Well it’s certainly been a week for discussion. This evening’s topic was one fairly new to me and I found it pretty difficult to address with a clear and Biblical defense: universalism. A definition I found online explains it with the following:
“This universal
redemption will be realized in the future where God will bring all
people to repentance. This repentance can happen while a person
lives or after he has died and lived again in the millennium (as some
“Christian universalists” claim) or some
future state. Additionally, a few universalists even
maintain that Satan and all demons will likewise be reconciled to God.”
While I certainly do not believe this to be true, at the time I could find hardly any verses to defend the position that salvation is based upon the enactment of God’s grace during life (and not after death) and at the same time garner a defense that the presence of sinners in hell was an eternal condemnation and not one merely meant to last until they might somehow acquire salvation in spite of being condemned (…?). The argument itself was quite new to me and I really was more shocked than anything at the idea that anyone condemned to punishment for a lifetime of rejecting Christ would–though he of course would realize his mistake and regret it but still not turn to God for saving grace–have the opportunity to receive salvation.
While this does not change my opinion on the situation–I still believe that God has made one “for honor and another for dishonor?” (Rom. 9:21) for His own glory and purposes– nonetheless it leads to many questions that, for the sake of apology, should be answered. What does it mean in those verses that speak of God’s willingness that “none should perish” or that “all be saved”? In addition, what are we to say to those who insist that hell is merely a temporary punishment–somewhat like purgatory, I guess–and that there is the opportunity even in hell to experiences the means of grace necessary to salvation? While it seems very strange and un-Biblical to me, I suppose it is what some people think based on a misunderstanding of verses that do include the term “all.” I seem to remember an observation about the grammar of the statement including a possessive–as in all “of something” (meaning not a universal ALL), but that thought was summarily rejected as a cop out.
Any thoughts on some good apologetic points for this subject?
hiddenart
Yes, all very good questions. Ones which bothered me, too, esp the one about *evil* and its authorship. *Hxll* too. I was totally amazed that some people dont even believe it in!! You are correct about the grammar and usage of *all* It has different meanings in different verses, like 1)all without exception, 2)all types of people, 3)all with exception. In each case, the context has to be examined.
Dont forget TULIP. That *L* is for limited atonement and there is the defense against universalism. You just need to build up your theological library 🙂
Christ came and accomplished his mission 100 % on the cross on that date at that time in history. He died for his sheep (past, present, future) not goats.
Anonymous
It is not often I encounter a page where theology is discussed in such a manner. Well thought out, cleanly referenced, and no fear of asking the tough questions. The real question is where this theory can be solidly based on scripture. Wonderful post, I would give it 3 e-props if I could.
Ciao.
AdonaiUplifts
Sounds like a Bauman class?