Do you ever see a preacher or teacher on social media and wonder how he or she got so many followers and likers? I sure do.
It seems to be a trend as of late, especially with the daily increasing of fulfilled theology believers, that Universalism is on the rise. All our lives we have been taught a fear based message of turn or burn. We sat in the church and agreed with it becuase it was all we knew. But then all of a sudden a better bible interpretation came along and things started to make more sense. Suddenly the passages that we all once struggled to understand, began falling into place rather nicely. The fulfilled view, what some call "full preterism" absolutely does this for us.
However, this view can also be very dangerous. I understand now more than ever why many people are against it. Although I could never deny that the view is indeed the correct one, I can see where the problems arise.
In the hands of someone who is understanding the bible through the flesh, it can be very dangerous. People can read things like "death has been defeated" and thrust that onto all of humanity rather than understanding that the whole point was that death was defeated for those who are in Christ and only those. Jesus said "he who believes in me shall never die". This is your defeat of death in a nutshell but yet that can be taken, twisted, and applied to everyone.
Jesus said "unless one be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God". The word see can mean to physically see something with the eyes but it can just as easily mean to understand or to perceive something with the mind. Unless a man is given a new heart and new eyes by the Spirit of God, he cannot begin to even fathom the true Spiritual things of God.
Now am I questioning the salvation of those who claim to be men and women of God? No, because it is never my place to do so. Only God knows the hearts of men. However, I will say that the bible is also a book. It is a story of God's plan. It has very real physical elements to it. It ties in with real physical historical events. I don't believe that you need the Spirit of God to be able to formulate and begin to see the story and how it falls into place. However, I do believe you must have the Spirit of God in order to understand how we today, fit into that story.
To many people seem to take an all or nothing approach. Meaning that either God saved none or He saved all. But what they are failing to realize is that the New Testament and what we read there, is simply the BEGINNING of the eternal blueprint. It was the start. It wasn't some 40 year period that would come to an abrupt end and then start something totally new again. It was the revealing of the true and better way. The eternal plan of God centered around His Son and faith in His work alone for the remission of sins and eternal life.
In this article I am going to be looking at eight different passages that Universalists tend to cling to in order to uphold their position. I will focus solely on the main ones that I personally see a lot and I hope to bring some clarity regarding each one. My aim is to show that what they say about these passages isn't exactly as clear as they would have you believe.
It has been my experience on social media that when you confront the proponents of this view with the hard facts, you usually end up getting either blocked or removed from their friends list. That to me is very telling. My desire is not to debate. I truly hate being involved in debates because 99% of the time nobody changes their position and people end up angry. The good thing about social media is that we can all share what we learn and those who want to consider can consider. Those who don't, don't have to. They can just keep scrolling right on by. :)
In the New Testament alone we can probably dig up and find no less than 500 passages (perhaps much more) that clearly and strongly state that faith in Jesus is the way back to the Father and the way of salvation. In Hebrews chapter 11 alone, we have the word "faith" mentioned 25 times. All different people of God throughout the ages being shown as having faith. Interestingly enough, Hebrews is basically outlining the new and better Covenant made with God. The whole focus is on faith. Hebrews isn't outlining the Old Covenant but rather it is saying that the Old was vanishing and what was new was coming into full bloom very soon. Again, with the focus always centered on faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
When you have 500+ references to something, you tend to think that it is important and true. The Universalist position often quotes 5-10 passages and says that these are enough to refute the 500 that say the complete opposite of what they are suggesting. Where would anyone take 10 over 500? What court would be able to look past 500 peices of evidence in order to focus in on just 10? Nobody in their right mind would. Yet this is what is done in this movement.
Universalism is a feel good and loving message no doubt. But is it what the bible truly teaches? People always say that God never changes. Yet in the Old Testament we see Him wiping away masses of people because of wickedness. Destroying them off of the face of the earth because of sin. We see a small remnant who had faith and were counted as righteous all throughout those days. Yet we are told that sin and wickedness is no more and God will now tolerate any and every act of man no matter how wicked or evil it may be.
A feel good message is an attractive one. It attracts masses. That is why these teachers have boatloads of followers. They have hundreds of people amen'ing and liking and sharing their all inclusive messages. Ask yourself a question though....
Did Jesus have boatloads of followers? Did everyone amen and like His message? Was He loved by all and hated by none?
The answer is a resounding NO!
Now on the flip side these teachers have boatloads of followers, they are liked and loved by all, and they are hated by none because their message doesn't cut to anyones heart to convict of sin. The gospel is offensive the bible says. Yet not a single thing that these people preach can offend anyone at all!
If you don't see a problem with this, something is wrong. We have the TOTAL opposite of what we saw with Jesus and His Apostles going on all around us and some of you are getting sucked right in.
"If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you" John 15:18
"Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world" John 16:33
1) "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive" 1 Corinthians 15:22
This passage seems to be the holy grail of Universalism. Whenever the position is presented this is without question the most cited passage in their argument. But did you ever notice that they never go any further than what I just quoted above? It usually just stops right there.
Many people love to say "context is king" but yet when the context defeats their theory, you will notice that context is usually left out. What do I mean by that? We will get to that shortly but first I want to call your attention to just "WHO" the "all" is here in this passage.
Paul opens up the chapter talking about the risen Christ and how that he (Paul) is the least of the apostles. But there seemed to have been some in the Corinthian church group that were DOUBTING THAT THEIR WOULD BE A RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. Look what Paul writes early on in the chapter...
"Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?" 1 Cor. 15:12
We have to keep CONTEXT in mind now going forward from here. Paul is addressing the concerns that these people have about there being NO RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD.
So WHO are the subjects here?
THOSE WHO HAVE DIED AND ARE AWAITING THE RESURRECTION AT THE END OF THE AGE!
This is very important to keep in mind! If you forget this point going forward you will no doubt drift into a universal understanding of the passage in question! Let's continue reading the chapter and NOTICE that the subject is still the same! The subject here is still THOSE WHO ARE DEAD. Paul continues..
"But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up--if in fact the dead do not rise" 1 Cor. 15:13-15
Again, who is Paul STILL speaking about here? THOSE WHO ARE DEAD AND HAVE FALLEN ASLEEP IN CHRIST!! He continues...
"For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished." 1 Cor. 15:16-18
Has Paul yet swerved away from the subject in question? Has he yet to speak of anyone other than THOSE WHO HAVE DIED IN CHRIST? NOPE! Let us continue...
"If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable. But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead." 1 Cor. 15 : 20-21
Any wavering from the subjects yet? NOPE!! Still talking about "THOSE WHO HAVE FALLEN ASLEEP"! Now let's get to the good part...
"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming." 1 Cor. 15:22-23
Now, remember at the beginning I mentioned how they usually don't quote verse 23. They typically end it at "so in Christ all shall be made alive". Well why is it important to follow it all the way through verse 23?
The answer is because Paul is concluding his thought! He is saying that there would be an order of those who were going to be made alive! The first to be made alive was Christ Himself! He was the firstfruits of the resurrection. He Himself. This was already a past event when Paul wrote it. Which is why Paul lists Him first by saying "Christ the firstfruits" AND THEN or AFTERWARD....."THOSE WHO ARE CHRIST'S AT HIS COMING"
Now I hope you are following me here. This passage actually has NOTHING to do with anyone other than THOSE WHO HAD FALLEN ASLEEP AND WOULD BE RAISED IN THE RESURRECTION. Do you see that clearly? I sure hope so. Context is EVERYTHING. Sure we also read later about those who were alive and remained and how they would be changed to immortal, but the point is that regarding the "ALL" will be made alive passage, we need to keep it in context. That context is solely pertaining to those who were DEAD AND WAITING IN HADES FOR THE RESURRECTION.
Paul shows this clearly by saying "THOSE WHO ARE CHRIST'S, AT HIS COMING".
Again clearly showing that this passage has nothing to do with anyone AFTER His Coming. The "all" there has nothing to do with anyone AFTER the Coming of Christ.
The phrase "those who are Christ's" shows a distinction. Christ had His people. He had His remnant.
When we compare this to the resurrection scene in Daniel 12 we see how clear this matches up! Daniel saw the resurrection out of Hades and he saw some being raised to eternal life, and some being sent to eternal shame and contempt. Again, CLEARLY showing a distinction which matches Paul saying "THOSE WHO ARE CHRIST'S".
This passage in no way, no shape, no form can be used to portray all of humanity.
2) "My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world"
1 John 2:1-2
Most universalists that I know are also preterists. They understand that context is important but they also contradict themselves a lot. On the one hand they acknowledge that many times terms like "all" "world" "every" etc have very limited scopes to them but at the same time they sternly reject this concept when it comes to their doctrine. Let's examine one of their "go-to" scriptures...
"My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the WHOLE WORLD." 1 John 2:1-2
The letter is written here to Jewish believers. In it John tells THEM (Jews) that He is the propitiation for THEIR (Jews) sins, but He is ALSO the propitiation of sins for the whole world! Why would John write this?
