Dialogue with Thomas Talbott

Thomas Talbott is Professor Emeritus of philosophy at Willamette University in Salem, Oregon.

One of Dr Talbott’s online activities is as a scholar in residence at The Evangelical Universalist (along with Gregory MacDonald). Talbott (I hope he won’t object to me just referring to him by last name) is a proponent of universal salvation, the view that everyone who has ever lived and will ever live shall, at some point, be reconciled to God, trust in Him and enjoy eternal life as a redeemed child of God. I’ve made no secret of the fact that I don’t share this view (click the “heaven and hell” category to see what  I mean).

One thing that’s done at the Evangelical Universalist is that a guest is invited to have a one on one dialogue with Dr MacDonald or Dr Talbott on a subject, and when they’re done, questions are invited from onlookers. At the moment Dr Joel Green from Fuller Theological Seminary is in discussion with Dr MacDonald on Universalism and the issue of free will. I’ve been asked to take part in a discussion with Dr Talbott. I’m not sure that the subject has been hammered into shape yet, but my guess is that it will be something involving universalism (no surprise there) and annihilationism. We’ll see how it shapes up and I’ll let you know when it’s about to take place.

Glenn Peoples

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailFacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

2 thoughts on “Dialogue with Thomas Talbott

  1. I read the first part (there never seemed to be a follow up). That led me here and out of universalism. I think you are too dismissive of universalist exegesis. They have three or four texts that appear on the face to teach their position, the traditionalists have just one by my count. But the annihilationists have hundreds if the Old Testament is allowed to speak and the best exegesis even if we look only at the New. I didn’t stop being a universalist because their exegesis is impossible, but because yours is much much better.

  2. Giles, exegesis was what I was DYING to get into with Talbot, but he thwarted me. The one time he did try to make an exegetical argument using the language of Matthew 10:28, it was appalling. My frustration got the better of me I’m afraid.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters available