The Unconditional Election Debate: An Universalist Perspective

Pancho Frijoles

Well-known member
Dear readers:

People have always wondered why Christ's sacrifice seems to "fail", so to speak, in some people who remain doing evil things.
Does this mean that God's plans can be frustrated by a bunch of evildoers, infinitely inferior to Him?
Obviously not.
So, three big solutions have been proposed to this "problem"


1. CALVIN'S SOLUTION:
God's plan was to save only a few, by enabling them to accept the Gospel, and send the rest to eternal torment. So, his plan is not frustrated because that's exactly what happens in the end.

2. ARMINIAN SOLUTION:
God's plan was to save those who, in use of their free will, accept the Gospel and send to hell those who don't. So, his plan is not frustrated because that's exactly what happens in the end.

3. UNIVERSALIST SOLUTION:
God's plan was to save everyone, sooner or later, persuading (not forcing) men to accept the Gospel. So, his plan is not frustrated because that's exactly what happens in the end.

There are verses in the Bible that seem to support these each of these three propositions. For this reason, it has always been NECESSARY to interpret verses within a broader context. If we were to take them all literally, they would be contradictory. Verses need to be reinterpreted by the action of the Holy Spirit in our REASON, in our HEART.

My proposal to you is that instead of thinking "What is the solution dictated by the Bible?"
we should ask ourselves: "Which solution is compatible with the Bible, reason, and ethics, and helps me to love God and my neighbor more?"
This is the approach I invite you to take in reviewing this long debate.
 
Last edited:
These three non-solutions all rest upon our being sinful at our conception, already under the curse of the wages for sin, ie, death and suffering. They pay lip service to the holiness of GOD but at the same time believe HE creates sinners, an awkward pov smelling of blasphemy until doublethink (holding opposites to both be true at the same time) solves the problem.

1. CALVIN'S SOLUTION:
God's plan was to save only a few,
Since Calvinism does not find any difference or condition between those who are saved and those who are left to condemnation, I must reject it as a non-solution as it contradicts the GOD who is LOVE which does no harm, the GOD who is righteous who has no favourites and the GOD who is just, condemning people who have not earned it for any good reason.

2. ARMINIAN SOLUTION:
God's plan was to save those who, in use of their free will, accept the Gospel and send to hell those who don't.
This non-solution denies our enslavement to sin suggesting that we both have and have not a free will at the same time. It also puts the onus of salvation on the sinner, not the free gift by the grace of GOD. WE can't be enslaved by sin in any meaningful way and still have a meaningful will free from coercion since enslavement implies coercion. This too is only resolved by doublethink that the opposites that we are free yet enslaved at the same time is meaningful.

It also does not deal with the fact that once condemned, always condemned in that no one is freed from hell. Love is patient and love is kind and the epitome of this love is GOD. Such love would be waiting patiently at the gates of hell for eternity, waiting in case HIS creation changes their mind while in hell and then HE would let them out. Dismissing HIS love for a fake free will enslaved by evil leaves me cold and shivering.

HE can't let them out because without their acceptance of HIM as their saviour they have no power to go against the enslaving power of evil for them. By rebuking HIM as a liar and a false god, (not a saviour from sin at all but by his false claim to be divine he became the first sinner in all creation), they have put themselves into the grip of sin while disallowing HIM any recourse for their salvation.

3. UNIVERSALIST SOLUTION:
God's plan was to save everyone, sooner or later,
This just contradicts the bible and the Spirit of the bible too much for me to accept though I was briefly attracted to it half a lifetime ago. If I have to throw out all the references to the eternal nature of hell then I may as well throw it all out and just make up my own definitions from the biblical words. Since I was led into a faith where an eternal hell does not impugne GOD's goodness nor righteousness nor HIS loving kindness, I rest in HIM, my faith in the gospel stronger for my understanding of our creation, our fall into sin by our free will and the meaning of a saving faith.

So I offer
4. THE PRE-CONCEPTION EXISTENCE SOLUTION:
Everyone created in GOD's image, ie, able to become a proper Bride for HIM in the heavenly marriage, was created with a free will uncoerced in any way, with an equal ability and opportunity to accept HIM as our GOD and to accept HIS marriage proposal or to reject HIM as a liar and rebuke HIM as a false god.

