Why just two camps?

But I would say, Bob, that Catholics are essentially arminian with respect to election. Reformed are calvinists. Pelagian and universalists are the groups I mentioned to the left of evangelicalism, along with open theists. So, in evangelicalism, I am still not convinced you have any more than two main groups. In the end, you believe eitehr 1) God chooses unilaterally or 2) God leaves the choice to man. What other options are there? In the end, someone makes the final call. Who is it? It seems ot me that it is either God (Calvinist) or man (Arminian).

 

The problem is God does both - but that the normative is God lets us hang ourselves with our own choices and actions.

 

vague, but applicable in the sense that arminians and calvinists alike take the ultimate control of grace out of the hands of God and places its responsibilities and consequences regarding accountability on man.

their activities explains their misunderstanding of grace and its purposes towards man.

both calvinism and arminians misperceive the election of grace with no regards to the selection of firstfruits AND the Fall harvest of God.
they stop short of examining Gods full plans of salvation of mankind.

which brings us back to "partialists" which both arminians and calvinists alike are within its camp while both are witholding the full grace of God from all men equally.

 

there are two plans in view here. the firstfruits are being called (selected). this is the only focus of both partiailists groups (calvinists and arminians).
they do not examine the further progression after the selection of the firstfruits which is the "fall harvest".

Exo 23:16 And the feast of harvest, the firstfruits of thy labours, which thou hast sown in the field: and the feast of ingathering, [which is] in the end of the year, when thou hast gathered in thy labours out of the field.

thats describing TWO HARVESTS...NOT ONE.

their religious views are also man made philosophies disregarding the grace of God to man.
try examining what the term grace means.
it is the chastisement and judgement. and it is given to all men. (heb 12:8)(tit 2:11)
both groups seem to control the (grace) chastisement towards themselves as well as others.

In this lifetime or aion (age) God is selecting his firstfruits. (elect, bride) which are to become the ministers or "harvestors" of the next harvest.
in the next age when the fall harvest will be gathered.

the election of Grace in this age has everything to do with the goal of the universal harvest of all men in the next age. the fall harvest.
the faith in those selected in this age are those called to be those harvestors in the next age.

Mat 9:37 Then saith he unto his disciples, The harvest truly [is] plenteous, but the labourers [are] few;
Mat 9:38 Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth labourers into his harvest.

the elect (laborors) are not chosen arbitrarily. they were called before this age began to be assembled "in christ". they were already guaranteed to be harvestors (laborors).

it is the fall harvest that Jesus is speaking of being gathered. the "universal" gathering by the harvestors that will occur in the next age.

christian universalism simply focuses on the eventual end of Gods will towards salvation rather than only the election of grace.
Christians must be called to be sanctified and trained to be harvestors within this age. and we WILL witness this calling in this age. for after this age. the harvestors will be fully assembled and the fall harvest will begin. starting in the next age.

 

Thank you Me2, that was the most thorough explaination of universalism I have ever heard. Within this view where will the next age take place? If all will eventually be saved will this take place in the heavenlies? What role does the great white thrown judgement? Do people spend sometime in hell, then are redeemed? What about Satan and the fallen angels?

Thanks again for your response. As you know from our previous conversations, I don't agree, but I am very interested in how you have come to this understanding and how you view the above questions.

Bro Tony

 

This web page gives an alternative view to the Calvinist and Arminian positions. I think it is the position that many Christians hold.

http://www.biblequery.org/opportunity.htm

 

Bro Tony,

My beliefs stem from the religion I started with in my infant form of understanding. It is still baptist yet many changes have occured as I grow into a more mature understanding.

all religions have the three camps wether they be annihilists, partialists or universalists.

annihilists are few, but appear more merciful than partialists. and the universalists are an anathema to the partialists and annihilists seeing as all control is given to God.

