Religious Studies 7 (3):245-249 (1971)
AbstractIn his article ‘A Critique of the Doctrine of Universal Salvation’, J. D. Bettis criticises the argument that all men will be saved because ‘God's love is both absolutely good and absolutely sovereign’ . I would like to argue that either some of Bettis's criticisms are confused, or else that he is not using ‘love’ in anything like its ordinary sense. I will not attempt a full defence of universalism here, however. In particular, I will not try to defend it against the sort of criticisms Bettis says an Arminian might raise
Similar books and articles
Universal Salvation: A Reply to Mr Bettis.Marilyn McCord Adams - 1971 - Religious Studies 7 (3):245 - 249.
I—Marilyn McCord Adams: What's Metaphysically Special about Supposits? Some Medieval Variations on Aristotelian Substance 1.Marilyn McCord Adams & Richard Cross - 2005 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 79 (1):15-52.
Some Later Medieval Theories of the Eucharist: Thomas Aquinas, Gilles of Rome, Duns Scotus, and William Ockham. [REVIEW]Marilyn McCord Adams - 2010 - Oxford University Press.
On Letting Go of Theodicy: Marilyn McCord Adams on God and Evil.Andrew Gleeson - 2015 - Sophia 54 (1):1-12.
A Critique of the Doctrine of Universal Salvation.Joseph Dabney Bettis - 1970 - Religious Studies 6 (4):329 - 344.
Evil and the God-Who-Does-Nothing-In-Particular'.Marilyn McCord Adams - 1996 - In D. Z. Phillips (ed.), Religion and Morality. St. Martin's Press.
Ockham's Individualisms.Marilyn McCord Adams - 1990 - In W. Vossenkuhl & R. Schönberger (eds.), Die Gegenwart Ockhams.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads