![]() The author argues that cognitive dissonance motivates the search for coherence, as a means to get rid of dissonance. After examining the meaning of coherence in several disciplines in psychology, this writing introduces the concept of Coherence Judgment. We will leave Hart’s demand for perfect logical coherence and clarity to the side for now (except to say that usually it is heretics who demand such coherence and clarity, and that orthodoxy usually holds two truths together, like one God and three persons or one person and two natures ).This paper argues that coherence is something about which cognitive dissonance theory is concerned but not explored. For Hart, to follow the premises of God’s goodness and human freedom is to arrive on the shores of universal redemption. In both arguments Hart demands maximal metaphysical coherence and clarity. And happily the Bible confirms this by not talking about hell as an eternal place of conscious torment (Hart’s second meditation). Therefore, every rational nature will eventually will its own good end, which is found only in God (even if it takes the rational nature an extended stay in hell to purge encrusted layers of sin and evil).Įxpanded a little: Because every rational nature will ultimately rest in God, eternal conscious torment is impossible (Hart’s fourth meditation). Second Main Argument: Every rational nature (humanity) is only truly free when it wills its own good end. I’m curious how the same arguments I’ve used to criticize aggressive views of Penal Substitutionary Atonement and Predestination are used by Hart to argue for universalism.As a strong advocate of the Christus Victor view of the atonement, I’m wondering if this also entails a final victory over sin that would be universalist in nature.My friends have friends drawn to universalism, and they aren’t sure what to think or how to respond.I have friends wondering about or drawn to universalism.I’m interested in Hart’s perspective because I would consider myself a theological moderate or centrist, but evangelical nonetheless (even if that is a meaningless term these days). Why Am I Interested in This Book (and why should you be)? If you were hoping to read Hart as a way to get up to speed on the various debates about universalism, the different options or streams involved, or a detailed review of the biblical arguments for or against universalism, you will be sorely disappointed. In the end his book really only manages to land serious blows against the infernalists, leaving the other two options mostly intact. Lewis), and 3) conditional immortality/annihilation as if they were all the same view. Hart treats 1) “infernalists” (his label for the “eternal conscious torment by God” view), 2) “hell is the place of our own making” (C. Hart, however, is not very clear about his opponents in the book. Hart, and most Christian universalists, claim that Christ’s life, death, and resurrection, are fundamentally necessary for the redemption of all things-and indeed, because Christ is the victor over sin and death, all things will eventually be reconciled to God (even if passing through the fires of hell, which are none other than the purifying glory of God). But Christian universalism is to be distinguished from universalism in general, which says that “all roads lead back to God” because all religions really takes us on the same spiritual journey in the end.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |