Earlier this year I featured an interview with Gregory MacDonald, pseudonymous author of The Evangelical Universalist: The biblical hope that God’s love will save us all (9780281059881, SPCK, 2008).

In my introduction to that interview I said that, given the struggle many evangelicals have when it comes to thinking outside the box, it’s hardly surprising that this book has attracted a certain amount of controversy and criticism. But the following review by Brian Kerr in this month’s Christian Marketplace, which gives the book a one star rating out of a possible five, struck me as a splendid example of how not to engage with a book:

If you ask me, the title of this book is an oxymoron and shows how the term ‘evangelical’, which means a Christian who believes in the supremacy of scripture, has been devalued. It is surely significant that MacDonald (not the author’s real name) begins with philosophy rather than scripture. It seems to me that he had reached a universalist conclusion before he even opened his Bible! The book illustrates that when one comes to the scriptures with one’s theological position already worked out, one will be able to find support for it there! It seems to me that MacDonald reads universalism into scripture rather than reading out what is there. MacDonald believes in redemption from hell, i.e. that people will have a chance to repent and believe after death, and that even the devil will ultimately be saved, and wants to convince his readers that his universalism is a legitimate evangelical option. He hasn’t convinced this reader! I couldn’t recommend this book to anyone.

“It seems to me,” says Kerr, “that he had reached a universalist conclusion before he even opened his Bible!” — which seems, unfortunately, to be the very approach that Kerr has taken to this book…

Taking umbrage at the title’s bringing together of two concepts that he finds mutually incompatible, rather than engage with the issues raised Kerr dismisses the entire book by reiterating this assessment:

The book illustrates that when one comes to the scriptures with one’s theological position already worked out, one will be able to find support for it there! It seems to me that MacDonald reads universalism into scripture rather than reading out what is there. 

Steady on, old chap: I think you’ve already said that! MacDonald’s arguments may fail to convince and his re-reading of scripture may or may not stand up to scrutiny, but the questions MacDonald seeks to draw to our attention deserve serious attention. Is it possible that evangelicals have misinterpreted scripture? Is it possible, as per the subtitle, that “God’s love will save us all”?

Kerr is not convinced and concludes that he “couldn’t recommend this book to anyone.” Why not? Are the arguments poorly constructed? Is the book badly written? Has MacDonald genuinely failed to engage with scripture? Does he offer us a selective reading that ignores difficult passages? Is he allowing woolly thinking to prejudice his conclusions, taking an ‘if only…’ approach that presupposes where it ends up? Has he abandoned any other supposedly essential tenets of evangelicalism? 

When you have a very tight word limit — as Christian Marketplace reviewers do — it’s impossible, of course, to address all the questions one might in a longer review. But in the case of this particular review, I suspect that the one star rating has more to do with the reviewer’s prejudices than with the merits or otherwise of the book.

If you, gentle reader, are a Christian bookseller trying to decide whether or not to stock this particular title, I invite you to read my interview with Gregory MacDonald before you make up your mind: given the tone of Kerr’s review, you may be in for a pleasant surprise…

Norman has now generously made his entire book freely available online: it’s a superb resource for anyone concerned by the accusations levelled by Don Carson and others that people such as Chalke have “largely abandoned the gospel” [1]. To the contrary, Norman’s work shows that it is perfectly possible to remain entirely faithful to scripture — to the gospel — and yet deny penal substitution as a model for understanding atonement.

An excellent book presenting the other side of the debate is Stephen R. Holmes’ The Wondrous Cross: review here.

Personally I found Stephen’s case less than convincing, but whichever side of the debate we come down on, I think the important thing is to hold these conversations in a tone of mutual respect: each of us, as Paul exhorts his Philippian readers, considering others better then ourselves (Philippians 2). I have to say that I was appalled at the lambasting and abuse Steve Chalke received from many evangelicals  when his book The Lost Message of Jesus hit the big time: who, I wondered, had lost the plot here?

The amount of literature around this topic is vast, of course, but two recent titles that certainly ought not to be missed are Zondervan’s The Atonement Debate, which brings together most of the papers presented at the Evangelical Alliance (EA) / London School of Theology (LST) Symposium on the Atonement held back in July 2005; and Eerdmans’ Stricken by God? which includes contributions from N T Wright, Miroslav Volf and Rowan Williams, amongst many others. Zondervan have made the first twenty pages of The Atonement Debate available for download (pdf, 123kb) — well worth grabbing to whet your appetite.

The beauty of both books is that they offer a range of different voices and viewpoints, inviting readers to think the issues through for themselves: there’s no spoon feeding or dubious indoctrination here.

Finally, for anyone reading who may be wondering what all the fuss is about, that’s a very good question. Seems to me that God’s grace — whoever or whatever we conceive God to be — is far greater than anything we can think, dream or imagine. Grace: God’s radical action changes everything. That’s the message of the cross, the enigma of Christ crucified: that God was in Christ reconciling humanity to God. Arguing and splitting hairs over how, exactly, that was achieved simply achieves the very opposite of reconciliation.