It's simple. The entire New Testament shows enmity between Jews and Gentiles. The Jews, even the believing Jews, had a hard time letting down their pride and ego. Paul in his letters works hard to explain that God is the God of the Gentiles as well. In Romans he concludes that all are under sin. The Jews were just as guilty as the Gentiles and the Gentiles were just as guilty as the Jews. There was none righteous, no not even one.
The Jewish believers were prone (with good reason) to taking the approach that they were Gods chosen people and that no other nationalities could partake of His blessings which came through faith.
John stops them dead in their tracks and says basically, "Hey listen fellow Jews! He is not only the Savior of us Jews! But He is the savior of the whole world as in all nationalities of people can come!"
This isn't rocket science and if we read the rest of this chapter we can see CLEARLY that John makes it known that this is the case by writing things like...
"If anyone loves the world the love of the Father is NOT in Him."
"They went out from us because they were NEVER part of us"
"Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does NOT have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also."
1 John 2:22-23
We have to understand the bible as a Jewish book. The mystery that Paul and others were revealing was that God had opened up His plan of redemption NOT ONLY TO JUST THE JEWS, BUT TO THE WHOLE WORLD!
You will see this language used often! What seems universal in scope actually has nothing to do with every person but rather it pertains to the all inclusiveness and availability to all nationalities of men. God had dealt solely with the Jews up until that point. Paul and others were trying to get them to understand that the exclusivity had come to an end. There was no more wall in between them and the rest of the world when it came to accessing the Father.
3) "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself" John12:32
If we are going to be students of the word, we must let our interpretation be consistent or at the very least we must consider that there could be a couple of meanings to seemingly universal language. What do I mean?
Well for instance, there are numerous places in scripture which use universal language but yet the universalist would deny that it is universal in scope. I will list some examples...
A) "And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed." Luke 2:1
Does anyone suggest that the entire world was taxed by Caesar? Of course not. We know that it was universal in the sense of the local area. The Roman Empire was taxed.
B) "And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, That I will pour out of My Spirit on all flesh"
Anyone who understands what took place in the last days, understands that the pouring out of the Spirit was very limited in scope. When the men at Pentacost starting speaking in tongues, were there men there who were confused about it? The Spirit was poured out on some but not all. Was the Spirit poured out on the Jews who persecuted the believers? Of course not! Was the Spirit poured out on the Roman soldiers who attacked Jerusalem? Of course not! But wait a minute....
Didn't the text say literally "I will pour out my Spirit on ALL FLESH?"
How come nobody holds that to strict literal application? How come we understand the "ALL" there to mean just those who were being saved? We must be consistent. The "all" here is VERY limited and had nothing to do with literally all people everywhere.
C) "If indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister." Colossians 1:23
Paul wrote this around maybe AD55-60. In an era when travel was a long and grueling process and there was no phone or email to communicate. But yet he says that at that time the gospel had ALREADY been preached to "EVERY CREATURE UNDER HEAVEN". How? How so?
Everyone is in agreement that there is a very limited scope to that passage and that Paul was just getting the point across that he had preached the message to many people but yet why not consider the same interpretation principle elsewhere? Do you see the inconsistencies?
In some places we automatically apply a very limited scope but in others, with the same types of phrases used, we automatically assume it is universal.
D) "Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen." Rev. 1:7
Again, not to beat a dead horse here but most universalists understand this to be referring to every eye OF THAT DAY. Clearly we know that not every eye saw His return but rather the tribes of the land saw Him coming in judgement on Jerusalem just as He promised He would before that generation passed. They mourned over this. Why apply a limited scope here but not consider it elsewhere when the same words are used?
The point is that these terms need to be looked at in a consistent manner. It seems as though the authors of the bible used universal terms to describe very limited concepts. We still do this today. We still say "everyone knows my business" or "I ate everything". Do we speak literally as in literally every person or literally every single bit of food everywhere? Of course not!
The passage quoted above was said by Jesus TO JEWS.
We must keep in mind that this is a Jewish book and the story pertains mainly to Jews. The "world" as in all nations would be included in this new plan. This new mystery that God was revealing. Again, not meaning all humans everywhere, but rather meaning all NATIONALITIES of humans everywhere. The constant breaking down of the barrier wall between Jew and Gentile is everywhere in the New Testament. This was the "mystery of the dispensation of Grace" Paul called it.
So when Jesus says "I will draw all peoples (or all men) to myself" He is not saying literally every person but rather all TYPES of people to myself. People from all groups.
The Greek word is "pas" G3956 and according to the LXX Blue letter Bible it has two biblical usages...
1) Individually as in each, every, all
2) Collectively as in some of all types
There is no doubt that in this case, Jesus is referring to definition #2. This is backed by the countless places where we read that faith is mandatory. Just prior to the passage above Jesus said...
"He who loves his life will lose it, and he who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life. If anyone serves Me, let him follow Me; and where I am, there My servant will be also. If anyone serves Me, him My Father will honor." John 12:25-26
Jesus wasn't contradicting Himself. He wasn't saying in one breath that those who didn't follow Him would lose their life and then in the next breath saying that those same people would be saved regardless. That makes no sense.
The answer is that He was speaking to Jews who again were prone to differentiating themselves from the rest of the nations based on their ego. "I will draw all types of men to myself" is what the Lord was saying.
4) "For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved" John 3:17
This passage again is a go-to. But just like the ones mentioned above, the quoter of the passage typically stops short before getting the full contextual picture. When reading this passage above on its own, it seems as though God didn't send His Son to condemn the world but rather to save the world. But let's read the same passage and include the next passages that directly follow it and notice how the message changes....
"For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed." John 3:18-20
When we read the passage in full, the message really changes doesn't it? We have one passage that sounds like all is good and God didn't send Him to condemn the world. But then He follows that up with 4 passages that say the complete opposite. He who does not believe is CONDEMNED ALREADY the Lord said.
We must be sure to read passages in their entire and proper context. It is astonishing how the universalist can place so much importance on this concept and yet ignore it so blatently at the same time.
5) "even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life" Romans 5:18
Here is again one of the passages which seem to suggest that the death of Christ resulted in the justification of all men. Again as I showed in #4, the word for "all" here is the same G3956 "pas" and it can have 2 meanings biblically. It came mean all is in every single person or it can also mean all is in some of all types of people.
For me though, whenever I seem to be confused on something, I stick to the context and dig there. Usually we find the answers. Such is the case with this passage as well. Let's look at what Paul clearly states both before and after the "all" men passage. He writes before...
"For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many." Romans 5:15
The Greek word for "many" is G4183 "polys" and it only has one meaning and that is: "many or much"
Let's also take a look at what else Paul said BEFORE he used the word "all" in verse 18...
"For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ"
Nothing really universal sounding there either. Now, let's take a look at what Paul writes directly AFTER the "all" passage in verse 18...
"For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous." Romans 5:19
Again, the word "many" is used. Big difference than saying "all".
So we have 3 passages which state that "many" would be made righteous and we have 1 passage that uses the term "all" which as we demonstrated previously, the Greek word has a couple meanings and often CANNOT be understood as literally all men everywhere.
6) "For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all." Romans 11:32
Another go to passage here. But again it absolutely blows my mind how context is ignored yet again.
Paul is writing to Gentiles here about physical Israel.
WHO is the subject of this entire chapter? ISRAEL IS THE SUBJECT! Look what Paul writes in the beginning of the chapter...
"I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew" Romans 11:1-2
He then goes on to refer back to the days of Elijah when Elijah cried out to God that he was alone and there was no other righteous ones left. He writes.....
"Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, “Lord, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life”? But what does the divine response say to him? “I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal." Romans 11:2-4
Paul is speaking about the fact that there would be a remnant saved from Israel and he compares that to the days of Elijah when there was a remnant reserved in his day. Look what Paul writes next...
"Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace" Romans 11:5
He takes this remnant idea and develops it further by saying that Israel's total rejection isn't final and how God would save some of them. "SOME OF THEM". He writes...
"For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh (Israelites) and save some of them"
Again, do not lose focus of WHO the subject here still is. We are still talking about ISRAEL IN THE FLESH!
Paul continues writing and talks about the root and the branches and how just because they (Gentiles) were grafted into the tree, doesn't mean that the natural branches (Jews) couldn't also be grafted back into that tree. Again, Paul is working to BREAK DOWN ANY DIVISION between Jew and Gentile. He is letting them understand that there is NO DISTINCTION ANYMORE.
But again, WHO is the subject here? Is it not still ISRAEL IN THE FLESH leading up to the end of the age? It sure was.
Paul wraps it up by writing...
"even so these (Jews) also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you (Gentiles) they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them (Jews) all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all." Romans 11:31-32
But wait, didn't Paul just a few verses before this say "if by any means I may provoke to jealousy those who are my flesh and save some of them"?
How is it that the "some" automatically turned into "all"? It did not.
Consider this point which also shows the limited scope of the word "all" here...