Christian universalists usually move on from their original religions and tend to be individuals without a religion. leaving only the partialists to tend to the pruning of their selective mantras and doctrines.

so there we have left in the main orthodox churches the choices of heaven, hell, and annihilation. as this thread has aluded to the arminians and calvinist. basically focusing on a power struggle of "free will" between man and God.
which misses the point of the acceptance and rejection of the grace of God in the believers life. both arminians and calvinists desire to control the grace of God thus disallowing God to control the process of Salvation.

next to your specific questions concerning Christian universalism. please move these inquiries to the "all others" section as to the baptists tend to frown on lengthy conversations that seem to not include them. I will be happy to answer any questions I have answers towards.

here is a more equal paper concerning partialists and impartialists.

partialists beliefs in calvinism and arminianism

or a paper concerning the reproach of partial grace in religion...


The Reproach of Partial Grace

Me2

 

Me2,

I have started a thread on this subject and with my questions in the "Other Religions/Doctrines" forum, that will allow others to join in.

Bro Tony

 

Hmmmm...

According to these passages, the Lord was a "partialist"

John 3:18
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

John 8:24
I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

 

Pro 20:10 Divers weights, [and] divers measures, both of them [are] alike abomination to the LORD.

God is impartial and equally just to all men alike. he would be committing an abomination if he treated some differently than others.

If God Chooses to save only some, or only allows some to choose to be save.
then he would be partial to others and would be committing an abominable act against his own character and will.

God has to be sovereign and choose all men to be conformed to his will. this is the only way all men are treated equally.
God willingly forces all men into death. God drags all men into the image of Christ.

Is God Just? He is impartial.

Everyone participates in the pains of suffering and the joys of his blessings. all men are called according to their turn.

"few" in this age. "many" in the next age.

If you cant see his entire plan..take a major step backwards to get a bigger view.

the scripture youve posted only remind me that his audience of whom he was speaking to didnt believe anything he was saying for they had the wrong spirit dwelling within them. they were all condemned at the moment.
yet step back..add some time..say after pentecost. they receive the resurrected spirit..and begin to understand what was said.
looks can be deceiving for we dont know How or when God is operating in each persons life.

He states he cannot be partial toward anyman.

He would be committing an abomination if he fails to treat each person equally. if he doesnt save all men. or deliver all men into heaven. or heal all pain and suffering. or deny any from receiving the full and mature knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ

He would be committing an abomination against his creation and himself.

calvinism as well as arminianism both teach christ as being partial. disregarding some souls in condemnation without regard for their ignorance obstinance and role in Gods designs of election.

they are both not regarding Gods character to rule over his own creation with mercy.
they are both allowing Gods creation to upsurp his sovereignty.
they are both worshiping mans free will above Gods glory towards his creation

 

The point where Arminianism is partial is the view of foreknowledge in which they say God's election is based on something in that person, namely the grounding of election in their intrinsic belief or disbelief in Christ. Calvinism does not teach that God is partial in that respect. Election is grounded in God. Partiality in election is, by definition, for God to ground election in somthing other than Himself. It is a false charge, Me2, to say that God is partial, unless, by "partial" you mean to condemn persons to hell for sin.

I would say that is a gross misunderstanding of partiality, because it fails to consider the justice of God. If you are trying to allege that orthodox Christianity is partialist on that basis, you are misrepresenting it by equating it with favoritism. I would agree that Arminianism's view of election is a form of favoritism. However, Calvinist teaching on the matter is not favortism in the least, because of the actual ground of election not being in the believer.

The cross satisfies God's mercy and God's justice. Mercy is only mercy if it is offered freely. God is under obligation to NOBODY to deliver it at all. To say He is partial in a connotative way is to defame God's character, Me2, because it alleges God is playing favorites. No, Scripture teaches God chooses according to His own purposes. Election is not arbitrary and it is not grounded in man. Therefore, it is impartial and not arbitrary as universalists like to allege. It is unmerited, as is the grace from which it flows. We do not know the criteria by which God elects, but elect He does. The Bible teaches that plainly. It is not, however, based in anything good in us for there is nothing good in us; we are sinners. That is why God shows no partiality; that is, He does not elect based on anything in us.

