Moltmann, Barth and 3 Types of Universalism

 I've noticed a declining trend these days in regards to the identification of Universalism, and it's variants in the theological spectrum. Most people immediately leap to speculations involving "no hell" to "no atonement and no hell" and even utilizing the 'p' word; pluralism. Now there are certainly pluralists who consider all religions of equal standing, and some Universalists veer towards this viewpoint. However, within evangelicalism, there exist several stripes of this view.

For example a universalist could be an excusivist (ala Robert Peterson and the majority of evangelicals) or an inclusivist (ala Clark Pinnock). They could be Reformed or a Calvinist (Barth; yes I think Barth was a universalist) or a combination of Reformed and Arminian (Tom Talbott). When I was a universalist, I believed in the 4 points of Calvinism, with an Unlimited atonement (ala Arminianism). This logically lead me to universalism. What changed my mind is outside the scope of this post.

Needless to say, it is usually best to just ask a universalist their opinion and methodology. They will likely talk your ear off.

Jurgen Moltmann in his wonderful book "The Coming of God" lays out four varying positions in competition, with three of them being universalistic in varying ways.

1. Particularismus verus (true Particularism). Moltmann identifies this with Beza and Gomarus in 1618, and Augustine over a millennium before. He wraps it up in 'double predestination' and his critique of the view is that is made up of antitheses and juxtaposition. It is 'negative' salvation.

2. Universalismus hypotheticus (hypothetical Universalism). Jurgen suggests that Moyse Amyraut developed the idea of the general proclamation of the gospel, even though he foreknew that only some would be saved. God's intent is universal, but the outcome is particular.

3. Universalismus verus (true or real Universalism). Moltmann brings out the (in)famous Friedrich Schleiermacher, a Calvinist theologian. Schleiermacher, argue Moltmann, sees that the eschatological goal of God is universal salvation. The human being cannot eternally maintain his unbelief contrary to God's love. God rejects in order to elect.

4. Open Universalism. Here, Karl Barth fulfills Moltmann's example. God elects all men in Christ, and consequently, God's resolve is universal, whether you know it or not. However, Barth resists symmetry in his theology and does not embrace universalism because of his high view of God's freedom.

Moltmann's own theology is wrapped up in the Descent into Hell, and the need for reconciliation not only between God and humanity, but for humanity to be reconciled to itself. His experiences in the prison camps, where guards and slaves fought, would ultimately be undone in God's liberative love.

Much of this can be found in Moltmann, 235-255.

--Nick

Christians and the Identification of God

As the title may indicate, I spent a lot of time on my honeymoon reading. And doing other unimportant stuff. Mostly what I read was a book on Paul by Jerome Murphy-O'Connor and Jurgen Moltmann's The Crucified God. My wife compromised on the amount of literature I was allowed to bring, and believe me, choosing just two texts was like pulling several teeth.

But I digress.

Moltmann sees all Christian theology as attempting to answer why Jesus asked "my God my God why have you forsaken me?" He sees it as a glimpse into the nature of God, but also whether or not this proclamation is the end or the beginning.

Theodicy is a powerful fan of flame. It begins and spirals amidst abstractions and climaxes in a broad sense of physical -- even existential -- suffering. One's identity may be forged in the triumphs of life, but most people remember such wonderful experiences as they were: in times of being lost or forsaken. A theology without faith is a computer without a battery. One tug on the power supply and everything simply shuts down. Foundationally, when there is no such thing, it becomes a black hole.

Theology (or dogmatics) is an act of faith. According to Karl Barth, "Faith is the determination of human action by the being of the Church and therefore by Jesus Christ, by the gracious address of God to man. The summation of determination is bound up in the character of grace. Barth's point is a potent one, but Moltmann seems to see it as insufficient.

For Moltmann, suffering as a prison of war, suffering was as in your face as such a thing could be. Faith was forsaken as there was nothing there to retain. This, however, changes when a nailed forsaken Messiah is shown in his brokenness.

Identity is bound up, most often, in suffering and in trials. The mysticism of suffering is compared with other sufferings. Moltmann suggests, as did several in his prison camp, that Jesus found him in his suffering. It becomes not only a tangible reality to witness parallel suffering when one is stricken by man, but it also brings forth empathy and a genuine response; whether of anger or compassion.

In my experience, I haven't suffered in comparison to many people. I haven't had my finger nails removed by pliers, nor have I ever had boiling oil poured down my throat. Suffering has a sense of putting one in their place, but it also shifts focus to what really matters.

The brother and sister that feels forsaken. When the crucified God was hanging there, his cry of loneliness is a cry that everyone who has suffered is able to picture with ultimate clarity. God gave of himself to exemplify how God is for us and with us. When suffering is found, identity is not far behind.

