Universal reconciliation and ‘Flevo’ (I)

Originally posted on August 16, 2008 – by Andre Piet

Last night our good friend Wim Hoogendijk was a guest at the Xnoizz Flevo Festival. Reason: he would engage in a debate with evangelist Johan Vreugdehil about “the great controversy of Flevo”: heaven or hell. Before a tent full of young people, Hoogendijk maintained that GOD truly is the Savior of all people.
In the Nederlands Dagblad a report could be read today.

‘Among evangelicals, belief in all-reconciliation is increasing’

BUSSLOO – According to Wim Hoogendijk, a growing number of evangelical Christians no longer believe that unbelievers are eternally lost. He himself also believes that in the end everyone will be saved.

Hoogendijk works for the organization Near East Ministries and appears as a Christian speaker and pastor. Last night at the Xnoizz Flevo Festival at the Bussloo event site near Apeldoorn, he said that he does not believe that hell is a place where people are punished forever. He cited a recent column by EO figurehead Andries Knevel in the magazine Uitdaging. In it, this presenter likewise raises the question of whether hell exists and, if so, whether it is eternal.

Yesterday, before a tent full of young people, Hoogendijk pointed out that the Bible contains texts that suggest that unbelievers are eternally lost, but also passages that indicate that in the end all will be well with everyone. “Does the Bible then contradict itself? No, I do not believe that,” said Hoogendijk.

The Bible is, however, often wrongly interpreted, in his view. Thus, according to him, the source text contains various words that are translated in Dutch as ‘eternal’, but which in fact refer to a period that does have an end. “‘Eternal judgment’ therefore does not mean ‘forever’, but has a temporary character.”

Sinner

It also states in the Bible that it is God’s will that all people be saved. “Would people then still be lost?” Hoogendijk wondered. “If God cannot accomplish His own will, then He is in fact a sinner. For sin means: missing your goal. His ultimate goal is that all people will eventually say: Lord Jesus, You are my Lord.”

That Jesus says He is ‘the Way, the Truth and the Life’ only supports Hoogendijk in his views. “All other ways ultimately lead to a dead end. At the end of the ages it will become apparent that God’s grace is so great that everyone will be saved.”

He sees ‘hell’ as a place of purification, where unbelievers are stripped of their unbelief and from which they emerge ‘pure’. Believing therefore does have meaning, according to him.

Hoogendijk, who is a member of the Church of the Nazarene, an evangelical denomination, acknowledges that there are not many people in his environment who believe the same as he does. “But there are steadily more. And a growing number of evangelical leaders, also in America, are taking this line.”

Air and space

Seeing hell as a temporary punishment for unbelief gives Hoogendijk air and space. “You have to be careful not to instill fear-faith in people. Charlemagne already did that: ‘believe or die,’ he said. Fear—of hell or of anything else—breeds obedient Christians, but not loving believers.”

At Flevo, Hoogendijk appeared in a discussion with evangelist Johan Vreugdenhil. The latter, quoting from the Statenvertaling and adhering to a strict doctrine of election, voiced a very different position. Vreugdenhil assumes that there is a hell, and that it truly is a place of eternal punishment. He placed Hoogendijk in the corner of ‘universal reconciliation’, a theological movement that teaches that ultimately every human being will be saved.

Hoogendijk did not strongly protest when this label was attached to him. He approvingly cited the German theologian Karl Barth, who is said to have remarked that he did not believe in universal reconciliation, but that he did believe that God reconciles all.

The discussion between the two Christian speakers—who indicated that despite their differences they regarded one another as brothers—was announced as “the great controversy of Flevo.” From reactions in the audience it became apparent that neither Hoogendijk’s doctrine of universal reconciliation nor Vreugdenhil’s strict doctrine of election met with unanimous approval among most visitors.

Delen: