entry) gives more details of Pearson’s theology. A blog-contributor also did an interview with another evangelical universalist (see “Leaving Munster”, below).

As promised* weeks* ago, I’m finally getting round to posting my interview with Gregory Macdonald, the author of The Evangelical Universalist. I’ll post it in a couple of parts as there’s so much content, but it’s all good. In short, the aim of The Evangelical Universalist is clear - to demonstrate that there is no inconsistency between being an Evangelical and a Universalist. I think Gregory achieves that aim commendably. I’ll post a few reflections, including an assessment of the book, following the interview. However, I should mention up-front that one of my criticisms is that the book assumes too much from the reader, in terms of an understanding of the topic. Ironically, the same could be said of this interview, that reads more like a conversation between people who’ve read the book, than an interview on behalf of those who haven’t.

Either way, enjoy!

**Gregory, firstly, thank you for agreeing to this interview. **
Let me start by asking you, When, why and how did you become a Universalist? (Was there one particular Biblical passage, logical argument or author that finally clinched it for you?)

I became a universalist about five years ago. It was not an instant conversion but a slow process drawn out over two years. It was not until about five years ago that I felt able to say that I believed in universal salvation.

The real roots of my journey began, I think, reading William Lane Craig’s attempt to defend hell (Craig is a first rate philosopher who I like very much). I really wanted to find his arguments convincing and I was terribly worried by the fact that they did not seem to me to carry much weight. So ironically here was I, a believer in the traditional view of hell, reading an agument defending what I already believed and coming away concerned by how weak the case seemed to be. So I read more defences of hell (at this point I had not thought to question my interpretation of Scripture so all the things I read were philosophical books and articles.) It might sound weird but I really wanted to be convinced that the traditional view of hell worked - it was an important element in my faith - but the more I read the less convinced I became.

Eventually I got to the point that I believed that God could have saved everyone without violating their freewill if that was what he wanted. I also believed that God would not do this and many would be damned forever. This conjunction of beliefs (God could save all but won’t) brought me major spiritual problems and I found it hard to believe that God really loved the world (only the elect). I found worship difficult.
It was Keith DeRose’s online article on universalism and the Bible which first raised the thought that perhaps God not only could save all but also that he would save all but I was not very convinced by his arguments…

So I spent the next two years reading and thinking and gradually my confidence grew that it was possible to conceive of a biblical version of universalism. I still believe that people go to hell but I believe that all will be redeemed from hell.

I agree with the author. And, Origen believed the same.

Hell is a purifying state wherein the person is purified from their sins and lifted out of their desperate situation by the grace of God and according to his good will.

Peace…

 

[Peter_DiMitri]

What a convenient belief.

You’re going to end up in heaven no matter what you do.

So… you may as well do whatever you want!

Okay, everyone, let’s go party and sin as much as we can… it turns out we’re all in the clear!

 

[Ahimsa]

What a convenient belief.

You’re going to end up in heaven no matter what you do.

Not quite. If you keep rejecting God, then ‘no heaven for you’. Universalism says that you are free to keep rejecting God, for as long as you want, and you are free to suffer the pain of separation from God, for as long as you want – you are free to live ‘in hell’ for as long as you want! But Universalism also says that God’s mercy would still be working, even in the midst of your rejection, so that if/when you get sick and tired of resisting Him, God would treat you like the father treated his prodigal son.

Entering into heaven requires a change of thought, feeling, and action – in short, repentance. Universalism says that the door to repentance is never closed.

Sure, you can think that this means that you will always have a ‘second chance’, so that you won’t have to repent now, but rather repent sometime in the future. But this would be an un-intelligent approach. The longer you keep putting off the inevitable, the more pain and suffering you create for yourself. The best approach is to repent this minute, this very second, and therefore eliminate the un-necessary painful experience of separation from God.

High-School students know that they can finish high-school in four years, or five years, or maybe even in 20 or 30 years (through GED or whatnot). The door to finishing high-school will always be open. But Jesus came to warn us that the time to finish high-school is now.

 

[Rocky]

At Mass yesterday, our priest told the following story. A saint (he did not mention which saint) had a vision where her guardian angel came and asked if she would like to see Heaven and Hell. She said yes. The angel asked which state she wanted to see first, and she replied “Hell.”

Her vision of hell was not what she expected. It was a beautiful place! With many mansions and a large banquet hall! And in the banquet hall there was every kind of delicious food and drink. But the people sitting around the table were moaning and uttering terrible things. She wondered why until she looked closer to the people. She saw that everyone had arms that were 5 feet long, but no one had elbows. So even though they were holding forks laden with food and cups filled with drink, the people were unable to bring the food and drink to their mouths, and so they were starving!

Next she was transported to heaven. It was a beautiful place! With many mansions and a large banquet hall! And in the banquet hall there was every kind of delicious food and drink. But the people there were smiling and happy. She saw that everyone there had arms that were 5 feet long, and that no one had elbows. But as the people were holding their forks laden with food and cups filled with drink, they were feeding one another across the table. So they were satisfied!