Whether through the cross or through eternal condemnation, God's justice is met. Therefore, orthodox Christianity is only "partialist" in that some are saved and others are condemned. However, because God's justice is satisfied either through the cross or through condemnation, He treats all persons equally in that respect. He is under no obligation to save any at all, which is what universalists would like God to do. There are not, however, any Scriptures that teach this. Calvinists ground mercy in the cross, by a belief in limited atonement, namely that the cross actually accomplished redemption for the elect. Those that are passed over have no redemption, but God is not being partial in the sense of playing favorites, because God has His own reasons for electing those persons. Partiality that connotes favoritism is to ground election IN THOSE PERSONS OR QUALITIES IN THEMSELVES. God is not partial, because He grounds election in Himself not the objects of election. To ground election in something other than His own self is partialism. Since God's mercy is satisfied by electing some to salvation and passing others over and since justice is satisfied at the cross for some and by eternal condemnation for others, they are treated the same way, because the only thing God "owes" sinful men is one thing: His wrath. Justice is satisfied, mercy is satisfied by the orthodox view. The universalist view would have God show mercy to all because He somehow owes it to THEM, not to Himself. Universalism is a mancentered unBiblical "theology."

 

calvinism as well as arminianism both incorrectly express Gods will and Character through their explanation of election.

Calvinism partialy explains election as God choosing those who are to be the elect and the non elect. yet continues on to end their explanation with those God chooses as the non elect to be eternally condemned with no repreive or salvation.
further complicating their explanation with the conclusion that God intended all along that those called to be the non elect were always chosen to be condemned. created to be damned.

thats partiality.

If one investigates both Gods character and will. If they further their study of Election..the answer is quite simple. both the elect and non elect are saved in the end.

thats impartiality. but it not the calvinist understanding.
theirs is partial. some blessed, some cursed.

Arminans desire all men to be saved until the scales of free will which they believe God give man outweights, overpowers, and outwits the sovereignty of God. as though he never had a will, a plan or an equitable goal. Man has the capability as some spoiled child to hold their breath longer than God has the capability to destroy death in their lives.

BUT... Jesus has already destroyed the power of death towards all men. its only a matter of time when each persons turn comes up and God demonstrates his power in them. bringing their comprehension of the destruction of death into their reality.

Both calvinists and arminians do not mention that man exists in ages. each age with a beginning and an ending. continuing into eternity. In this age the election of God is being demonstrated by the calling of the "few". These are called the "Elect".
Yet there are also others called the "many" or the non Elect which are destined to be brought into the full knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ in the following age. The next age.

Both called of God as the elect and non elect. the few and the many combined, total all of Gods creation.

making Gods Plans of expressing the father (elect, Few) bringing into maturity the sons (non elect, many) to all men...equally and impartially towards all.

Gods Character is impartial.

Unjust weights are an abomination to Him. He cant treat all unequally.

Calvinism and arminians dont understand this principle of Just weights to all.

 

Calvinism partialy explains election as God choosing those who are to be the elect and the non elect. yet continues on to end their explanation with those God chooses as the non elect to be eternally condemned with no repreive or salvation.
further complicating their explanation with the conclusion that God intended all along that those called to be the non elect were always chosen to be condemned. created to be damned.

thats partiality.

No, it's not, Me2. Partiality is favoritism. It is not partiality, because election is not grounded in any quality in those particular individuals. It would be partiality, e.g. favoritism if election was grounded in those persons. It is not; it is grouded solely in God' will, which is, by nature impartial and perfectly just. You are changing the defintion of partiality. YOu are also using hyperCalvinism in your explantation of Calvinism's teaching on election. Most Calvinists teach that the elect are actively decreed or elected, the rest are passively decreed, eg. simply left to their own devices. Moreover, Arminians and Calvinists DO understand "just weights." Just weights simply means justice is satisfied. The cross satisfies God's justice for the elect. Hell satisfies it for the nonelect. God is under no obligation to offer salvation to anybody at all or pay for the sins of anybody at all. To use "just weights" the way the unies do is to allege God owes man something He does not owe them. Salvation is about satisfying God's wrath and extending God's mercy. God is not required to offer mercy to anybody at all. He is only required to satisfy His justice. Both Arminians and Calvinists do have God treating all persons the same in that respect.

If one investigates both Gods character and will. If they further their study of Election..the answer is quite simple. both the elect and non elect are saved in the end.

Universalism postulates a God who tolerates sin. It is the unies that don't understand God's will or election. That simply is not taught in Scripture. Something here is fishy. It's too familar...are you one of the persons that used to post at www.carm.org, if so I don't mind asking Matt Slick or Eric Langstrom to take some time to come here and post further for you.

