It’s always amusing to see people whose self-image is diametrically at odds with their actual conduct. In the wake of the controversy over Rob Bell, a number of universalists have been defending Bell, as well as defending universalism.
And that’s understandable–if you’re a universalist. But what’s richly ironic is how they go about defending universalism. They defend the proposition that God loves everyone so much that God will save everyone by assuming a belligerent us v. them mentality.
They cast themselves in the role of the white hats, while they cast the Calvinists in the role of the black hats. They treat Christians who adhere to everlasting punishment as the enemy.
In effect, universalists are the sheep, while Justin Taylor, Kevin DeYoung et al. are the goats.
But shouldn’t they make a bit more effort to personally model their generous, inclusive theology? If God is all-loving and all-forgiving, why are universalists so divisive and bellicose in dealing with Christians who oppose universalism?
They act as if they believe in hell for those who believe in hell. That God ought to smite those who oppose universalism.
Shouldn’t a universalist cut back on the fire-n-brimstone rhetoric?