When you identify with the crucified God, you identify with everyone else who has suffered. Empathy seems to be the slope towards reconciliation at that point, abstraction be damned. A world without suffering would befit only the eschaton. A world that is presently suffering showcases the need for such an end, an end to death, an end to suffering, an end to the forging of identity within pain and evil.

Thankfully, one hopes, the formation of identity within God and us doesn't cease upon the forsaken breath in our chests. Hopefully, with universal pleas, it begins thus.

Just some mere thoughts.

--Nick

Moltmann and The Liberation of the Cross

"It promises first of all the pain of repentance and fundamental change. It offers no recipe for success. But it brings a confrontation with the truth. It is not positive and constructive, but is in the fist instance critical and destructive. It does not bring man into a better harmony with himself and his environment, but into contradiction with himself and his environment. It does not create a home for him and integrate him into society, but makes him homeless and rootless, and liberates him in following Christ who was homeless and rootless. The 'religion of the cross', if faith on this basis can ever be called, does not elevate and edify in the usual sense, but scandalizes; and most of all it scandalizes one's 'co-religionists' in one's own circle. But by this scandal, it brings liberation into a world which is not free." 

--Jurgen Moltmann, "The Crucified God" pg39.

In thinking about Christology and working my way through the myriad of material, I was struck by Moltmann's quote above. I don't quite agree with all of it so I'll start with that.

I think in some ways, depending on context, the truth itself is a positive proposition. If one is incorrect, then certainly the truth can be devastating, but I wish to nuance this a bit. I think it depends on the level of falsehood within a certain viewpoint. There are certainly differences between Mormon and Evangelical Christians, but there would be greater differences between the lack of religion within certain European countries and the "americanized" Christianity most of us would fall into. I think it would be better to say something instead that the crucifixion can mean a whole host of things to one who is already familiar with the concept and one who has no conception of what they would concieve of as monotheism.

But that's more nitpicky on my part.

The biggest aspect of this that struck me was the idea of the cross as liberation. Moltmann sees Jesus' death as solidarity with all of humanity, dying a common and painful death like most of those who currently sleep, to borrow a Pauline term. It awakens us to new perspective and identification with those that are not only outside our circles, but also in that we can never see such ideals in the same light again.

It demands change and self-involvement with those that would rather be alone and afraid and isolated. It breaks down the social barriers that divide and instead proposes an entire unity within not only the church but with all humanity. Moltmann doesn't proof-text above, but I think Paul's letter to the Galatians is something that Jurgen would get giddy over right about now.

Consequently, this invites another dilemma in that the cross demands change, and this brings forth contradiction. We cannot live in such a way as we currently are when encountered by the Crucified God. This invokes freedom ἐν Χριστῷ.

Something has to give. 

--Nick

The Christology of Jurgen Moltmann

Karkkainen:

"Because the hope of resurrection goes back to the decisive victory of God in Christ over death, it encompasses and includes the hope of God's righteousness within history, yet it also transcends history. Interestingly enough, in contrast to Pannenberg, Moltmann refuses to subject the event of the resurrection to the scrutiny of historical-critical research, even though he obviously regards it as an event in time and space. He does so because the even of the resurrection calls into question the concept of history as it is conceived of within the limits of the modern scientific approach. The proper way to approach the resurrection is to connect it with the future eschatological hope; to believe in the reality of the resurection, one must let oneself be thrown into active hope."

 Karkkainen, Christology: A Global Introduction pg151.

Jurgen Moltmann Quote, "God Becomes Man"

“When God becomes man in Jesus of Nazareth, he not only enters into the finitude of man, but in his death on the cross also enters into the situation of man's godforsakenness. In Jesus he does not die the natural death of a finite being, but the violent death of the criminal on the cross, the death of complete abandonment by God. 

The suffering in the passion of Jesus is abandonment, rejection by God, his Father. God does not become a religion, so that man participates in him by corresponding religious thoughts and feelings. God does not become a law, so that man participates in him through obedience to a law. God does not become an ideal, so that man achieves community with him through constant striving. 

He humbles himself and takes upon himself the eternal death of the godless and the godforsaken, so that all the godless and the godforsaken can experience communion with him.”

--Jurgen Moltmann

Scot McKnight, "Top Five Most Influential Books"

Mine are in no particular order:

1) The Inescapable Love of God by Thomas Talbott


Thomas Talbott's ability to make an exegetical and logical case for trinitarian exclusive universalism that leave room for a will that could be free is refreshing. A very logically concise and rigorous example of an evangelical universalist who deals with proof-texts and actively engages with those who disagree with him.

2) The Coming of God by Jurgen Moltmann


As Talbott is logical and philosophical, Moltmann is very Eastern in his thinking. He writes as if he is telling a very grand story that is far beyond anything you've ever heard. His background as a drafted German soldier experiencing hell in prison camps and him saying "Jesus found him" is not only a powerful example of God's sovereignty, but also God's desire to be all in all. An intimate and powerful case for universalism. 

