The Unconditional Election Debate: An Universalist Perspective

[TedT]

Nothing can escape his will.

The Bible ends with HIS marriage to HIS creation...suggesting that is why HE created in the first place. But a marriage forced by HIS will cannot be a real marriage and true love cannot be forced - they can only be chosen.

GOD is not a Borg who wants a Stepford wife, HE created us to choose to accept by our free will HIS proclamation of deity, the gospel as found only in the Son and HIS marriage proposal by our free will, not by the force of HIS grace.

Those who rebuked HIM as a husband and a false god left HIS purpose so as to enter into HIS enmity.

Those who accepted HIS proclamation, Col 1:23, to be their GOD and Saviour from sin and accepted becoming HIS bride, entered into HIS will as able to fulfill HIS purpose for their creation even though some later chose to go astray into sin and needed redemption and sanctification, ie, HIS sheep who later chose by their still free will to astray into sin, HIS sinful but good seed, the sinful people of HIS kingdom, the sinful elect.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Dizerner and @Eternally-Grateful

We are not discussing here Penal Substitutionary Atonement (PSA).

If a person is a PSA-believing Universalist, she may believe that all men will be persuaded, sooner or later, here or in the afterlife, to understand and accept PSA.
If a person is a Islamic Universalist, she may believe that all men will be persuaded, sooner or later, here on in the afterlife, to understand and accept the mission of Prophet Muhammed.
The point is that, whatever God's method of salvation happens to be, it will be available as long as God loves and human souls exists.

Dizerner and @Eternally-Grateful

I personally reject PSA, because I sincerely believe it is not a literal model of Jesus mission. My theological framework is different.
If I am wrong, God will let me know I am wrong, and why. Either here on earth or in the afterlife.
If I failed to believe in PSA due to ignorance, God will dissipate my ignorance. If I failed to believe due to arrogance, God will dissipate my arrogance, perhaps the harsh way: I will suffer, I will cry, I will gnash my teeth, and I will learn. From the belly of the whale in the middle of the ocean I will cry out to God, I will praise His Name, and He will listen.

Whatever is the reward or punishment God will give me, I will accept it because I trust his Wisdom, his Justice, his Mercy.

I don't want hell, just as any of you. But I don't fear hell. I focus on enjoying God's company, love and power in my life.

Jesus said on the day you eat you will die

The wage, the reward of sin is death. or separation from God.

The law showed the only means of forgiveness was the shedding of blood. Or an innocent lamb (without blemish) was slaughtered for the atonement.

That is in effect penal substitution.

Jesus, the lamb of God was slain for the world. so the world might be saved.

Salvation is a gift. It is not a reward. if you want to earn salvation. You will not like the outcome

while the wage of sin is death, the gift of God is life. through Jesus

if you committed one sin, you earn death.

I am sure you like the rest of us, have committed a lot more than one sin. just think of it this way. each sin you commit, comes with a death penalty.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

How do you reconcile saved by grace when enslaved to sin:
Ephesians 2:8-9 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works so that no one may boast.....
so,
I would argue that saved by grace denies our will BUT...it denies or overwhelms our enslaved will, NOT our free will because as enslaved to sin, we have no free will.

Let me share my two cents, Ted T

When Jonah was in the belly of the fish, which in turn was in the belly of the ocean, did Jonah have free will? If he did, could his free will help him out?
So, having free will doesn't mean that we have the ability to get out of prison. It just shows our willingness to get out of prison (or not).

To make a choice, we need free will but we also need the material, mental or spiritual means or resources to make a choice.
The drug addict has the free will to escape from his slavery, but lacks the resources to escape.
God provides those resources.

 

[Dizerner]

so,
I would argue that saved by grace denies our will BUT...it denies or overwhelms our enslaved will, NOT our free will because as enslaved to sin, we have no free will.

Right. We agree man's will is naturally enslaved.

But contrary to Calvinism, Classical Arminianism does not posit that you have to be born again to be born again.

Regeneration does not precede faith in Scripture.

Rather preceding Grace frees and empowers the will to accept or reject Christ's offer.

 

[Dizerner]

We are not discussing here Penal Substitutionary Atonement (PSA).

As soon as you bring in the Bible and Christ's sacrifice, you definitionally are.

