Why is Universal Salvation not Explicit?

Arguments/positions against Evangelical Universalism.

Re: Why is Universal Salvation not Explicit?

Postby davo » Sun Apr 09, 2017 7:51 am

qaz wrote:Davo is not a Calvinist, arminian, ET, or anni. So all that leaves is universalism.

Ok qaz I surrender to your simplistic rationale, but on these terms…

    I believe 100% in election, just NOT according to Calvinism.
    I believe some form of unpleasant reckoning may occur for some postmortem; but not in terms of torture or torment or fiery flames, nor any thought of exclusion from God.
    I believe in annihilation as pertaining solely to the physicality of man alone, no more and no less, and THIS predominately in terms of divine judgement as typically meted out against disobedient Israel or her enemies in the basic loss of one’s physical life.
    I believe in the universal i.e., comprehensive scope of God’s grace as encapsulating all.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1389
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Why is Universal Salvation not Explicit?

Postby qaz » Sun Apr 09, 2017 7:21 pm

davo wrote:I believe 100% in election, just NOT according to Calvinism.


Election is not an exclusively calvinist concept.

I believe some form of unpleasant reckoning may occur for some postmortem; but not in terms of torture or torment or fiery flames, nor any thought of exclusion from God.


So do a lot of other universalists.

Universalism has no singular position on the nature of postmortem punishment, or whether or not there even is postmortem punishment. Universalists are united by our belief about the final state of creatures (salvation), not how they/we get there.

I believe in annihilation as pertaining solely to the physicality of man alone, no more and no less, and THIS predominately in terms of divine judgement as typically meted out against disobedient Israel or her enemies in the basic loss of one’s physical life.


You're making an equivocation. Annihilationism, as a soteriology, is the idea that God chooses to wipe creatures out of existence. If a creature biologically dies, but God preserves the creature's spirit/soul so that he/she continues to exist, that creature has not been annihilated.

I believe in the universal i.e., comprehensive scope of God’s grace as encapsulating all.


Hence you're a univeresalist. :)
qaz
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Why is Universal Salvation not Explicit?

Postby Robert Wagener » Sun Apr 09, 2017 10:24 pm

The teaching of universal salvation is made very explicit by Romans 5:18:19. This includes a comparison between the effect of Adam’s sin with that of Christ’s sacrificial death, as follows:

So therefore, just as through one offence condemnation came to all men[1], so also through one righteous act justification of life comes to all men[2]. For as through the disobedience of one man the many[1] were made sinners, so also through the obedience of one righteous man the many[2] will be made righteous.

The first point to note is that the reasoning of both verses are linked, as indicated by the word ‘for’ at the beginning of verse 19. Verse 19 explains verse 18. It is also worth noting that verse 19 does not say that ‘many will be made righteous’; it says ‘the many will be made righteous’. The definite article here clearly refers back to a previous, indefinite noun as it does in other passages where the phrase 'the many' is used (c.f. Mark 6:2; 9:25, 26; Romans 5:12-16; 12:3-5; 1 Corinthians 10, 17 & 33; 2 Corinthians 2:17). In this case, verse 19 refers back to the phrase ‘all men’ in verse 18.

The first group of ‘the many’ [1] is ‘all men’, as this is the corresponding phrase to which it is linked in the first sentence. We also know that the phrase, ‘all men’ in that sentence must mean literally every single human being on the planet, because of the Bible’s clear teaching regarding the universality of sin.

For the same reasons, the second group that is described as ‘the many’ [2] must also refer back to the ‘all men’ in the previous verse. Unless we can show that this does not literally mean ‘all men’ as in the first clause, then the normal rules of exegesis require us to interpret this phrase in exactly the same way. We would otherwise have to conclude that ‘all men’ had two completely different meanings in the very same sentence, even though there was absolutely no evidence that this was the case!

The only conclusion that we can draw from all of this, therefore, is that verse 19 is telling us in a very direct way that in the end ‘all men will be made righteous’. Elsewhere in the Bible we are told that ‘the righteous’ are God’s sheep, who will never perish (John 10:28), as nothing now or in the future can separate them from the love of God (Roman’s 8:39). This must, then, be the joyful fate of ‘all men’, as all of us will eventually be ‘made righteous’.


Yours in Christ


Robert
User avatar
Robert Wagener
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 12:28 pm

Re: Why is Universal Salvation not Explicit?

Postby davo » Mon Apr 10, 2017 12:42 am

qaz wrote:
davo wrote:I believe in the universal i.e., comprehensive scope of God’s grace as encapsulating all.

Hence you're a univeresalist. :)

Well qaz it’s clearly meeting some need of yours to tag me specifically as a universalist, despite my numerous clarifying explanations given to you over some time now. I have no aversion to the moniker but just find it so inadequate and inaccurate of my oft-stated position which can better be described as an inclusive prêterism aka *pantelism* which is actually beyond universalism and prêterism i.e., universalism is inadequate and comes up short on the understanding of quite a number of biblical texts (as does prêterism but to a lesser degree) which pantelism “IMO” handles much better.

I suspect qaz you will probably read right over that… you’re not the first, and that’s ok if it’s meeting a need. :o
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1389
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Why is Universal Salvation not Explicit?

Postby maintenanceman » Mon Apr 10, 2017 3:53 am

For myself, the Isaiah text (and subsequent NT passages that allude to it) that every knee will bow and every tongue will confess is a clincher. As has been discussed in this forum, the question for many is what is God going to do with the sinner after he she does the confessing? Or can we really think that this means we will confess without truly understanding? Of maybe some will confess in this physical life and some after physical death?

I tend to like the image of an unending sea of humanity coming to the realization of who God truly is. :D

qaz said
If a creature biologically dies, but God preserves the creature's spirit/soul so that he/she continues to exist, that creature has not been annihilated.


The interesting twist is how God does deal with those he has destroyed. Will he destroy them in this physical life and then they will bow but God will somehow continue to punish/correct them?

And some will say that the Isaiah passages only deal with Israel. :shock:

A mystery.
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: Why is Universal Salvation not Explicit?

Postby Eaglesway » Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:57 pm

maintenanceman wrote:I tend to like the image of an unending sea of humanity coming to the realization of who God truly is. :D


Beautiful thought :)

Rev 5:13 And every created thing which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all things in them, I heard saying,

“To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever.”

I tend to look at this verse as the fulfillment of Phil 2:9-11
Eaglesway
 
Posts: 916
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:01 am

Previous

Return to Discussion Negative

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: maintenanceman and 5 guests