Religion III

[Light]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I already proved that "all" or "whole world" can be used in the limited sense in scripture.

You never proved it one iota.

Originally Posted by boxcar

Furthermore, there is not one text in all scripture that says that Jesus died for each and every person in the world.. You're reading that into passages.

On the contrary, when the words "all" or "whole world" is redefined by you, it is you who are reading a whole new meaning into it. You claim to take the the Bible as the literal word of God , but clearly you don't. Yes I understand context, but you don't.

Nobody talks like you say. If someone says "I love the whole world", it means just that. There is no context to it.

If on the other hand someone says "I love my world", then there is clearly context that it does not mean the whole world.

The word "my" is a reflexive pronoun which refers back to the person who is talking. The word "the" does not.

Originally Posted by boxcar

Isa 49:5-6

5 And now the LORD says —
he who formed me in the womb to be his servant
to bring Jacob back to him
and gather Israel to himself,
for I am honored in the eyes of the LORD
and my God has been my strength —
6 he says:
"It is too small a thing for you to be my servant
to restore the tribes of Jacob
and bring back those of Israel I have kept.
I will also make you a light for the Gentiles,
that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth."
NIV

The text above does not say that God's Messiah would bring salvation to each and every person on the earth.

It also does NOT say he would NOT bring salvation to all. That's you reading into it. It certainly saying he will try to bring salvation to all. ("salvation to the ends of the earth")

Originally Posted by boxcar

But on top of all this, you have two insurmountable problems to overcome to prove your heresy of universalism.

[1. God is a COVENANT God.. But Jesus didn't make that New Covenant with each and every person in world -- he made that covenant with his disciples at that Supper, and by extension all the Gentile sheep that the Jewish believers would bring into the [covenant]sheepfold (read John 10 the Good Shepherd Discourse). Therefore, God never made a universal redemptive covenant with the entire world. His covenant is only with his chosen people, i.e. the elect.

You need to remember who came up with the idea that the Jews are Gods chosen ones. Drum roll:The Jews. Wow, who knew the authors of Judaism would declare they are the apple of God's eye. Such humility.

They wrote that for their own people. They declared themselves God's elect to give their race hope and strength. But that is THEIR invention, not God's.

And these chosen (elect) ones did not keep God's covenant. When the Temple was destroyed in 70AD, that was the end of their belief in Jesus as the son of God. They thought he was going to come down and destroy the Roman army who was oppressing them. Instead they were crushed by the Romans and that's why till this day they reject Jesus Christ as the Messiah.So who is your elect now?

So are you saying, the Jews,his elect, who reject Jesus as the true Messiah are the ones that will be saved because they declared they are his elect even though they don't follow him? Sorry not possible. Jesus says all that believe in me are his elect. They Jews don't believe he is the true Messiah.

While all the billions of Gentiles who do believe in Jesus and follow Jesus now will just be trashed because it does not say they are his elect in the Bible?

My point is to show how utterly stupid this concept of the elect is. The elect reject him but they are saved while the gentiles believe in him but are trashed. An absolute joke.

[Light]

Now that you know what a "reflexive pronoun" is, note that the most well know verse in the Bible does not use it.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

There is no "my" as a "reflexive pronoun" in that verse. It doesn't say God so loved "his own world", or the world of the "elect".

The word "the" defines the meaning of a noun, in this case the "world". When you use the word "the" you are referring to a specific thing. The "elect" are no where to be seen here. The world is the world here.

There is nothing to take out of context here. If you do, then everything God says means something different and you end up with pure nonsense which is what your "elect" is.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Light

Now that you know what a "reflexive pronoun" is, note that the most well know verse in the Bible does not use it.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

There is no "my" as a "reflexive pronoun" in that verse. It doesn't say God so loved "his own world", or the world of the "elect".

The word "the" defines the meaning of a noun, in this case the "world". When you use the word "the" you are referring to a specific thing. The "elect" are no where to be seen here. The world is the world here.

There is nothing to take out of context here. If you do, then everything God says means something different and you end up with pure nonsense which is what your "elect" is.

It doesn't have to say "my"; for this is God's world! And he owns every single thing in it! Jesus Christ is the King of kings and Lord of lords, while at the same time God has seen fit to grant to his adversary the devil his wish for lordship by making Satan the under lord of this world.

Also, God only loves his own. Jesus taught that, remember? Why can't you believe your "best friend"? God only loves those who love his Son and who believe on him. That's what Jesus said in John 14. And Jesus' theology was dead on the money because it's grounded in HIS OT scriptures.

Ps 32:10
10 Many are the woes of the wicked,
but the LORD's unfailing love
surrounds the man who trusts in him.
NIV

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Light

You never proved it one iota.

On the contrary, when the words "all" or "whole world" is redefined by you, it is you who are reading a whole new meaning into it. You claim to take the the Bible as the literal word of God , but clearly you don't. Yes I understand context, but you don't.

Nobody talks like you say. If someone says "I love the whole world", it means just that. There is no context to it.

If on the other hand someone says "I love my world", then there is clearly context that it does not mean the whole world.

The word "my" is a reflexive pronoun which refers back to the person who is talking. The word "the" does not.


It also does NOT say he would NOT bring salvation to all. That's you reading into it. It certainly saying he will try to bring salvation to all. ("salvation to the ends of the earth")

You need to remember who came up with the idea that the Jews are Gods chosen ones. Drum roll:The Jews. Wow, who knew the authors of Judaism would declare they are the apple of God's eye. Such humility.

They wrote that for their own people. They declared themselves God's elect to give their race hope and strength. But that is THEIR invention, not God's.

And these chosen (elect) ones did not keep God's covenant. When the Temple was destroyed in 70AD, that was the end of their belief in Jesus as the son of God. They thought he was going to come down and destroy the Roman army who was oppressing them. Instead they were crushed by the Romans and that's why till this day they reject Jesus Christ as the Messiah.So who is your elect now?

So are you saying, the Jews,his elect, who reject Jesus as the true Messiah are the ones that will be saved because they declared they are his elect even though they don't follow him? Sorry not possible. Jesus says all that believe in me are his elect. They Jews don't believe he is the true Messiah.

While all the billions of Gentiles who do believe in Jesus and follow Jesus now will just be trashed because it does not say they are his elect in the Bible?

My point is to show how utterly stupid this concept of the elect is. The elect reject him but they are saved while the gentiles believe in him but are trashed. An absolute joke.

In Isaiah 49, where are the GENTILES if not scattered to the ends of the earth!?

Again, the text in Isaiah does NOT say he would bring salvation to each and every on the earth. Only that salvation would eventually be brought to the Gentiles (the non-covenant people of God at the time of that writing) who were scattered all over he world.

And, yes, I know who came up with the idea that Jews are the Chosen People of God: God did! If the scriptures are not divinely inspired as they teach, then you need to prove that.

Also, God made covenants with people prior to making the Mosaic Covenant with the Jews.

Also, Jesus was a Jew. So, going by your logic, he can't be believed because he's a biased, elitist, ego-maniacal Jew who had grandiose ideas about himself. The fact that you summarily reject the OT, speaks volumes. No wonder you CAN'T believe your "best friend". You're actually an antisemite! You're a bigot! You actually think all the Jewish OT writers are bunch of lying, religious, hateful fanatics on a giant ego trip who looked down their condescending snouts on the Gentile world, thinking that they alone had the in with the Creator of the world.

Don't forget: your "best friend" himself had the audacious temerity to think he was someone special, too, when HE made the New Covenant with the Jews -- with his disciples at the Last Supper. When He did that, he fulfilled this prophecy:

Jer 31:31-37
31[i] "The time is coming," declares the LORD,"when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. 32 It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt,because they broke my covenant,though I was a husband to them," declares the LORD. 33 "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time," declares the LORD."I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts.I will be their God,and they will be my people. 34 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,'because they will all know me,from the least of them to the greatest," declares the LORD."For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more."
35 This is what the LORD says,
he who appoints the sun to shine by day,who decrees the moon and stars to shine by night,who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar — the LORD Almighty is his name: 36 "Only if these decrees vanish from my sight,"declares the LORD,"will the descendants of Israel ever cease to be a nation before me."
37 This is what the LORD says:
"Only if the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below be searched out will I reject all the descendants of Israel because of all they have done," declares the LORD.
NIV

When Jesus made that New Covenant and he blessed the cup of wine which signified his blood, he said that his blood would be poured out for MANY. He didn't say for all. He didn't say for the world. He didn't say for everyone. He didn't say for each and every person. Since when does "many" = "everyone"?

Since Jesus never made the New Covenant with each and every person in the world, then your universalism falls dead on the floor! Jesus did indeed make the New Covenant with his Jewish disciples at the Last Supper -- and by extension with the elect Gentiles, since the Church of God, which consists of born-again, believing Jews and Gentiles is the Israel of God. But even more importantly, since Jesus fulfilled the above passage in Jeremiah 31, this was, yet, another way he claimed to be deity! Don't forget: YHWH is speaking in the above passage: "I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel.." So, by Jesus making it, he was claiming to be equal with YHWH! It was always God Almighty himself who initiated all the covenants in the OT; and so it was at the Last Supper, as well, when the Old Covenant was getting ready to disappear forever.

But on top of all this this Jesus Christ himself is the embodiment of the New Covenant. His Father appointed him to be a covenant "for the people".

Isa 42:6-8
6 "I am the Lord; I have called you in righteousness;
I will take you by the hand and keep you;
I will give you as a covenant for the people,
a light for the nations,
7 to open the eyes that are blind,
to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon,
from the prison those who sit in darkness.
8 I am the Lord; that is my name;
my glory I give to no other,
nor my praise to carved idols.
ESV

Note once again that in this messianic prophecy, it doesn't say to ALL the people. But to the people of the [Gentile] nations to whom Jesus would shine as a Light in this dark world.

So, yeah, Mr. Light-headed, CONTEXT in communication means a lot. A text interpreted out of context is nothing less than a pretext. We can make anything mean anything when we ignore context.

And I'm still waiting on a bunch of answers from you. Since you insist that the term "world" = everyone, = all, = each and every person in it, then why didn't Jesus pray for everyone in this world in John 17? See...I can tell you why. But you can't because you're spiritually ignorant and your soul is filled with darkness. But I'll give you a little hint: The answer is right in John 17 itself.

Also, you need to explain why everyone in this world is presently not a born again disciple of Jesus Christ since you claim that God saves all. If indeed He's saving all, then that has to mean, according to what Jesus taught in John 6, that his Father has given all to Him to be saved and that everyone He has been given will believe on Hm in this present age. But this is hardly the factual situation in this world, is it? The vast majority in this world doesn't believe in Christ. (In fact, as Jesus taught, the world actually hates him.) You can't have this both ways: You can't say in one breath that God saves all; but then either ignore John 6 or in the next breath make some lame excuse for why all are not currently saved in this age.

Then you need to square your universalism with what Jesus taught in Matthew 25 about Him judging the world, which consists of "sheep" and "goats" at his Second Coming. Why two classes of of people if all are saved?

In fact, you haven't proved diddly squat until you reconcile all the above passages with your lame universalism.

And don't over-tax your little head with what a passage doesn't say, or with what you think it should say. Instead, address a text by what it DOES actually say. And make sure it harmonizes with the rest of scripture. For example, does this following passage teach that Christ purchased with his blood each and every person in the world:

Rev 5:9-10
9 And they sang a new song:

"You are worthy to take the scroll
and to open its seals,
because you were slain,
and with your blood you purchased men for God
from every tribe and language and people and nation.
10 You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God,
and they will reign on the earth." ?
NIV

[boxcar]

When "universal" terms are used in the bible, they need to be understood in their context, in terms of their different usage and also we must strive to understand God's revelation from the perspective of the original audience who received it and from the writer's intent.

It was ingrained in the vast majority of Jews that they were the Chosen People of God. They were his covenant people exclusively. They were well aware of God's covenants that he made with people in the Jewish scriptures, e.g. Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Circumcision, Mosaic, Davidic, even the promised New Covenant. And they were also very aware that God made no such covenants with the Gentiles per se, i.e. the rest of the nations of the world! Paul brings this truth out poignantly by telling the Gentile Church that they were formerly excluded from the covenants.

Eph 2:11-13
11 Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men)— 12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.
NIV

So...if the Gentiles were without hope under the Old Covenant dispensation -- without God, without the covenants, and all these people died without any
salvific remedy back then...or as Paul said "at that time", then how could a just, righteous, holy, immutable God decide to save each and every person under this New Covenant dispensation?

At any rate...once we understand that the world consists of two kinds of people and that in turn both of these groups consists of two subsets, then it's easy, natural, reasonable and scriptural to believe (as the Jews would have) that the world that God "so loved" consisted of Jews and Gentiles. John 3:16 was telling the Jews of Christ's day that a new day has dawned and that God's tender mercies and love were no longer limited to just the Jews but now would extend to [believing] Gentiles as well, ergo "the world".

[Actor]

YouTube

[boxcar]

Lord winning and the crik doesn't rise, I'm going to do a series on Universalism that will expose the utter absurdity to universal salvation. The simple-minded universalist says that such terms or phrases like the "world" or "whole world" must mean everyone without exception -- that His love is for everyone in particular. This is how they interpret Jn 3:16, for example. The "world" God so loved is everyone in the distributive sense. However, I will argue that the biblical way of interpreting these so-called universal terms is the general sense. Therefore, I will begin this series by defining the adjective "general". Here are all the ways my M-W Collegiate defines "general":

Main Entry: 1gen£er£al
Pronunciation:*jen-r*l, *je-n*-
Function:adjective
Etymology:Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin generalis, from gener-, genus kind, class— more at KIN
Date:14th century

1 : involving, applicable to, or affecting the whole
2 : involving, relating to, or applicable to every member of a class, kind, or group *the general equation of a straight line*
3 : not confined by specialization or careful limitation
4 :[b] belonging to the common nature of a group of like individuals : GENERIC
5 a : applicable to or characteristic of the majority of individuals involved : PREVALENT b : concerned or dealing with universal rather than particular aspects
6 : relating to, determined by, or concerned with main elements rather than limited details *bearing a general resemblance to the original*
7 : holding superior rank or taking precedence over others similarly titled *the general manager*

Note particularly definitions 2, 4 and 5 because these are closely related. Notice especially, please, #5 in this group. As we can see there is a universal component to the general sense, but it's in both the quantitative and qualitative senses! A majority of individuals in a specific group can share share certain characteristics. Or as #4 says above, the individuals in a group have a common nature.

And definition #2 applies to the general sense of interpretation because it talks about class or kind. And we know that the world consists of two classes of people: Jews and Gentiles. Saints and Sinners. Sheep and Goats. Children of Light and Children of Darkness. Children of God and Children of the Devil. Lovers of the Truth and Haters of the Truth, etc., etc.

Even definitions 1 and 3 can apply to a biblical text. It could apply to more than one group without regard for specialization or limitation. Jn 3:16 tells us that God so loved the world (i.e. nations) which in turn consists of two groups: Jews and Gentiles -- without distinction. Obviously, context counts for much when interpreting any form of communication. Only dishonest people with agendas would discount or even outright dismiss the importance of context, as this would give them license to read anything they want into any given passage to make it say what tickles their ears.

So, with these definitions in mind, we'll begin to examine several biblical texts in my next post to see which interpretative sense is true of these so-called universal terms or phrases. We'll find out which sense harmonizes with the entire context of the bible, and which one doesn't and would render the bible a hopeless, hapless, incoherent volume of literature filled with numerous contradictions.

[boxcar]

So, let's begin our journey down the Broad Path that leads to Destruction: In this case Universalism. We'll start with passage I quoted several days ago to which Light had no answer (as ususal)!

1. The Whole World has Gone After Jesus

John 12:18-19
18 Many people, because they had heard that he had given this miraculous sign, went out to meet him. 19 So the Pharisees said to one another, "See, this is getting us nowhere. Look how the whole world has gone after him!"
NIV

Don't forget: To a universalist, terms or phrases such "world", "whole world", "all men", etc. always mean each and every person without exception. So, to be consistent with their interpretation of these kinds of terms and phrases, they must interpret the above passage the same way they do Jn 3:16, for example. Therefore, everyone in this world, without exception, went out seeking Jesus. People in North America, South America, Antarctica, Asia, Central America, Europe, they Pygmies in Africa, headhunters in the Amazon -- wherever there were people on this planet, they all, without exception, went out seeking after Jesus. However, some thinking people might balk at this kind of absurd interpretation. Honest, thoughtful people would interpret this passage in its immediate context and see that "many people" puts a limit on the "universal" term "whole world". After all, the whole world didn't see Jesus' "miraculous sign" -- only "many" did. So, it is eminently reasonable to conclude that the Pharisees spoke hyperbolically out of their frustration with Jesus' growing popularity among the masses, who the Pharisees generally despised.

2. The Faith of Christians in Rome was Proclaimed Throughout the Whole World.

Rom 1:8
8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is being reported all over the world.
NIV

We have a similar situation with this passage as with the preceding one. But the solution is different, for Paul wasn't speaking hyperbolically. Again, the immediate context of the passage helps us to understand Paul's meaning. Verse 5 tells us that Paul received his apostleship "to call people from among all the Gentiles". Notice carefully that Paul was not commissioned to call each and every person in the world. He wasn't charged with calling ALL people from all the Gentiles!

Paul went on to say in v14 that he was obligated to both Greeks and non-Greeks -- two main subsets in the Gentile world.

So, when Paul told the Church in Rome that their faith was being proclaimed all over the world -- he meant the known Gentile world within the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire was essentially the world really known among the ancients in Paul's day. And this makes sense because Paul traveled extensively throughout the Roman Empire on his missionary journeys to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. This is how he would know that the faith of the Christians in Rome was well known throughout the Roman Empire, i.e. "all over the world". Also, we shouldn't forget that Gentiles is a class of people in this world.