If you don't want PSA, then leave out Christ's sacrifice and the Bible.

I don't care if people have the obviously incorrect opinion that Scripture denies Jesus is our atonement, it's simply demonstrably false.

If I am wrong, God will let me know I am wrong, and why. Either here on earth or in the afterlife.

He already has.

The afterlife will be too late, dear friend, and you will not be able to look me or God in the eye and say, "But you never warned me."

Whatever is the reward or punishment God will give me, I will accept it because I trust his Wisdom, his Justice, his Mercy.

Stop being selfish.

Do what GOD wants, instead of what YOU want, for once.

And he wants you to accept Christ before it is too late.

But I don't fear hell

And there's your fundamental problem, you don't listen to the real Jesus and make up one you like instead.

The REAL Jesus said:

But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear Him who,
after He has killed, has power to cast into hell;
yes, I say to you, fear Him! (Lk. 12:5 NKJ)

 

[TedT]

A true Arminian definition of free will seems to condone universalism, which I have chosen to reject.

Explain how that follows, I do not see a logical connection.

If I am correct that the Arminian definition of our enslavement to sin still allows us enough free will to change our minds and decide to put our faith in Christ for salvation then must I not also accept that those who change their minds in hell would also be saved and if so, then hell would be empty, no?

I do not think that those enslaved to sin can change their minds at all without the Holy Spirit...and since their choice to rebuke Him as a false god put themselves outside of HIS saving grace, they are eternally doomed.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

As soon as you bring in the Bible and Christ's sacrifice, you definitionally are.

Then we would include Christ's resurrection, incarnation, Second Coming, deity, baptism, the nature of the Holy Spirit, etc.
What about Sola Scriptura? Do we need to discuss Sola Scriptura for any of the 3 models? Do we need to discuss whether Catholics need to stop praying to Virgin Mary to be saved under any of the 3 models? Do we need to discuss biological evolution and whether it denies God as a Creator, or the inspiration of the Bible, for any of the 3 models?

No, my friend. The point of the thread is that, whatever the sacrifice of Jesus signifies for you, whatever the inspiration of the Bible means for you, you perceive some people around you as being in an unsaved situation. The three models presented here try to explain why this does not represent a failure in God's plan.

 

[TedT]

Well sin was not part of the plan. Sin was a result of God giving man free will..He wanted to have a relationship with them. you can not have a true relationship unless their is free will

Perfect!!

 

[TedT]

if you committed one sin, you earn death.

and,
if you die, it is proof you were / are a sinner.

 

[TedT]

Right. We agree man's will is naturally enslaved.

But contrary to Calvinism, Classical Arminianism does not posit that you have to be born again to be born again.

Regeneration does not precede faith in Scripture.

Rather preceding Grace frees and empowers the will to accept or reject Christ's offer.

Then why deny some sinners this preceding grace??? Are we saved by grace or not? If we get grace but reject it then we are doomed but if we get grace and accept it then we are saved by our own will, our own desire to be saved that has us accept the grace! IF that grace cannot be refused then GOD is going against the (so called) free will of the enslaved sinner and grace forces him to repent.

I think there is a name for the false logic here but I can't think of its name, sigh.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

He already has.

I honestly think God has shown me that He does not demand blood of an innocent in exchange for his mercy.
Since I have come to this conclusion through a spiritual journey, and through honest examination of Scriptures, including Scriptures that you don't believe in, I can face God knowing He will show me whatever error I could have made, and teach me accordingly.

Let me repeat this: I submit to God's will and to whatever reward or punishment He gives me, because I trust Him.

Be careful, my brother, because when you fear something too much for too long time, you start wanting that something to happen.
If you keep worried about me going to hell, you may end up wanting me to go to hell, just to confirm that, in the end, you were right and I was wrong.

Irrational fears are irrational wishes.
You better sleep tonight trusting that God loves you as much as He loves me.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

If I am correct that the Arminian definition of our enslavement to sin still allows us enough free will to change our minds and decide to put our faith in Christ for salvation then must I not also accept that those who change their minds in hell would also be saved and if so, then hell would be empty, no?

God wants an empty hell. Any country or judiciary system aims at having empty prisons.
And one day, God will be "all in all", as Paul says.
Can God be "all in all" if billions of people are screaming in hatred and eternal evil? Would God be there in them?
Death, hell, hatred, all of that will be defeated.
God always wins.