NOTE: no one was created a sinner, nor as sinful or with any sin nature in the least. GOD is holy and cannot create anything unholy by any means, even by a surrogate like Adam, but in order for HIM to fulfill HIS plan to marry us, we had to accept HIS marriage proposal by our free will. This opens the door for anyone to reject HIM and HIS plan and, by turning from HIM by their free will, becoming enslaved to sin, ie, unable to save themselves by changing their minds and by rebuking HIM as a false god and a false saviour, forcing HIM to never go against their choice by saving them against their will.

By a true free will decision (ie, not while enslaved by sin NOR after seeing the proof of HIS deity and eternal power) all of hIS creation separated into HIS people or HIS eternal enemies, condemned already when they all saw the creation of the physical universe, the proof of HIS deity and eternal power which all the sons of GOD witnessed and sang HIS praise, Job 38:7.

All our sinfulness is by our free will.
Our election to salvation was HIS response to our accepting HIS proclamation of being our GOD and HIS gospel of salvation, Col 1:23. As believers, those who put their faith in HIM and HIS gospel, we are never condemned for our sins but those who rebuked HIM a s a false god and a false saviour were condemned already, Jn 3:18.

Then all self made sinners were all flung into the earth to work out the salvation of the sinful elect, Matt 13:27-30 : 36-39.
 
Last edited:
These three non-solutions all rest upon our being sinful at our conception, already under the curse of the wages for sin, ie, death and suffering. They pay lip service to the holiness of GOD but at the same time believe HE creates sinners, an awkward pov smelling of blasphemy until doublethink (holding opposites to both be true at the same time) solves the problem.


Since Calvinism does not find any difference or condition between those who are saved and those who are left to condemnation, I must reject it as a non-solution as it contradicts the GOD who is LOVE which does no harm, the GOD who is righteous who has no favourites and the GOD who is just, condemning people who have not earned it for any good reason.

2. ARMINIAN SOLUTION:

This non-solution denies our enslavement to sin suggesting that we both have and have not a free will at the same time. It also puts the onus of salvation on the sinner, not the free gift by the grace of GOD. WE can't be enslaved by sin in any meaningful way and still have a meaningful will free from coercion since enslavement implies coercion. This too is only resolved by doublethink that the opposites that we are free yet enslaved at the same time is meaningful.

It also does not deal with the fact that once condemned, always condemned in that no one is freed from hell. Love is patient and love is kind and the epitome of this love is GOD. Such love would be waiting patiently at the gates of hell for eternity, waiting in case HIS creation changes their mind while in hell and then HE would let them out. Dismissing HIS love for a fake free will enslaved by evil leaves me cold and shivering.

HE can't let them out because without their acceptance of HIM as their saviour they have no power to go against the enslaving power of evil for them. By rebuking HIM as a liar and a false god, (not a saviour from sin at all but by his false claim to be divine he became the first sinner in all creation), they have put themselves into the grip of sin while disallowing HIM any recourse for their salvation.


This just contradicts the bible and the Spirit of the bible too much for me to accept though I was briefly attracted to it half a lifetime ago. If I have to throw out all the references to the eternal nature of hell then I may as well throw it all out and just make up my own definitions from the biblical words. Since I was led into a faith where an eternal hell does not impugne GOD's goodness nor righteousness nor HIS loving kindness, I rest in HIM, my faith in the gospel stronger for my understanding of our creation, fall into sin by our free wil and the meaning of a saving faith.

So I offer
4. THE PRE-CONCEPTION EXISTENCE SOLUTION:
Everyone created in GOD's image, ie, able to become a proper Bride for HIM in the heavenly marriage, was created with a free will uncoerced in any way, with an equal ability and opportunity to accept HIM as our GOD and to accept HIS marriage proposal or to reject HIM as a liar and rebuke HIM as a false god.

NOTE: no one was created a sinner, nor as sinful or with any sin nature in the least. GOD is holy and cannot create anything unholy by any means,even by a surrogate like Adam, but in order for HIM to fulfill HIS plan to marry us, we had to accept HIS marriage proposal by our free will. This opens the door for anyone to reject HIM and HIS plan and by turning from HIM by their free will, becoming enslaved to sin, ie, unable to save themselves by changing their minds and by rebuking HIM as a false god and a fsaviour, forcing UM to never go against their choice by saving them against their will.