3. The whole World is Accountable to God

Rom 3:19
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God.
NIV

So, again, who is the "whole world"? Paul again tells us in v.9 "Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin". I'm not making it up when I say this was (and to a great extent still is today) the mindset of Jews. When they think "world" they think Jews and Gentiles. Of course, in this case every Jew and every Gentile will stand before Christ on Judgment Day, but it will only be the unbelievers who will be condemned.

4. Whole World is Under the Power of Sin

Gal 3:21-22
22 But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
NIV

But does this mean everyone in this world without exception? Did Paul contradict himself in Romans 6 wherein he teaches that Christians were formerly slaves of sin but now they are slaves to righteousness? Christians have been set free from the power of sin - from the dungeon of darkness that used to be the state of their souls. Even Jesus taught that He has set the prisoners [of sin] free (Lk 4:18-21)!

But perhaps even more importantly, once again Paul right in the context of the above Galatians passage tells us: "Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed" (v.23).

Therefore, when he said the whole world IS held prisoner by sin (present tense), he is talking about an entire class of people in this world, i.e unregenerate sinners. He's talking about a class of people who share a common characteristic, i.e. their sinful, corrupt nature. These people are prisoners to sin. They are under its power.

I'm going to stop here now and pick this up later. I still have important passages to share -- one of them being John 17 in which Jesus did not include the world in his intercessory, high priestly prayer to his Father.

[Actor]

YouTube

[boxcar]

Let's see if we can wrap this up in this post.

5. The Whole World is Under the Power of the Evil One

1 John 5:19
19 We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one.
NIV

This problem is similar to number 4. But, again, this cannot mean everyone without exception. See Rom 6:14-18 again. Also see what John said earlier in this epistle in 3:8 in which he said that "The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work".

Moreover, in the more immediate context of 5:19, he said in the preceding verse that no one born of God continues in sin, that is to say, lives a lifestyle of ongoing sin. Therefore, since it's unreasonable to think that John contradicted himself from one breath to another, we can only reasonably conclude that by the "whole world" he limits that to just a class of people who are not believers -- who have never been born again, and therefore, have no power to extricate themselves from the power of their spiritual father, the devil.

6. Do Not Love the World or Anything in it

1 John 2:15
15 Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
NIV

So...a consistent universalist would need to explain how Christians are called to love their neighbors, theirs spouses, their sons, their daughters, their parents, fellow believers, etc. and yet at the same time not love any of these people because, after all, they're in the world and part of the world. The above text does say to not love anything in this world. The command is NOT to love the world! If the world is every person it it without exception, then what do we do with all the commands to the contrary!? See 1 Jn 3:11, 23; 4:7, 11-12, etc.

The best way to understand this command is this passage:

James 4:4-6
4 You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God. 5 Or do you think Scripture says without reason that the spirit he caused to live in us envies intensely? 6 But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says:

"God opposes the proud
but gives grace to the humble."
NIV

When John tells us, therefore, to not love the world, he's saying don't love the world's ways. Or as Paul said in 2Cor 6:14-16, Christians are not to be yoked together with unbelievers. The Children of Light cannot have fellowship with the children of darkness. Also, righteousness and wickedness have nothing in common. To love the worldly or the world system is to have an affinity with it. A Christian would be aligning himself with the devil, who is the "prince of this world'. This is why Christians, like their God and Savior, are to hate all that is evil.

7. Christ is the Atoning Sacrifice for the Sins of the Whole World

1 John 2:2
2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins , and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
NIV

If Jesus actually died for each and every person in the world without exception, then the entire world would be filled with nothing but disciples of Jesus Christ; for this means that His Father gave the entire world to Him (John 6), but we know this isn't the case. The whole world is not filled with Jesus' disciples. Not even close!

The apostle John, whose ministry was primarily to the Jews (Gal 2:7-10), again was writing from the perspective his original Jewish audience would have clearly understood. The "whole world" would have been understood to have included Gentiles -- clearly a distinctive class of the world's population.

8. The World Hates Christ and His Disciples

John 15:18-25

18 "If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. 19 If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. 20 Remember the words I spoke to you: 'No servant is greater than his master.' If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also. 21 They will treat you this way because of my name, for they do not know the One who sent me. 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin. Now, however, they have no excuse for their sin. 23 He who hates me hates my Father as well. 24 If I had not done among them what no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin. But now they have seen these miracles, and yet they have hated both me and my Father. 25 But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law: 'They hated me without reason.'
NIV

The "world" in this passage cannot possibly be each and every person in it without exception. For one thing not everyone in the world hates Christ. None of the born again children of God hate Jesus. In fact, I don't believe that's even possible, since the children of God have the Holy Spirit living with them.