Heaven is ours—waiting for us. We need to be able to feed others, and just as importantly, be willing to let others feed us. When we get to heaven will we be willing to feed our greatest enemy and let him feed us?

 

[Peter_DiMitri]

Not quite. If you keep rejecting God, then ‘no heaven for you’. Universalism says that you are free to keep rejecting God, for as long as you want, and you are free to suffer the pain of separation from God, for as long as you want – you are free to live ‘in hell’ for as long as you want! But Universalism also says that God’s mercy would still be working, even in the midst of your rejection, so that if/when you get sick and tired of resisting Him, God would treat you like the father treated his prodigal son.

Entering into heaven requires a change of thought, feeling, and action – in short, repentance. Universalism says that the door to repentance is never closed.

Sure, you can think that this means that you will always have a ‘second chance’, so that you won’t have to repent now, but rather repent sometime in the future. But this would be an un-intelligent approach. The longer you keep putting off the inevitable, the more pain and suffering you create for yourself. The best approach is to repent this minute, this very second, and therefore eliminate the un-necessary painful experience of separation from God.

High-School students know that they can finish high-school in four years, or five years, or maybe even in 20 or 30 years (through GED or whatnot). The door to finishing high-school will always be open. But Jesus came to warn us that the time to finish high-school is now.

That still sounds like a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card used whenever you want it to be used. As soon as I decide I’ve had enough of misery, I get to go to heaven.

Your example of the GED is most prescient. The existence of the GED has lead increasing numbers of High School Students to believe that they don’t really need to complete school. So, God is an enabler?

Not only is it not really scriptural, it makes little sense. We are already seeing in modern culture that large groups of people don’t give a hoot about an abstract future – it’s the pleasures of today that captivate us. If this philosophy were true, then it just means that all the people sinning are actually doing the smart thing!

I somehow don’t think God works that way.

 

[christianley]

That still sounds like a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card used whenever you want it to be used. As soon as I decide I’ve had enough of misery, I get to go to heaven.

Your example of the GED is most prescient. The existence of the GED has lead increasing numbers of High School Students to believe that they don’t really need to complete school. So, God is an enabler?

Not only is it not really scriptural, it makes little sense. We are already seeing in modern culture that large groups of people don’t give a hoot about an abstract future – it’s the pleasures of today that captivate us. If this philosophy were true, then it just means that all the people sinning are actually doing the smart thing!

I somehow don’t think God works that way.

I’m not willing to reject the possibility that in the end everyone might be saved and that hell might be empty. At least I hope that is the case. I certainly am not in a position to state that anyone is in hell. God wills that everyone be saved. While it is entirely possible that some might reject his will, I think we can at least have a hope that nobody will. Some of the early Church Fathers seemed inclined to universal reconciliation (Gregory of Nyssa was one of them). Eastern Orthodoxy still leaves open the possibility of universal reconciliation. Is it likely that nobody will reject God – maybe not. Is it possible? I think so.

My biggest problem with Carlton Pearson is that a little reading of his writings has convinced me that he drifted toward a kind of secular humanist view of universalism more in line with Unitarian-Universalism than with Christian Universalism. Let’s all at least hope for a happy ending for everyone – that’s what we pray for often in mass. “Remember our brothers and sisters who have gone to their rest in the hope of rising again; bring them and all the departed into the light of your presence.”

 

[Ahimsa]

That still sounds like a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card used whenever you want it to be used.

Didn’t Jesus die on the cross, so that we could ‘get out of jail free’?

As soon as I decide I’ve had enough of misery, I get to go to heaven.

Not quite. Purification would be necessary.

Your example of the GED is most prescient. The existence of the GED has lead increasing numbers of High School Students to believe that they don’t really need to complete school. So, God is an enabler?

That’s why Jesus came: to tell us that we do need to finish school, and to warn us about our lack of employment opportunities if we don’t.

Not only is it not really scriptural, it makes little sense. We are already seeing in modern culture that large groups of people don’t give a hoot about an abstract future – it’s the pleasures of today that captivate us. If this philosophy were true, then it just means that all the people sinning are actually doing the smart thing!

I somehow don’t think God works that way.

The ‘pleasures’ that you speak of are actually forms of pain and suffering. People allow themselves to be captivated because they don’t realize that today’s pleasure contains within it tomorrow’s suffering. Universalism says that even though the door is always open for repentance, the law still remains ‘as you sow, so shall you reap’. The prodigal son was welcomed home, but the negative results of his past ‘party life’ will still be experienced. What people have forgotten are the inevitably painful results of seeking mere ‘pleasure’.

 

[christianley]

Didn’t Jesus die on the cross, so that we could ‘get out of jail free’?

Not quite. Purification would be necessary.

That’s why Jesus came: to tell us that we do need to finish school, and to warn us about our lack of employment opportunities if we don’t.