Paul wrote this at least 20 years after Pentacost. Who were the first to be saved at Pentacost? JEWS right? Yes the Jews were the first to be filled with the Spirit and sealed. But look what Paul wrote 20 years later...
"For God has committed them (Jews) all to disobedience" Romans 11:32
How could this LITERALLY MEAN ALL JEWS if in fact we know that MANY Jews had already been saved and sealed many years before this was even written?!
Clearly here, the "all" is limited in scope yet again!
But most importantly, the Universalists who apply this passage to people post AD70 do so with no basis whatsoever. Paul's entire focus was on ISRAEL IN THE FLESH. Some of the last generation of Jews would be saved prior to the Coming of the Lord to bring destruction upon the city and to usher in the eternal Spiritual Kingdom.
7) "For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe" 1 Timothy 4:10
I am sure we have all heard this passage used as a proof text for universalism. It is certainly one that seems to "suggest" a universal salvation for all mankind. But have you ever asked a universalist the following question...
"If God is the Savior of all men, ESPECIALLY OF THOSE WHO BELIEVE, then what advantage does the believer have over the non-believer?"
I personally have asked a few this question and each time it is avoided and left without any attempt at an answer. The reason is because there is simply NO ANSWER.
If those who believe are considered SPECIAL or FAVORED above those who don't believe, then in what way is this so? After all this is exactly what the passage says. It says that God is the Savior of all men, especially or SPECIFICALLY those who believe.
The same word for "all" is used here again. The Greek word "pas" G3956 which again, has two meanings biblically. One being "some of all types".
What did God entrust Paul with revealing besides the true gospel? He was entrusted to reveal the "mystery of the dispensation of Grace" (Ephesians 3:1-7) Paul wrote that the main focus of this mystery was...
"that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel" Ephesians 3:6
So do you understand why Paul was so quick to use terms like "ALL MEN"?
He was bridging the gap between Jew and Gentile. Working hard to break down that wall of division and let them know that the blessings of God were now available to all men. ALL NATIONALITIES OF MEN!
This passage from 1 Timothy chapter 4 shows nothing more than the fact that all are now redeemable due to the sacrifice of Christ, but redemption is specifically applied to those who trust in Christ.
8) "God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself" 2 Cor. 5:19
Another passage that is used often and the last one we will look at in this article is this one from Paul's 2nd letter to the church at Corinth.
Paul writes that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself. But again, most times if not all times, the universalist will stop short and not continue on to grasp the full context. Let's read this passage and continue to get Paul's full message....
"God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God. For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." 2 Cor. 5:19-21
Now, let's use common sense here. If all was done and the entire world as in all humans everywhere were already redeemed and reconciled because of Christ's death, why would Paul be "PLEADING WITH PEOPLE TO BE RECONCILED TO GOD" through Christ?
Seems rather pointless to plead for something you already possess eh?
The context of this chapter proves that again this is a letter written to believers who had received the Spirit of God as a pledge or as a sign of their coming inheritance....
"Now He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who also has given us the Spirit as a guarantee."
2 Cor. 5:5
Did everyone receive that Spirit as a guarantee? Do I really even need to ask that question?
Just as there were in the days of Elijah, there was also a remnant that had received the Spirit in the last days too.
In order to ever truly understand what seems to be a bit contradictory, we need to apply consistent hermeneutics throughout our studies. If the word "all" can be used in limited ways in many places, we must always take this into consideration and not ignore this when it comes to passages that may go against our theory.
We must remember the nature of Paul's message and what was entrusted to him to teach. That being the mystery of the dispensation of Grace. Grace was going to be opened up and dispensed to all nations. No longer would there be any exclusivity to the Father. No longer would the Jews alone partake in the blessings of God. That was being opened up to ALL MEN. Being made available to ALL MEN through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Will you continue to reject the 500+ passages that demand faith in the risen Lord in order to cling to your small selection of passages that you interpret in a very biased way?
I believe that salvation is completely of the Lord and that no man will come to the Father unless the Father draw Him. This was not just a first century thing. This applies today. We are made willing in the day of His power.
Call me whatever you want but I still 100% believe in the new birth. Without which it is impossible to even understand the Kingdom of God and how it is a present and on-going reality today and will be forever.
I often hear people who doubt the new birth today sarcastically ask "How is someone born from God today?"
Which to me speaks volumes. Again, I am not one to judge a mans heart but if you are asking that question to begin with, something is just not right.
Thanks for reading the article guys. If you enjoyed it please be sure to like it and share it. God bless.