 

[Dizerner]

then must I not also accept that those who change their minds in hell would also be saved and if so, then hell would be empty, no?

It's too late in hell, there is no grace anymore.

 

[Dizerner]

Then why deny some sinners this preceding grace??? Are we saved by grace or not? If we get grace but reject it then we are doomed but if we get grace and accept it then we are saved by our own will, our own desire to be saved that has us accept the grace! IF that grace cannot be refused then GOD is going against the (so called) free will of the enslaved sinner and grace forces him to repent. I think there is a name for the false logic here but I can't think of its name, sigh.

Grace can ALWAYS be refused.

Only the Calvinists invented so-called "irresistible" grace which is no where found in Scripture.

Everywhere we are told "do not resist the grace of God," or "they resisted the grace of God."

The only false logic is from Calvinism saying a mere choice is somehow a meriting work.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

It's too late in hell, there is no grace anymore.

So, is evil eternal, and grace temporary?
I thought God, and his attributes, were eternal.

 

[Dizerner]

Then we would include Christ's resurrection, incarnation, Second Coming, deity, baptism, the nature of the Holy Spirit, etc. What about Sola Scriptura? Do we need to discuss Sola Scriptura for any of the 3 models? Do we need to discuss whether Catholics need to stop praying to Virgin Mary to be saved under any of the 3 models? Do we need to discuss biological evolution and whether it denies God as a Creator, or the inspiration of the Bible, for any of the 3 models?

Yes, we must discuss what is NECESSARY for salvation before we say HOW MANY are saved.

That's just simple logic.

 

[Dizerner]

I thought God...

I highly suggest you put down all the Bahai books, all the forum posts, all the logic you think you worked out.

And actually learn who Jesus really was and what Jesus really said.

Slowly and prayerfully reading Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Grace can ALWAYS be refused.

Only the Calvinists invented so-called "irresistible" grace which is no where found in Scripture.

Everywhere we are told "do not resist the grace of God," or "they resisted the grace of God."

The only false logic is from Calvinism saying a mere choice is somehow a meriting work.

Of course God's grace can be resisted.
We all have resisted God's grace at some point of our life, haven't we?
That proves that God's grace can be resisted.

However, we all here have been blessed by God's grace.
So, it proves that God has not given up on us.

To resist does not imply "to resist forever".
However, to love DOES imply "to love forever". Love never ceases to exist. (1 Cor 13:8)

I beg you to reflect on this: Evil can't be eternal. God loves forever.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Yes, we must discuss what is NECESSARY for salvation before we say HOW MANY are saved.

That's just simple logic.

We have done that in other threads, my friend.
We can continue our exchanges in those threads. Tag me in any of them and I promise to go and keep the dialogue.
What do you think? Please help me on this.

 

[GodsGrace]

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"

Hi Pancho...very nice thread.

I would say that the question is lacking and maybe you could clarify.
You state that some people remain doing evil things....does this mean that God's plan has been frustrated?

I don't see this as a problem but will respond to your 3 solutions anyway.

It's not a problem because God gave free will to man.
It's MAN'S free will that makes him do evil things.
The evil will not have access to heaven...
Revelation 21:27
27 and nothing unclean, and no * one who practices abomination and lying, shall ever * come into it, but only * those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life.

It is not God who fails....but man.
God has let man know what has to be done to be saved...
it's up to each person to do this or not to do this.

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.

This is not representative of the biblical God that revealed Himself beginning in Revelation.
Adam sinned. God could have just ended humanity right there, but God is a loving God and gave to man a second chance.
Twice God wanted to exterminate mankind...but He always left a remnant to continue on.

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.

I agree except I really dislike the statement "send to hell those that don't".
It's not so much that God wants to send anyone to hell...it's that a person that does not love and obey God and
is distant from Him and not in communion with HIm, or abiding in Christ...cannot be in the presence of God.
Wherever God is not after death....that will be hell.

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.

This is just not found in scripture as far as I can tell.
No further comment.

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.

Agreed 100%.
The bible is not a collection of verse but a complete message from God...
from Genesis to Revelation.

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.

I'd say the Arminian solution...although I don't know why it's called that, but I can't fight a loosing battle (I've tried).