Your post is very rich in relevant reflections. I thank you for that, @TedT !
Had we interacted before? I'm not sure, but it will be a pleasure.

Perhaps I need to digest your post in pieces, but first thing that comes from my mind is to ask you to elaborate further in the difference between your solution ("THE PRECONCEPTION EXISTENCE") and the Arminian solution. Could you do that? Thanks in advance!
 
Love is patient and love is kind and the epitome of this love is GOD. Such love would be waiting patiently at the gates of hell for eternity, waiting in case HIS creation changes their mind while in hell and then HE would let them out. Dismissing HIS love for a fake free will enslaved by evil leaves me cold and shivering.
If possible, as a second petition, I would like you to explain further what you meant in this paragraph.

I believe in God's ability and desire to reach out those in hell, both in this life and in the afterlife.
I echo the image of God waiting patiently (as the father in the parable of The Prodigal Son), but not just waiting... I also imagine God actively seeking the lost sheep until he succeeds in bringing her back to the flock.
I also don't envision Him waiting or trying for eternity... He is much wiser and powerful and persuasive as to achieve what He wants in short time.
I believe hell lasts what it needs to last in order to achieve the desired objective.

In fact, I see punishment as an active (very active) way for God to express his love and make us realize we need Him.
 
Last edited:
why just these three?

This pits 2 groups against each other. and is the biggest form of frustration I have seen in any christian chatroom.

I would change the names

1. No free will
God's plan was to save only a few, by enabling them to accept the Gospel, and send the rest to eternal torment. So, his plan is not frustrated because that's exactly what happens in the end.

2. Free will
God's plan was to save those who, in use of their free will, accept the Gospel and send to hell those who don't. So, his plan is not frustrated because that's exactly what happens in the end.

3. Universalist
God's plan was to save everyone, sooner or later, persuading (not forcing) men to accept the Gospel. So, his plan is not frustrated because that's exactly what happens in the end.

I think this would cause alot less arguments and hopefully open up real dialogue insted of the consistent calvin vs arminian debates especially since most of us fall under neither of these two camps
 
Thanks for making the titles simpler, @Eternally-Grateful and specially thanks for your appreciation of a peaceful dialogue among Christians with different views.

*****

Theologically speaking, I think that our Calvinist friends would not agree to call their view "No free will". They believe in free will... it is just that they believe that people, by nature, exercise their free will to make bad choices ("total depravity"), until God regenerates their nature and make them able to make good choices.

I don't share their view... I am just explaining what I understand in order to be fair.
This is an example of how they see it:

An unregenerated office clerk wants to steal from the company. So, he uses his free will to choose among different options to steal money without being caught. He chooses what method to use, how much money to steal, when is the best moment to do it.... he could even choose not to steal, but not because of any appreciation for honesty, but because the present circumstances are not favorable for a successful theft.

Once transformed by God into a new person, the office clerk can exercise his free will to either steal or refrain himself from stealing, but for the right reason: because he values honesty.

If I'm not interpreting correctly the calvinist position, I beg our brother @brightfame52 to explain it better.
 
Last edited:
Calvinists use dishonest arguments like "do you think God failed" while presupposing what God's goal was in the first place. God can desire everyone to be saved without being a failure if everyone is not saved because God has multiple hierarchical desires, and his intent was not to override free will. If God is really love then he doesn't want children to be born with tumors and parents that molest them—but according to the dishonest argumentation of Calvinists, that already makes God a failure, so underneath, they really are saying God is partly evil and not all loving. This world, as it is, cannot be logically compatible with an all-loving God in their estimation, so God is no longer love, just "loving" to some.

And don't get me started on Calvinist's "not free" free will, double speak is not an argument, it's insanity.
 
Also you forgot one.

4. MORALIST'S SOLUTION:
Man is basically good and sin is not that bad, so you can just go to heaven by being a good boy and God doesn't really need to do much to forgive you. Jesus just died to show us what a great guy he was and how much he was willing to suffer, not to actually be punished for our sins.

 
Thanks for making the titles simpler, @Eternally-Grateful and specially thanks for your appreciation of a peaceful dialogue among Christians with different views.

*****

Theologically speaking, I think that our Calvinist friends would not agree to call their view "No free will". They believe in free will... it is just that they believe that people, by nature, exercise their free will to make bad choices ("total depravity"), until God regenerates their nature and make them able to make good choices.

I don't share their view... I am just explaining what I understand in order to be fair.
This is an example of how they see it:

An unregenerate office clerk wants to steal from the company. So, he uses his free will to choose among different options to steal money without being caught. He chooses what method to use, how much money to steal, when is the best moment to do it.... he could even choose not to steal, but not because of any appreciation for honesty, but because the present circumstances are not favorable for a successful theft.

Once transformed by God into a new person, the office clerk can exercise his free will to either steal or refrain himself from stealing, but for the right reason: because he values honesty.

If I'm not interpreting correctly the calvinist position, I beg our brother @brightfame52 to explain it better.
I see it a little different, To me that is too basic an example. the thing we have to remember here we are talking about our eternity. Romans 1 tells us not only do we know God. but we know we are rightly judged by God. so in reality. we know we are doomed, every man woman and child knows and sees this. One thing to remember, It is not choosing to do good or do bad. it is choosing to be rescued or deny being rescued. As you said, the person could chose not to steal.. Just not for good reasons.

Now with this in mind, lets use this example.

we are stranded out in the middle of the ocean un the middle of a hurricane, 30 - 60 foot waves are all round us, bashing us and unless we are rescued soon, we will perish (we are basically dead men swimming).

A rescuer arrives on seen.

free will states I can accept the rescuers offer of salvation. or I can continue to try to save myself, or deny I am even in any danger (I understand, how could they deny they are in danger, well Like romans 1 says they hid the truth of God in their hearts. they denied they even had an issue, and made up new gods) so according to what the person decides. Does he have faith in the rescuer, and allows him to rescue him, or does he reject (free will or option number 2)

now in this scenario. the fatalist, or Calvinist would say the person has no capacity to receive the rescuers offer. He can not know he is danger, he can not know he needs saved, and he is so depraved he can not even see the person who came to rescue them. According the fatalist. The rescuer would have to save them first (regeneration) before they even call out for rescue. and then AFTER they are saved, they finally are able to have faith in the rescuer. However. the rescuer chose to save him anyway, \

which brings us to the part of fatalism people do not like. If the rescuer did not chose to save the 'dead man swimming" he would not even offer it to him. the person would be lost no matter what. with no hope of even responding to the rescuer. hence we get a term I call double predestination.
 
Also you forgot one.

4. MORALIST'S SOLUTION:
Man is basically good and sin is not that bad, so you can just go to heaven by being a good boy and God doesn't really need to do much to forgive you. Jesus just died to show us what a great guy he was and how much he was willing to suffer, not to actually be punished for our sins.
this would be in line with universalism
 
I see it a little different, To me that is too basic an example. the thing we have to remember here we are talking about our eternity. Romans 1 tells us not only do we know God. but we know we are rightly judged by God. so in reality. we know we are doomed, every man woman and child knows and sees this. One thing to remember, It is not choosing to do good or do bad. it is choosing to be rescued or deny being rescued. As you said, the person could chose not to steal.. Just not for good reasons.

Now with this in mind, lets use this example.

we are stranded out in the middle of the ocean un the middle of a hurricane, 30 - 60 foot waves are all round us, bashing us and unless we are rescued soon, we will perish (we are basically dead men swimming).

A rescuer arrives on seen.

free will states I can accept the rescuers offer of salvation. or I can continue to try to save myself, or deny I am even in any danger (I understand, how could they deny they are in danger, well Like romans 1 says they hid the truth of God in their hearts. they denied they even had an issue, and made up new gods) so according to what the person decides. Does he have faith in the rescuer, and allows him to rescue him, or does he reject (free will or option number 2)

now in this scenario. the fatalist, or Calvinist would say the person has no capacity to receive the rescuers offer. He can not know he is danger, he can not know he needs saved, and he is so depraved he can not even see the person who came to rescue them. According the fatalist. The rescuer would have to save them first (regeneration) before they even call out for rescue. and then AFTER they are saved, they finally are able to have faith in the rescuer. However. the rescuer chose to save him anyway, \

which brings us to the part of fatalism people do not like. If the rescuer did not chose to save the 'dead man swimming" he would not even offer it to him. the person would be lost no matter what. with no hope of even responding to the rescuer. hence we get a term I call double predestination.
yes double predestination is the default position no matter how much they try and deny it since only the predetermined elect are saved and all others are damned. They cry wolf and try and soften that position but the fact is if one group is chosen then the other is chosen as well to damnation. The damned like the chosen have no choice in either their salvation or damnation. Its all predetermined via fatalism.
 
Calvinists use dishonest arguments like "do you think God failed" while presupposing what God's goal was in the first place.
Hi Dizerner

All theological models presented here have in common that God's plan cannot fail.
What makes those models different is our idea of what God had in mind when he made his plan. What He really intended to do.

  1. Some think "God wanted to save only few men, with no special condition or criteria in mind"
  2. Some think "God wanted to save only those who made the right choice"
The third model, the universalist, indeed, may be a variant of the second: God wanted to save those who made the right choice, but He wanted all men to make the right choice.

Arminians and Calvinists share the idea that some persons will NEVER EVER make the right choice. So, they will burn in hell forever.
In the case of Arminians, because those people, for some weird reason, remain rebellious for eternity, even when it is OBVIOUS that they made a wrong choice.
In the case of Calvinist, because those people, for some weird reason, were not touched by God's grace to help them make the right choice.

The Universalists, like me, think that all men end up making the right choice, here or in the afterlife, even if going through all the necessary pain (hell). This is the result of two things:
  1. After death, souls remain councious and can deliberate, understand, desire
  2. God keeps loving all souls forever. His love and plans do not depend on the biological survival of cells and organs.
 
Well, the term universalism itself does not specify exactly what people need saving from or how God saves them.
I can't speak for all forms of universalism, but I can speak for the universalism I uphold.
So let me address your two concerns:

What people need saving from: From hell, of course. Hell is a state of painful, sad separation from God, just like the Prodigal Son when he was peniless, lonely, devoid of dignity, and with nothing he could do to solve or mitigate his situation. I do believe in hell. What I don't believe is that hell has a sadistic purpose. It is a tool of God's justice, mercy and love so that people realize their desperate situation and come back to Him.

How God saves them: Using the same method. There is no other gospel. People (in this life or the afterlife) have to recognize in pain and in reason they did wrong, desire to change their situation, recognize they cannot do anything by themselves, and then cry out to God for salvation, as Jonah did from the belly of the fish, or like the tax-collector did next to the Pharisee.

So, universalists (at least those who share my view) do not skip hell and do not skip the gospel of salvation. There is only One Way, the one taught by Jesus and all God's Messengers: Repentance, faith (trust), and willingness to be transformed into a new person.

Fire is a figure used in the Bible not only to mean punishment, but also purification, transformation, renewal. Fire has these two symbolisms.
 
Last edited:
Hi Dizerner

All theological models presented here have in common that God's plan cannot fail.
if its Gods will that none should perish ( His plan ) and people perish that are not saved. Then by definition His will has failed.

God does not force His will/plan on people. God draws people via His grace yet man is still necked as Peter declared and they reject Him. Jesus even declares that Himself when He say Oh Jerusalem, Jerusalem how I longed for you and you would not listen. Matt 23:37- Paul makes the same case in Romans 9-11. This was Gods elect/chosen people who died in unbelief.

Like I have been saying love is a 2 way street and God does not force anyone to love Him. God is longsuffering towards us not willing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. He desire all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. 2 Pet 3:9.

There are so many passages in both testaments about God grace reaching out to His people and they continue to reject Him and worship idols. They played the role of the harlot. God was married to a harlot. The unfaithful people who were stiff necked, rebellious, idolators sacrificing their children to pagan gods.

These people were Gods plan to be the light to the world , for God to demonstrate a people that served Him and were faithful to Him. That was Gods plan and purpose for the Jews. Not them being idolators/harlots.

Gods plan and desire is never to cause them to sin and rebel against Him. That is calling evil good. Let no man say when he is tempted to sin that God caused it to happen. Thats the devils work.


Matthew 22:3
And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.

Matthew 23:37
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.

Luke 19:41
And when he drew nigh, he saw the city and wept over it,

Barnes:
the triumphant King and Lord of Zion wept! Amid all "his" prosperity, and all the acclamations of the multitude, the heart of the Redeemer of the world was turned from the tokens of rejoicing to the miseries about to come on a guilty people. Yet they "might" have been saved.

conclusion: Those whom He came to seek and save ( the lost ) rejected Him.

2 Corinthians 6:1
As God’s partners, we beg you not to accept this marvelous gift of God’s kindness and then ignore it.

Hebrews 10:29
Just think how much worse the punishment will be for those who have trampled on the Son of God, and have treated the blood of the covenant, which made us holy, as if it were common and unholy, and have insulted and disdained the Holy Spirit who brings God’s mercy to us.

Hebrews 12:25
Be careful that you do not refuse to listen to the One who is speaking. For if the people of Israel did not escape when they refused to listen to Moses, the earthly messenger, we will certainly not escape if we reject the One who speaks to us from heaven!

Hebrews 6:4-8
It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6 and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.

Here we have those receiving Gods grace sharing in the Holy Spirit of grace reject it. They have fallen away permanently from His grace and can no longer repent.

Psalm 78:17;40
But they continued to sin against Him, rebelling in the desert against the Most High. How often they disobeyed Him in the wilderness and grieved Him in the desert!

Here we see them in the wilderness rejecting Gods grace upon them and grieving God in the process.

People sin: Which separated all from fellowship with God.
Responsible: Able-to-respond to God’s appeals for reconciliation.
Open door: For anyone to enter by faith. Whosoever will may come to His open arms.
Vicarious atonement: Provides a way for anyone to be saved by Christ’s blood.
Illuminating grace: Provides clearly revealed truth so that all can know and respond in faith.
Destroyed: For unbelief and resisting the Holy Spirit.
Eternal security: For all true believers.

Gods teaching His Grace is resisted.

My top 20 reasons against grace being irresistible


1-Matthew 22:3
And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.

2-Matthew 23:37
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.

3-Luke 19:41
And when he drew nigh, he saw the city and wept over it,

4-Galatians 5:4-7
You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. For through the Spirit, by faith, we wait for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love. You were running well; who hindered you from obeying the truth?

5-Hebrews 12:14-15
Make every effort to live in peace with everyone and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord. 15 See to it that no one falls short of the grace of God and that no bitter root grows up to cause trouble and defile many.

6-2 Corinthians 6:1
As God’s partners, we beg you not to accept this marvelous gift of God’s kindness and then ignore it.

7-Hebrews 10:29
Just think how much worse the punishment will be for those who have trampled on the Son of God, and have treated the blood of the covenant, which made us holy, as if it were common and unholy, and have insulted and disdained the Holy Spirit who brings God’s mercy to us.

8-Hebrews 12:25
Be careful that you do not refuse to listen to the One who is speaking. For if the people of Israel did not escape when they refused to listen to Moses, the earthly messenger, we will certainly not escape if we reject the One who speaks to us from heaven!

9-Genesis 6:3: And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.”

10-2 Chronicles 36:15-16: And the Lord God of their fathers sent warnings to them by His messengers, rising up early and sending them, because He had compassion on His people and on His dwelling place. But they mocked the messengers of God, despised His words, and scoffed at His prophets, until the wrath of the Lord arose against His people, till there was no remedy.

11-Proverbs 29:1: He who is often rebuked, and hardens his neck, Will suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.

12-Isaiah 30:15 “For thus says the Lord God, the Holy One of Israel: ‘In returning and rest you shall be saved; In quiteness and confidence shall be your strength.’ But you would not.”

13-Isaiah 65:2“I have stretched out My hands all day long to a rebellious people, Who walk in a way that is not good, According to their own thoughts.”