3) Man and Woman, One in Christ by Philip B. Payne


I was raised Complementarian, and this book certainly helped changed my mind on the entire issue. Payne spends countless pages addressing each counter-example, using his experience in textual criticism and detailed exegesis, leaving no stone unturned. His findings on I Corinthians 14 are unprecedented, and he has indeed shown me that it is very reasonable to be an Egalitarian. Of which I proudly am. 

4) Fear and Trembling by Soren Kierkegaard


Most people put Mere Christianity here. When I first read MC at Biola, I was going through a pretty rough time spiritually, and found MC trite. This is not to suggest that MC *is* trite, but after rereading it several times, I didn't find much of it compelling. However picking up F&T did indeed offer a different way of looking at things. That is the strength of Kierkegaard. 

5) God At War by Gregory A. Boyd


If one is looking for not only a holistic take on atonement, theodicy and God's foreknowledge, look no further. Boyd tackles all three in this weighty book, which reads like a textbook filled with mythological battles. His use of Scripture is compelling, his belief in Christus Victor has given me much food for thought, and even his "open" view of God has shown to be reasonable, even if I don't believe in it.

Jesus Creed/ Top 5

McKnight's top five are:

Martin Buber, I and Thou
Augustine, Confessions
Dante, Divine Comedy
John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Discipleship

Which books make your top 5? Excluding the good book, of course.

--Nick

Jurgen Moltmann Quote, "The Crucified God pg.xii"

"The translation of The Crucified God into many languages brought me into the community of many struggling and suffering brothers and sisters. The book was read in Korean and South African prisons. People working in slums and hospitals wrote to me, as well as people who were themselves suffering under 'the dark night of the soul.' I came into contact with Catholic orders vowed to poverty and the mysticism of the cross, and with Mennonite congregations who are following the path of Jesus. I need not tell it all. What I should like to say is this: even more than Theology of Hope, this book brought me into a great company. I believe it is the company of people under the cross. Beneath the cross the boundaries of denominations and cultures collapse. The community of the sufferers and the seekers is an open, inviting community. 

It is about this community that I am thinking, now that this book appears again, for it is there that I am home."

--Jurgen Moltmann, "The Crucified God", preface xii.

Jurgen Moltmann Quote, "When God Becomes Man"

“When God becomes man in Jesus of Nazareth, he not only enters into the finitude of man, but in his death on the cross also enters into the situation of man's godforsakenness. In Jesus he does not die the natural death of a finite being, but the violent death of the criminal on the cross, the death of complete abandonment by God. The suffering in the passion of Jesus is abandonment, rejection by God, his Father. God does not become a religion, so that man participates in him by corresponding religious thoughts and feelings. God does not become a law, so that man participates in him through obedience to a law. God does not become an ideal, so that man achieves community with him through constant striving. He humbles himself and takes upon himself the eternal death of the godless and the godforsaken, so that all the godless and the godforsaken can experience communion with him.”

― Jürgen Moltmann, The Crucified God: The Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology

Is Rob Bell a Universalist?

No.

It's been over a year, so I figured addressing this would be a nice circular return to form.

He's an Arminian inclusivist who believes in the possibility of post-mortem salvation, and hopes that all people will be saved. Universalism seems to demand a specific level of certainty. Meaning all will eventually be saved. Keith DeRose contacted me and offered a unique and challenging perspective, in that "hopeful" universalism seems to be a personal preference or feeling, rather than an objective view of the data.

Instead of certain, I offer "highly probably" universalism as the best way to define "certain" universalism. "Hopeful" universalism will be termed "possible" universalism from this point forth.

I think Thomas Talbott, Eric Reitan, Robin Parry, Jurgen Moltmann, George MacDonald and Keith DeRose are "highly probable" universalists.

I think Rob Bell is not a universalist, but he believes it is possible. Possibility does not seem to grant universalism. It merely presents it as an option. That is all Rob Bell did. Presented an option and stepped back.

Rob Bell is not certain of whether or not all will be saved. He has said that the afterlife in regards to heaven/hell is speculative. But he hopes all will be saved, and he is open to think it is possible. But he is not certain, and since he cannot be certain, to tag him with the label is simply incorrect. Most "highly probable" universalists will correct you on the label as well.

No need to read anymore into his book. If you want universalism, read the above mentioned gentlemen. Besides Rob Bell, of course. The literature offered by the above gentlemen (particularly Moltmann and MacDonald) is quite compelling.

Arminian.

Inclusivist.

Postmortem salvation.

And I think only one of those labels (arminian/inclusivist/postmortem salvation) is incorrect. I'll be like Bell and maintain some level of certain cheekiness by not saying which one.

And

That's

How

This

Blog

Post

Ends.

--Nick