The Evangelical Universalist 
The biblical hope that God’s love will save us all

Gregory MacDonald
ISBN 9780281059881 (0281059888)
SPCK, 2008 (201pp)
£12.99

Category: Doctrine and Theology
Author interviewed by: Phil Groom

Not surprisingly, this book has attracted a certain amount of controversy as evangelicals who thought they knew what they believed struggle to come to terms with a new — some would say impossible, but is anything impossible for God? — way of looking at things. Not a review, then, but an interview with the author, who kindly agreed to answer my questions over the ether… but not by webcam! So, without further ado:

Who is your target readership? Are you writing for academics, church leaders or laypeople?
I wrote, in the first place, for myself. I was not intending to get the work published but I simply wanted to think the issue through and get clear what I thought. A friend suggested offering it for publication but I originally wrote for an audience of one. It is a little on the academic side so I hope academics will find it of some use (and, from feedback I have received, they seem to) but non-academics will follow a fair bit of the discussion so long as they make the effort to concentrate (plenty of non-academics have contacted me to say how helpful they found it).

What do you mean by ‘Evangelical Universalist’?
I mean a Christ-centred, trinitarian, gospel-focused person with a high view of Scripture who also believes that God will eventually reconcile all people to himself through Christ.

Why Universalism rather than ‘Conditional Immortality’?
I believe in conditional immortality – but I also believe that God will eventually bring it about that all people meet the conditions and will thus be granted the gift of immortality.

If you mean, “Why universalism and not annihilationism?” then I would simply say that I think that God will save all people and that this might be tricky if he has annihilated some of them. In other words, my key reason for not being an annihilationist is that I am a universalist and I cannot be both. (That said, I suppose that it might be possible to make a case that God could reconstitute those he has annihilated at some future point – if one can overcome the well worn philosophical problems of temporal gaps and personal identity. If so then it may be possible to believe in literal annihilation and universalism.)

If you then ask, why be a universalist? I’m afraid you’ll have to read the book. (See how I turned that into a teaser? Crafty, eh?).

Where on earth (or heaven or hell) did you get your ideas?
No one source. On the philosophy side Thomas Talbott and Eric Reitan were key. On the Bible it is a bit more eclectic. I drew on all sorts of sources and just put them together in a different way. One very influential source was N.T. Wright. He’d be mortified by that as he has argued several times at length against universalism. But his links between Adam, Israel and Christ were key in my thinking.

If everyone’s going to be saved anyway, why bother proclaiming the Gospel?
Because that is how they get saved – by accepting the gospel. I have an extended discussion on this in the last chapter of the book and there I say … you’ll have to read it (ah ha! that crafty teaser trick again!)

Why are you using a pseudonym? Is it because you’re not convinced by your own arguments? Or because you know how loving [ahem] Evangelicals really are?
It’s because I am John Piper! (That’s a joke by the way – don’t contact him and ask!)

I am convinced by most of my arguments (some of them need improving but I am hoping some more capable people might do that on my behalf – I am just one person and I don’t have much time these days to develop the case in better ways).

The reason is that I do not wish to undermine the work that God is doing in the churches through my other books. I suspect that if my identity was known then some of those who would be helped by those books would consider them guilty by association and not read them. I do not especially care about people hating me – I think I can live with that so long as I retain some friends – but I do not wish to undermine some messages that are more central to my ‘ministry’. So it is, if I read my motives aright, pragmatism in the service of the kingdom. On top of that, the little boy in me does rather enjoy the ‘game’ of being incognito. It adds spice to life.

Which other books have you written?
I could tell you… but then I’d have to kill you!
[That's a joke too... I think! - Ed.]

The Evangelical Universalist
First published in the USA by Cascade/Wipf & Stock, 2006
ISBN 9781597523653 (1597523658)
$24.00

Phil Groom, May 2008

Phil Groom is this site’s Webmaster and Reviews Editor. He’s a regular contributor to Christian Marketplace magazine and is the manager of London School of Theology Books & Resources. Any opinions expressed here are personal and should not be taken as representing the views of London School of Theology or of any other group or organisation.

Author’s Blog: The Evangelical Universalist
Discussions Elsewhere: Chrisendom | Generous Orthodoxy Thinktank | Jason Clark | An Oxymoron?

SPCK | Order from www.christianbookshops.org

Authors | Categories | Publishers | Reviewers | Titles

As the first black man at the top of the EA, it seems that Joel has never been far from controversy, most recently about his appointment to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, with questions being raised from both sides — conservative evangelicals suspecting him of selling out, the gay lobby wanting to know how a representative of evangelicalism could ever possibly defend equality.

I’d say the gay lobby have a good point there: evangelicals are not exactly renowned for promoting equal rights for gays. In fact, the term ‘evangelical’ itself seems to have become something of a dirty word: synonymous with bigoted, prejudiced, short-sighted, narrow-minded, obnoxious, homophobic… I could go on, but I won’t: I’m happy to say that, in my brief encounter at least, Joel Edwards didn’t come over as any of these things; a charming, urbane gentleman, rather.

And much of his book, if I’ve understood things correctly — have to say I haven’t read it yet, but yes, it’s on the agenda; and I did take the opportunity to grab a signed copy — is about rescuing the word ‘evangelical’ from all these negative connotations. Is that possible? Time will tell…

Book Details
An Agenda for Change: A Global Call for Spiritual and Social Transformation
Zondervan, 2008
9780310283713 | 031028371X
£7.99

Where to Buy
Wholesale: STL
Retail: offline, your local Christian Bookshop; online, The UKCBD Shop