Re Zander Dunn, December Letters
I want to thank Zander Dunn for his honesty about how he arrives at his theology, taking from the Bible that which is most helpful to him. But that, really, is the issue. We may all do that to some extent, but is that what we’re supposed to do? Are we to judge the truth or is the truth to judge us? Do we find our own way to God or does God show us the way?
In order to hold the opinion Zander holds about universalism, he needs to do away with (or at least ignore) large portions of scripture, just as Marcion tried to do centuries ago. Zander contends that the portions of scripture that support universalism are more Christ-like than those which don’t. But to which Jesus is he actually comparing them? The one who spoke about wheat and tares, sheep and goats? In order to suggest that universalism is more Christ-like, Zander then has to radically remake Jesus. In whose image is he then going to remake him? And where does the remaking end?
Zander also misses my point when he suggests that the Apostles’ Creed’s use of the words “I believe …” gives us permission to follow them with whatever words we like. It is the very fact that the whole church follows “I believe …” with the same words that defines the church, that defines our faith as Christian faith, and turns that chorus of “I’s” into a unison “we.”