For another thing, what about all the infants, babies and young children who have little or no understanding of Good and Evil? How could they consciously hate Jesus?

Again, the big clue of what is being said here is in v.19. That since the disciples don't belong to the devil's world -- to his world system -- the world will hate them as it hates Jesus. Jesus clearly told his disciples that the world will hate them because He chose them to come out of the world system. The world will hate the disciples just as it hates both Father and Son (vv. 23, 24).


9. Jesus Does Not Pray for the World

John 17:9
9 I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours.
NIV

To many (including many Christians), the above text seems to be incongruous with the rest of the bible, especially NT passages. Why would Jesus say such a thing when "God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son" to it (Jn 3:16)? Or perhaps, even more perplexing, when Jesus himself said that he didn't come into this world to judge it but to save it (Jn 12:47)? Why wouldn't He have prayed for the world (for everyone without exception) and yet not pray for the world (for everyone without exception)? In John 17, Jesus clearly limited his intercessory prayer to his Father's elect, that is to say, believers contemporary with Him and future believers who would embrace the gospel by faith through their preaching and the preaching of all future generations of believers.

The biggest clue to understanding why Jesus prayed what he did is to be found in verses 14 and 16 wherein Jesus taught that the elect are not OF this world, anymore than He was OF this world. Yes, they're "in" the world, but not OF its system. They are not worldly. Instead, they are God's HEAVENLY kingdom people. This prayer actually strengthens my argument in #6.

What is also fascinating about this passage is Jesus went on to say his disciples are ONE with the Father and the Son, and their unity with the Godhead would contribute to the world's believing the gospel (v21). In v. 23, he further says of this unity that the world would know that Jesus was sent from the Father and that He loved them (the disciples) even as the Father loved Him. Not a thing in this passage about how God's love for the world for which Jesus did not pray -- only that the world would come to see the Father's love for Jesus and the elect through the elect's sanctified life.

Last argument as this is already too long. But I have to get this one in.

10. The Argument of the Many and the Few Refutes Universalism

As pointed our previously, when Jesus instituted the New Covenant at the Last Supper, he clearly said this:

Matt 26:27-28
27 Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for MANY for the forgiveness of sins.
NIV

Clearly, "many" does not equate to everyone in the world without exception.

Then we have this passage:

Matt 7:13-14
13 "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a FEW find it.
NIV

So, how can "few" = everyone without exception? In other words, most enter through the broad gate that leads to perdition (destruction). Only a few find the narrow "gate". And that "gate", incidentally, is none other than Christ himself (Jn 10:7-9). There is no other way TO God the Father except through the God the Son, i.e. Jesus Christ incarnate!

[boxcar]

although I personally don't find these to be difficult passages at all. Sadly, though, even many professing Christians do. But careful exegesis of scripture in its context almost always provides the accurate interpretation. Christians are workmen of God and are enjoined to "correctly handle the word of truth" (2Tim 2:15), which is why I'm here now to briefly exegete 2Pet 3:8-9 and 1Tim 4:10 in this order.

2 Peter 3:8-9
8 But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
NASB

This passage comes in the context of Peter warning the "beloved" that in the last days mockers will come telling the Church that Jesus isn't returning. These heretics will mock the Parousia (Second Coming). But Peter not only warns his readers about this but explains to them in the above passage why Jesus hasn't returned yet -- why the Day of the Lord (a/k/a Judgment Day) has not occurred yet. He tells his readers that Lord is patient toward YOU, not willing that ANY should perish but that ALL should come to repentance. Universalists interpret this as saying that God does not wish that anyone at all to perish. God wants everyone without exception to be saved. The only problem with this interpretation is that it ignores the context of the passage.

We should ask the question: Who is the "beloved", "you", "any" and "all in this short passage? Does Peter have in mind one group (class) of people or multiple classes? So, the first order of business is to determine who Peter is writing to! We can cut to the chase to answer this important question very quickly once we notice that he told the "beloved" a little earlier that this was his second letter to them (3:1). And in 1:1 he clearly wrote to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours. And if there's still any lingering doubt that he wasn't writing to believers (or to be even more precise to Jewish believers in the Messiah), we can go to his First Epistle to see how he addressed that one: To God's elect... (1Pet 1:1).

