Is the topic important enough?
Should we dare to have an argument on the subject of “all reconciliation”? An open conversation about the All Atonement is not possible in many circles. Even quoting a Bible verse can sometimes trigger violent reactions. However, open discourse is important for a number of reasons:
- It concerns fundamental questions that many people ask themselves
- It concerns concrete biblical statements that want to be understood
- It concerns the scope of the gospel
- It concerns the image of God that we have
- It will shape our everyday lives.
Jens Adam writes in the preface to his theological work “Paul and the Reconciliation of All.”
“The theological question of “all-reconciliation” is a highly controversial and sometimes hotly debated matter; it looms at the center of Christian theology insofar as it specifically addresses the question of God’s being God – and not in itself, but for us.”
Jens Adam, “Paul and the Reconciliation of All,” A Study of Pauline Salvation Universalism. Neukirchen-Vluyn 2009(Amazon).
Nothing is as damaging to a faith community as to block, prevent, conceal, and heresy a confrontation. How could one exclude questions “that reach into the center of Christian theology”? Insofar as the confrontation is consciously avoided or only dogmatically countered, it blocks healthy spiritual life.
On the one hand, the dogmatically shaped community thus prevents the growth of the individual and thus the growth of the community (an institutionalization of the original liveliness takes place). On the other hand, a fundamental rejection of biblical immersion deprives the ground for spiritual growth. Both positions narrow perception and therefore diminish the viable wing of the community.
Differentiation in life and faith
Of course, not every issue is equally important or relevant to everyone at the same time. However, a living community needs the diversity of thought and the deepening of faith to move the community – and within it, the individuals – forward. This is the task of the teacher in the community, a task that exists explicitly alongside other tasks. A healthy interplay of all gifts leads parishioners to spiritual maturity, allowing for reflection and self-reflection in light of the Gospel as well as personal life. In healthy development, growth is “toward Him who is the head, Christ”(Eph. 4:11-16). The focus, Paul says, must remain on God, on His work through Christ, and on His ways-which explicitly includes God’s goal of becoming “all in all” (see Eph. 1:15-23). So it is a matter of differentiating between questions of life and questions of faith. Differentiation is a process of becoming human as much as it is a process of maturing.
The tabooing of important issues
A tabooing of topics, on the other hand, typically happens with ideas that have become ideologies (“ossified guiding principles”). These no longer allow dogmas to be tested. In ideologically dogmatic communities, words such as “all reconciliation” therefore trigger not only rejection but also direct and diffuse fears – a sure sign that the Good News is still lacking there. Where that is the case, taboos apply – presumably to other topics as well. Dealing with doctrine and biblically based expectation is a reflection of the spiritual life of a community.
Now is the reconciliation of the universe such an outlandish subject? No. First, the reconciliation of all things is explicitly stated in the Bible(Col 1:20). Moreover, in over 2000 years of church history, it is demonstrably talked about again and again. We are in good company when we are moved by these questions. Hardly anyone cares where the road goes. People didn’t always agree, but why should that bother us?
Ultimately, it is not about right or wrong as a goal, but whether we come to know the God of the Bible. Any doctrine or dogma is only a reflection of our current understanding and therefore should never be confused with the essential. There is a world of difference between tabooing topics outside one’s own dogma and openly discussing important concerns. Cultivating an open culture of learning and conversation is a necessity, but it’s worth consciously fostering.
The central question
The all-important question is only one, and it does not concern doctrine. The all-important, central question is: Who is God? Because everything depends on that. Our understanding of this world and our trust depend on it. It’s not a right or wrong question. Also, it is not a multiple-choice test on doctrines, where we should make crosses on the correct answers. It is an open question that we can pursue based on the Bible. In the process, we logically encounter more questions.
Just as the Bible records that God created the heavens and the earth and everything that lives on them(Gen 1:1 Isa 42:5), it also testifies that this world is governed by Him(Eph 1:11 Prov 16:9 Prov 21:1 Isa 14:24 Am 3:6). This justifies the question of whether He has any plans for this world. What does God want? What is His goal? And in doing so asked quite fundamentally: Does He have a goal? Does the Bible have anything to say about this? And if that were so, does God achieve His goal? These questions are significant. It is about understanding God’s nature and work and what outlook it gives us.
The answer also shows how we see ourselves. Image of man, image of God and image of the world – they exist only together. Statements such as the following from Jeremiah show both self-understanding and understanding of God in a clear dependence on each other. This has shaped his view of the world.
“I have come to know, LORD, that the way of man is not in his power, and that it is not given to any that walk to direct his step.”
Jer 10:23
So if we ask “Who is God?” it always involves ourselves and our understanding of this world. Conversely, it is not without consequences for our image of God and our view of the world if He either saves all people one day or considers the majority to be “lost” and sends them to their doom.
