普救论

David Ekstrand
{"title":"普救论","authors":"David Ekstrand","doi":"10.1017/9781108591997.027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Universalism is the belief that everyone will ultimately be saved, that all people will eventually end up in heaven. The very idea of men and women living a life of “eternal torment” in hell is simply an irreconcilable doctrine to the universalist. Their argument goes like this — if you accept the assumptions that God loves all people and desires their redemption, and that He is truly all powerful, then by deductive reasoning you must believe that God is going to ultimately save all people. Furthermore, they maintain that if you reject universalism, you must reject at least one of these assumptions. Essentially, this is the universalist’s application of the Western “law of non-contradiction.” Let me illustrate the law — let’s suppose someone says they have a immaculate, cherry red 1960 Corvette in their garage (at a given location) — the law of noncontradiction says either that is statement is true or it is untrue, that both positions can’t be right. That is the way the typical logician argues. The problem with such logic is that it is somewhat narrow in scope, it disallows for any paradoxical truth-claims, and it rejects any consideration outside of the parameters they establish. Universalists like to use this law as the “final test of truth” — thus they “put God in a box” and make Him conform to human logic. Essentially, this is just another form of “circular reasoning” — you begin by stating presuppositions that you believe express absolute reality, and then you proceed to make all deductions from there.","PeriodicalId":419333,"journal":{"name":"Religion in the Modern World","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Universal Salvation\",\"authors\":\"David Ekstrand\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/9781108591997.027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Universalism is the belief that everyone will ultimately be saved, that all people will eventually end up in heaven. The very idea of men and women living a life of “eternal torment” in hell is simply an irreconcilable doctrine to the universalist. Their argument goes like this — if you accept the assumptions that God loves all people and desires their redemption, and that He is truly all powerful, then by deductive reasoning you must believe that God is going to ultimately save all people. Furthermore, they maintain that if you reject universalism, you must reject at least one of these assumptions. Essentially, this is the universalist’s application of the Western “law of non-contradiction.” Let me illustrate the law — let’s suppose someone says they have a immaculate, cherry red 1960 Corvette in their garage (at a given location) — the law of noncontradiction says either that is statement is true or it is untrue, that both positions can’t be right. That is the way the typical logician argues. The problem with such logic is that it is somewhat narrow in scope, it disallows for any paradoxical truth-claims, and it rejects any consideration outside of the parameters they establish. Universalists like to use this law as the “final test of truth” — thus they “put God in a box” and make Him conform to human logic. Essentially, this is just another form of “circular reasoning” — you begin by stating presuppositions that you believe express absolute reality, and then you proceed to make all deductions from there.\",\"PeriodicalId\":419333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Religion in the Modern World\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Religion in the Modern World\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108591997.027\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion in the Modern World","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108591997.027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

普遍主义相信每个人最终都会得救,所有人最终都会进入天堂。男人和女人在地狱里过着“永恒折磨”的生活,这种想法对普遍主义者来说简直是一个不可调和的教义。他们的论点是这样的——如果你接受上帝爱所有的人,渴望他们的救赎,并且他真的是全能的假设,那么通过演绎推理,你必须相信上帝最终会拯救所有的人。此外,他们认为,如果你拒绝普遍主义,你必须至少拒绝这些假设中的一个。本质上,这是普遍主义者对西方“不矛盾法则”的应用。让我来说明一下这个定律——假设有人说他的车库里(在给定的地点)有一辆完美无瑕的樱桃红色1960年克尔维特——非矛盾律告诉我们,这个说法要么是对的,要么是错的,不可能两个说法都对。这是典型逻辑学家的论证方式。这种逻辑的问题在于,它的范围有些狭窄,它不允许任何自相矛盾的真理主张,它拒绝任何超出它们所建立的参数的考虑。普救论者喜欢用这个法则作为“真理的最终检验”——因此他们“把上帝放在一个盒子里”,使他符合人类的逻辑。从本质上讲,这只是另一种形式的“循环推理”——你首先陈述你认为表达绝对现实的前提,然后从那里进行所有的演绎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Universal Salvation
Universalism is the belief that everyone will ultimately be saved, that all people will eventually end up in heaven. The very idea of men and women living a life of “eternal torment” in hell is simply an irreconcilable doctrine to the universalist. Their argument goes like this — if you accept the assumptions that God loves all people and desires their redemption, and that He is truly all powerful, then by deductive reasoning you must believe that God is going to ultimately save all people. Furthermore, they maintain that if you reject universalism, you must reject at least one of these assumptions. Essentially, this is the universalist’s application of the Western “law of non-contradiction.” Let me illustrate the law — let’s suppose someone says they have a immaculate, cherry red 1960 Corvette in their garage (at a given location) — the law of noncontradiction says either that is statement is true or it is untrue, that both positions can’t be right. That is the way the typical logician argues. The problem with such logic is that it is somewhat narrow in scope, it disallows for any paradoxical truth-claims, and it rejects any consideration outside of the parameters they establish. Universalists like to use this law as the “final test of truth” — thus they “put God in a box” and make Him conform to human logic. Essentially, this is just another form of “circular reasoning” — you begin by stating presuppositions that you believe express absolute reality, and then you proceed to make all deductions from there.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信