Now that we've irrefutably established who the recipients of the second letter were, i.e. "you", "beloved', all that is left to do to is establish who "any" and "all" are. Is this group different from the first, or are they one and the same? Many interpret this passage as saying there were two groups in Peter's mind. But the big problem with that interpretation is that it creates a logical disconnect. It should be asked why would God be patient toward the elect ("you") if he's not willing that any unsaved sinners perish? Wouldn't God exercise patience toward the unsaved rather than the elect who are already saved!? However, the passage is totally coherent if Peter has just one group in mind -- the elect! After all, at the time of that writing, all the predestined elect from eternity had not entered the kingdom of God yet, so it makes sense that the Second Coming would be "delayed". Therefore, God is patient toward all his elect -- not wanting any of them to perish, which is precisely why the Day of the Lord has not arrived yet. God is not willing that any of His chosen people perish...but that they all enter his kingdom as he has decreed in eternity.

More solid evidence that this is indeed the correct interpretation can be found in the life of Paul. Paul speaks of God's patience toward him, and toward ALL who would believe in Jesus, to Timothy. This is an incredible passage:

1 Tim 1:15-16
15 Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners — of whom I am the worst. 16 But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life.
NIV

Clearly, then, Peter was not telling the saints, to whom he was writing, that God was not willing that any sinner in the world perish. Not at all! Rather, he was telling them that the Second Coming is delayed (humanly speaking), and God is patient toward the elect (all those who will come to believe) because He is not willing that any of his elect should perish. In fact, if Peter had said, "God is not willing that any [of you] should perish, it would not change the sense of the passage one iota.

In my next post, we'll take up 1Tim 4:10.

[boxcar]

1 Tim 4:10
10 For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.
NASB

The bolded part is a qualifying phrase which many interpreters carelessly or conveniently overlook when giving their interpretation. But before getting to that clause, we have another "universal" phrase to deal with first: "all men".

Did Paul mean "all men" without exception, or "all men" without distinction? If the first, then that would mean each and every person in the world; and this would contradict numerous other scriptures. But if the latter, then this would mean "without regard for [covenantal] status" before God. In other words, God is the Savior of Jews (his Old Covenant people) and now also the Gentiles (who at the time of Paul's writing were being brought into the New Covenant relationship with God). And this latter interpretation would harmonize with the rest of scripture.

This phrase "all men" is used elsewhere in scripture, too. A passage that comes immediately to mind is this one:

John 12:32-33
32 But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself." 33 He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die.
NIV

Yet, we know that "all men" without exception are not drawn to Christ today, nor historically have they ever been! So...did Jesus have this all wrong? Or did He mean that he would draw "all men" to himself in the without distinction sense? In other words, in the general sense of the two classes of people in the world: Jews and Gentiles? If this latter sense, then Jesus had it right; for there are and have always been Jewish and Gentile believers in the world, i.e. "all men".

But what did Paul have in mind when he wrote to Timothy? Does the context of 1 Timothy help us out? Yes, it does!

1 Tim 2:1-7
2:1 I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all men — the testimony given in its proper time. 7 And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle — I am telling the truth, I am not lying — and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.
NIV

For what purpose was Paul appointed a "herald and an apostle"? Was it not to fulfill Jesus' Great Commission and His specific commission to Paul, as well, to take His Gospel to "all men", i.e. the Gentile nations? Moreover, when Paul went out on his missionary journeys, it was his habit to first take the Gospel to the Jews in their synagogues throughout the Roman Empire and then to the Gentiles. Paul literally preached and taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ to both classes of humanity -- Jews and Gentiles, i.e. all men without distinction of status.

So, now when we come back to our original verse under consideration, it can indeed be said that "God is the Savior of all men" because he is the Savior of both classes of peoples in the world -- Jews and Gentiles. And this interpretation is further reinforced by that bolded text in 4:10 "especially believers" or as some translations read, "especially those who believe". The reason why this bolded part is so important is because of the verb tenses in the first and second part of the verse.

Paul said in 10a. that he and others who have preached "have fixed" (past tense) their hope on the living God; but then tells Timothy in part b. God is the Savior especially of those who believe (present tense). The reason this is so important is that true biblical faith is not just a one time act -- it is a lifelong, lifetime, ongoing act -- a faith that believers take to the grave with them!!! (See Mat 24:13, Jn 8:31; 15:19; Acts 14:21-22; Col 1:22-23; Heb 3:12; 10:38; 1Pet 1:10-11).

Therefore, what Paul has done in this one verse is go from the general sense in part A to the particular sense in part B. He goes from "all men" without distinction of status to very specific kind of men without exception, i.e. especially [and only] those who believe right now! Those who made some kind of profession of faith in the past but are not now living out that faith on ongoing basis have no biblical basis to claim that God is their Savior! This is what Paul is really telling Timothy in a very succinct way. This is the purpose of the qualifying phrase in part B of the verse.

In closing, then, universalists cannot use this verse to teach universal salvation of all men without exception. Universalism is nowhere to be found in this passage. Rather, this text harmonizes with the rest of scripture when so-called universal terms are understood properly in their general, limited and, therefore, biblical sense.

[Actor]

YouTube

[Light]

Boxcar

So you are saying in effect, that God is by far the biggest mass murderer that ever existed on this planet. Those who do not believe in him will be thrown into the "lake of fire" forever while the "chosen ones" will dance with joy.

I don't know anyone who wants to follow a God that goes against every iota of what "good" is and would commit the greatest sin ever making all the mass murderers that ever existed combined, look little league. God would be committing the greatest of sins ever while your Bible keeps scaring you from committing one. A God who disobeys his own 10 commandments and his own sons decree of loving your enemies and neighbors.

You only know about God from what you read. The people who committed the recent mass shootings also read things and what they read caused them to believe they are justified in their mass killings. We are all outraged. But here you are justifying similar mass killings times a billion that God will destroy.

IMO, Actor who I believe is an Atheist or Agnostic, is closer to God than you who claim to be a "chosen one". That's because Actor does not have a "concept" of who and what God is. He just says he does not exist or prove it. You on the other hand have defined a God that's basically horrendous and fits the profile of a demon, not a loving God with your concept of the "elect". Satan also operates with his "elect". By saying God has an "elect" you would lower God's powers to those of Satan. Satan cannot love unconditionally. If your God cannot love unconditionally then he does not have love because true love is unconditional. Then he is no different than Satan.

Although I believe in God, i never really KNEW God till I had a personal experience with God a few years ago. Since then I have experienced his love a handful of times that is beyond anything in the Bible or this planet. I love God more than anything and anyone. I could never say that before I had my experience and it blows my mind every time I say that because I never imagined I would ever feel that way. My approach to God was intellectual like yours but with different criteria. And my love for God is not because of something I read but because it is from a real experience with God. A few seconds of God's love trumps everything in the Bible that says he has "favorites" or is not universal or requires anything from you. He accepts you as you are.

Jesus responded to a question about being thrown into the "lake of fire" according to the Bible by a person who had an NDE. Jesus said, "would a parent throw their kid into a lake of fire? Think how much more God loves you than your parents".

This is one example of why i don't take the Bible literally.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Light

Boxcar

So you are saying in effect, that God is by far the biggest mass murderer that ever existed on this planet. Those who do not believe in him will be thrown into the "lake of fire" forever while the "chosen ones" will dance with joy.

I don't know anyone who wants to follow a God that goes against every iota of what "good" is and would commit the greatest sin ever making all the mass murderers that ever existed combined, look little league. God would be committing the greatest of sins ever while your Bible keeps scaring you from committing one. A God who disobeys his own 10 commandments and his own sons decree of loving your enemies and neighbors.

You only know about God from what you read. The people who committed the recent mass shootings also read things and what they read caused them to believe they are justified in their mass killings. We are all outraged. But here you are justifying similar mass killings times a billion that God will destroy.

IMO, Actor who I believe is an Atheist or Agnostic, is closer to God than you who claim to be a "chosen one". That's because Actor does not have a "concept" of who and what God is. He just says he does not exist or prove it. You on the other hand have defined a God that's basically horrendous and fits the profile of a demon, not a loving God with your concept of the "elect". Satan also operates with his "elect". By saying God has an "elect" you would lower God's powers to those of Satan. Satan cannot love unconditionally. If your God cannot love unconditionally then he does not have love because true love is unconditional. Then he is no different than Satan.

Although I believe in God, i never really KNEW God till I had a personal experience with God a few years ago. Since then I have experienced his love a handful of times that is beyond anything in the Bible or this planet. I love God more than anything and anyone. I could never say that before I had my experience and it blows my mind every time I say that because I never imagined I would ever feel that way. My approach to God was intellectual like yours but with different criteria. And my love for God is not because of something I read but because it is from a real experience with God. A few seconds of God's love trumps everything in the Bible that says he has "favorites" or is not universal or requires anything from you. He accepts you as you are.

Jesus responded to a question about being thrown into the "lake of fire" according to the Bible by a person who had an NDE. Jesus said, "would a parent throw their kid into a lake of fire? Think how much more God loves you than your parents".

This is one example of why i don't take the Bible literally

Whatever you say, doc.