14-Jeremiah 35:15 “I have also sent to you all My servants the prophets, rising up early and sending them, saying, ‘Turn now everyone from his evil way, amend your doings, and do not go after other gods to serve them; then you will dwell in the land which I have given to you and your fathers.’ But you have not inclined your ear, nor obeyed Me.”

15-Acts 7:51 “You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you.”

16-Acts 13:46: Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, “It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles.”

17-Romans 10:21: But to Israel he says: “All day long I have stretched out My hands To a disobedient and contrary people.”

18- Matthew 23:37: Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I have wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling.”

19- Hebrews 6:4-8
It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6 and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.

Here we have those receiving Gods grace sharing in the Holy Spirit of grace reject it. They have fallen away permanently from His grace and can no longer repent.

20- Psalm 78:17;40
But they continued to sin against Him, rebelling in the desert against the Most High. How often they disobeyed Him in the wilderness and grieved Him in the desert.

Adam who was “spiritually “dead hid from God in the garden and was able to communicate with God and understand Him. In the day you eat you shall surely die. So adam sinned and was spiritually dead and yet could communicate with God and understand God. “I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.” (Genesis 3:10)

Luke 16:27-31 -“He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’ Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’ He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

Above we see that Jesus declared the physical dead and spiritual dead can respond to spiritual things. The dead spiritual/physical dead man is pleading for his own brother’s life.

Jesus declares in John 5:25, “An hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.” Here Jesus says the spiritually dead can and will hear him

In Mark 2:17 Jesus said, “"It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners." The sick/spiritually dead can hear and understand Jesus- the sinner who is dead in their sins can understand.

In Romans 1 we read of the spiritually dead that they can perceive God and that Gods handiwork is self-evident to them and that the things of God are clearly seen by them so that they are without excuse. Romans 1:20- For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.”

conclusion: You see the doctrine of irresistible grace is unfounded and there are many unproven presuppositions built into Gods Sovereignty and mans condition and free will to choose or reject God. God does not force Himself on anyone for that by definition would be unloving, just as it would be for you or I to force another person to love you.

hope this helps !!!
 
Last edited:
So, universalists (at least those who share my view) do not skip hell and do not skip the gospel of salvation. There is only One Way, the one taught by Jesus and all God's Messengers: Repentance, faith (trust), and willingness to be transformed into a new person.

Yeah, well, you know I don't mean to be rude or caustic, but you have no atonement in your system and Jesus' death doesn't actually accomplish anything relating to the expiation of sin. You redefine the Gospel more in line with moralism than Christianity, which to be Christ-centered and honoring, must logically connect his death as the only method of purgation of wrong and forgiveness for our sins. Once you make a Crossless Gospel you have meandered outside of anything that can be called Christianity and are now in a form of Moralism or Do-Goodism.

Jesus said HE was the way, not moralism, not merely repentance in and of itself, and since Jesus preached he was a ransom for sin, removing that part actually and truly removes his claims to be the "One Way" and replaces him with a more palatable and moralistic non-Biblical Jesus who is nothing more than a humanitarian preaching good works to get to heaven, without his place of ultimate authority and work of atonement.

Now we can make many kinds of Universalism, but only some fall within the parameters we could consider remotely Biblical, and they must needs honor certain core and fundamental truths that Christ provides us with, one of which is the need for trusting him to be atonement for our sins.

So we can have:

1. Non-biblical Universalism: Jesus' death is not a necessary component for God to grant eternal well-being to all creatures.

2. Deterministic Universalism: God does not allow people to reject and so forces them all to accept Christ in the end.

3. Free will Universalism: God puts enough persuasion to bear on people they eventually have to cave in and accept.

And I would argue that #3 fundamentally violates free will as it is essentially complete coercion removing the possibility of rejection. You can argue that if people knew hell existed or experienced it, virtually no one would go there. This may be true, however, if someone wants to reject God and still feel like they can get away with it, they always have the capacity of self-deception to excuse and enable their choice.
 
Last edited:
if its Gods will that none should perish ( His plan ) and people perish that are not saved. Then by definition His will has failed.
I think this is answered in places like John 3.

whoever believes will never perish

or John 6

it is his will that whoever sees and believes.

It is his desire that all men is saved. But his will will not fail if not everyone is saved.
 
Back
Top Bottom