big d

"and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world."

So what, Im' saved after all? (I am in the whole world after all!) :-)

Gringo

This verse puts me in mind of I Tim. 4:10 "...we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially those who believe." Some take these verses to mean that mankind will universally be saved, but there are plenty of verses, such as Daniel 12:2, which would indicate otherwise. For now, I understand these verses to mean that Jesus is the judge who can forgive all sin. So according to one's deeds in the flesh, he may be given more mercy or more wrath on the day of judgement. Any mercy given him, whether or not he is given eternal life, has come from Christ, who has already laid down His life for the sins of mankind.

Peter Kirby

There are a few other Universalist proof-texts. Make of them what you will - confused rantings, exuberant mysticism, absolute truth, whatever.

1 Corinthians 15:22. "As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive."

John 12:32. "When I am lifted up from the earth I will draw all to myself."

2 Peter 3:9. "God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

Romans 11:32. "God has consigned all to disobedience that he may have mercy on all."

Kinda makes me wonder why hell is such an important Christian doctrine to many, when apparently conflicting quotes can be found. I mean, wouldn't theology be fine, even better, without it? Unless you really need the big stick.

best,
Peter Kirby

Vesica

All of those are rather confusing but the 2 Peter quote is incomplete...the verse makes a bit more sense in its entirety:

Peter Kirby

Surely someone has some standard refutations for the implications of these quotes. Does anyone know them?

best,
Peter Kirby

David Bowden

The usual refutation of Christian universalism rests on the basic definition of salvation as a gift of God's grace granted to those who come to have faith in Jesus as savior. If you've got that, you're saved. If not, you're doomed.

So, yes, God is willing to save all, and has done enough by sacrificing Jesus to save all, but if you don't do your part, (either because of your own free will you reject his salvation, or because you weren't chosen to receive it) then you won't get saved, noway, nohow.

Modern Evangelicalism, in the classic Protestant tradition, teaches that doctrine as basically self-evident in the NT. In Romans 1:16, Paul says, "I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes....as it is written, 'The righteous will live by faith.'" Orthodox faith in the Gospel as taught by Paul is pretty clearly what separates the saved from the unsaved.

Paul's idea of salvation hasn't gone unchallenged down through church history, and obviously Protestantism's interpretation of Paul isn't that of the Catholics. Any discussion of salvation between two Christians of even slightly different backgrounds can get hairy, fast. The mechanism for getting God's grace and mercy to actually work on people isn't a simple thing to understand, unfortunately.

Universalists can avoid all that bickering by citing the many instances in the NT where salvation seems to depend not so much on faith but on good works: God's grace is for all those who consciences keep them doing basically good things. See Matt. 25:31-46, and other parables which indicate that even calling Jesus "Lord" isn't enough for salvation, but where good works can apparently save even those who are ignorant of the Christian means of salvation.

Since everyone has a basically functional conscience, universalists believe we'll all redeem ourselves in the end, or perhaps have to go through repeated cycles or some sort of purgatory in order to complete our journey to heaven/into God himself.

In support of this interpretation, Revelation 20:12-13 implies that we're to be judged based on what we've done. No mention is made here of orthodox beliefs being necessary for salvation, although some of the prefatory letters in Rev. indicate that following certain heresies will bring on Christ's wrath, but overall in Rev salvation seems to be a matter of overcoming the temptations to depart from the practice of godly living, not maintaining certain beliefs.

Some Christians who wouldn't classify themselves as universalist would open the Heavenly Gates for nice Muslims, Hindus, and even atheists who just do their best with the light they've been given; God knows the heart, etc. They're condescending (we're right and you're okay) but at least they're not spouting fiery condemnations at all non-TrueChristians. But they'd keep Hitler and whomever else they really hate from entering, thus using hell to cause eternal pain to the most depraved souls in history, but it's nothing for the average nonChristian to worry about.

As far as I know, there's no scriptural argument to back up this more generous non-universalism. Most NT scripture is very clear: Faith in Jesus as Lord, or at least doing good works in Jesus' name, along with maintaining good fellowship with the community of believers, is absolutely necessary for salvation.

This is also exemplified 2 Jn, by all accounts a very late NT work: "Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God..." This seems to combine the notion of orthodox belief ("the teaching of Christ") as well as good works ("that you do not lose what you have worked for") as relevant to salvation.

Different theologians will put attach more weight to one or the other category of verses, depending on which notion of salvation they accept. The study of salvation theory is pretty active and it even has its own special subheading in theology: "Soteriology." I won't even pretend to be an expert here, so I'll stop with this basic scriptural material. That, and it's way past my bedtime.

-Wanderer

[ July 13, 2002: Message edited by: wide-eyed wanderer ]</p>