The ‘pleasures’ that you speak of are actually forms of pain and suffering. People allow themselves to be captivated because they don’t realize that today’s pleasure contains within it tomorrow’s suffering. Universalism says that even though the door is always open for repentance, the law still remains ‘as you sow, so shall you reap’. The prodigal son was welcomed home, but the negative results of his past ‘party life’ will still be experienced. What people have forgotten are the inevitably painful results of seeking mere ‘pleasure’.

Many universalists see everyone going through a kind of purgatory. They just widen the door to purgatory to more people than some conservative Catholics do. And of course many people who seem to commit mortal sin don’t qualify for all of the conditions of mortal sin as explained in the Catechism. There may indeed be people who reject God forever, but then again it doesn’t make any sense they would. I have heard it said that everyone will have a final choice to make just before they die as to who they will serve – God will hold out hope until the end for everyone. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me that a great many people in their dying breath finally turn to God – maybe even everyone. That’s my hope anyway.

Now is it smart to wait until that final breath to turn to God? I don’t think so – there are too many blessings from experiencing Christ right now for me to feel people who wait until the end experience as much joy in life as I do right now trying to live for Jesus.

 

[ahimsaman72]

What a convenient belief.

You’re going to end up in heaven no matter what you do.

So… you may as well do whatever you want!

Okay, everyone, let’s go party and sin as much as we can… it turns out we’re all in the clear!

Universalism doesn’t deny that judgement exists for those who are disobedient. The difference is that it’s not an eternal punishment. There will be punishing to be sure. But not an eternal punishment.

This view speaks to God’s justice and mercy.

Remember the story of the Prodigal Son?

God is always there to accept the willing repenter.

Peace…

 

[ahimsaman72]

That still sounds like a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card used whenever you want it to be used. As soon as I decide I’ve had enough of misery, I get to go to heaven.

Your example of the GED is most prescient. The existence of the GED has lead increasing numbers of High School Students to believe that they don’t really need to complete school. So, God is an enabler?

Not only is it not really scriptural, it makes little sense. We are already seeing in modern culture that large groups of people don’t give a hoot about an abstract future – it’s the pleasures of today that captivate us. If this philosophy were true, then it just means that all the people sinning are actually doing the smart thing!

I somehow don’t think God works that way.

It wouldn’t be smart to be disobedient and keep being punished for it. A really simple analogy is our children.

If you were a child and living with your parents and under their rules, would it make sense to keep disobeying, get grounded, disobey again, get grounded again, ad infinitum?

No, it makes sense to obey and be able to enjoy your life instead of being stuck in your room with no TV or radio for a month. That’s what Ahimsa is telling you.

What doesn’t make sense to me is expecting that God would punish a person eternally ad infinitum for a possibly 72 years of human life lived as best as one can, but with committing sins. How is that just? How is that reasonable?

Let me make this easy for you. The holier-than-thou attitude of those who point the finger at all us sinners out there should be pointing back to the accuser. People do stupid sinful things. Haven’t you?

I sure hope God’s mercy and justice are greater than yours.

Peace…

 

[ahimsaman72]

Many universalists see everyone going through a kind of purgatory. They just widen the door to purgatory to more people than some conservative Catholics do. And of course many people who seem to commit mortal sin don’t qualify for all of the conditions of mortal sin as explained in the Catechism. There may indeed be people who reject God forever, but then again it doesn’t make any sense they would. I have heard it said that everyone will have a final choice to make just before they die as to who they will serve – God will hold out hope until the end for everyone. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me that a great many people in their dying breath finally turn to God – maybe even everyone. That’s my hope anyway.

Now is it smart to wait until that final breath to turn to God? I don’t think so – there are too many blessings from experiencing Christ right now for me to feel people who wait until the end experience as much joy in life as I do right now trying to live for Jesus.

Great post! Insightful and logical. Thanks!

Peace…

 

[christianley]

Great post! Insightful and logical. Thanks!

Peace…

One of the books that has really influenced me is Hans Urs von Balthasar’s “Dare we hope “that all men be saved”?” He makes a good case for the hope that all might be saved without presuming that all will be saved. I understand he is one of the favorite theologians of Benedict XVI and was also greatly admired by John Paul II.

amazon.com/Dare-Hope-That-All-Saved/dp/0898702070/sr=8-1/qid=1164200157/ref=sr_1_1/002-5190568-4195241?ie=UTF8&s=books

 

[ahimsaman72]

One of the books that has really influenced me is Hans Urs von Balthasar’s “Dare we hope “that all men be saved”?” He makes a good case for the hope that all might be saved without presuming that all will be saved. I understand he is one of the favorite theologians of Benedict XVI and was also greatly admired by John Paul II.

amazon.com/Dare-Hope-That-All-Saved/dp/0898702070/sr=8-1/qid=1164200157/ref=sr_1_1/002-5190568-4195241?ie=UTF8&s=books

I didn’t know that. Thanks for the link!

Peace…