Hart’s arguments have been summarized by other reviewers, and they do a much better job than I would. So to avoid belaboring the point, I won’t summarize anything here. With that said, I was impressed with Hart’s arguments for universal salvation here. I was a fan of his “God, Creation, and Evil” paper, and I remember it challenging my beliefs in ways that made me uncomfortable.

Some of his newer arguments are just as fascinating, like his redefinition of freedom (freedom being the ultimate comprehension of the Good rather a blind libertarianism that allows us choose whatever without knowing the consequences) and his ontology of the self as ultimately indistinguishable from others’ (that we are a conglomeration of other people and their choices).

Hart leaves little room for those who hold to the doctrine of eternal conscious torment (ECT). He is, as always, quite blunt in his rhetoric, claiming that those who hold to ECT have a morbid imagination and are intellectually dishonest. Since I hold to an annihilationist position, I’m not convinced that Hart’s arguments apply 100%.

Still, I was disappointed at his conclusion that the entire book of Revelation is unusable, that its symbolism renders it impossible to understand. This leaves a huge gap in his use of Scripture, though I find that his philosophical arguments do make up for this lack.

Stylistically, I really enjoy his overconfident polemical style, but others may deem it uncharitable.