From MSlick @ carm:

Scriptures that say not all are saved


Universalists believe all people will be saved. They often complain against the contrary teaching that people go to hell by posing questions such as

"Do you really believe that God is going to lose most of mankind in hell and that only a few are going to be saved?"
"If most go to hell, doesn't that mean that Satan wins since God only gets a few compared to the majority who are lost?"

Of course, these kinds of questions are the wrong ones to ask. What they are doing is using emotionalism to sway someone's beliefs. What they should be asking are questions like these:
"What does the Bible teach about damnation?"
"Does the Bible tell us if most will be lost or saved?"
"Does it tell us that all will be saved?"
The means to good biblical theology is to examine the whole of scriptures without bias so that proper and correct doctrines can be determined. Of course, no one is without bias. But, that does not mean that we should give up trying to be objective. We must endeavor to let God's word lead us rather than our emotionalism and personal preferences make decisions for us, especially about doctrine. At least, that should be the goal.
What matters is what God has revealed in His word. So, are there scriptures in the Bible that plainly state that not all are saved? Yes, there are.

"Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide, and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter by it. 14"For the gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those who find it," (Matt. 7:13-14).
"For many are called, but few are chosen," (Matt. 22:14).
"And He was passing through from one city and village to another, teaching, and proceeding on His way to Jerusalem. 23And someone said to Him, "Lord, are there just a few who are being saved?" And He said to them, 24"Strive to enter by the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. 25"Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, and you begin to stand outside and knock on the door, saying, ‘Lord, open up to us!’ then He will answer and say to you, ‘I do not know where you are from.’ 26"Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in Your presence, and You taught in our streets’; 27and He will say, ‘I tell you, I do not know where you are from; depart from Me, all you evildoers,'" (Luke 13:22-27).
"And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel, "Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, it is the remnant that will be saved; 28for the Lord will execute His word upon the earth, thoroughly and quickly," (Rom. 9:27).
These verses are plain and clear. Not all are saved; in fact, few are. Whether or not we think this makes God a failure, or that it makes us sad, or upsets us, isn't really that important. If the Bible says it, that settles it. What is left is to make adjustments in our understanding and feelings in order to bring more in line with what God has stated.
After all, we do not know the mind of God. His ways are higher than our ways. I prefer to accept what it says than feel my way through theology.

 

creation is the expression of God in a limited physical form. It is seen focused in the father/son expression of the father loving the Son.
creation is the begetting of Gods character in an outward flow of his personhood through the image called Jesus Christ.
it is full of grace and truth.

to say that God owes his creation nothing is negating that God is expressing himself completely to his creation through the person of Jesus Christ.
in expressing himself. He Obligates himself to prove to creation who he is completely and perfectly through the Image of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ is the Joining of God and man whereas God gives to man his expressed character and empowers man to bring to fullfillment his fullest expression of his personhood, His Character and his full intent of his planned will towards his creation.

God has Obligated TO HIMSELF to the fullest that His will be expressed perfectly without any distractions or Delays.

Isa 25:8 He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken [it].

Jesus is Lord because He has swallowed up death.

the only way for man to understand this is that death must be taken from all men born. Jesus is Lord because he destroys death in all men.

It is simply a matter of time for all men to experience this in their reality and understand it to its fullest extent imaginable.

Christian universalism focuses on the fullest expression of Gods Character and will towards his creation.

It is calvanists and arminians who Postualates A God who is not sovereign over his creation nor loves his creation.

your friends would only make fools of themselves.
I've read what they have written which is NOTHING resembling the understanding of any real truth concerning what Christian universalists accept as Gods truth.

I notices that your friend remarks included analogies that are not supposed to be read literally but descerned spiritually.. dont they know that? (mat 7:13-14)

anyways. the understanding is carnal at best what is accepted and postulated by most. maybe you should read less of what they post and have a little talk with Jesus himself.

1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

thats all men born of adam. all men reborn of Christ. Thats every man in his order. The head. the body and all the rest.

Me2

 

Even John Calvin was not a Calvinist as some would like to portray him. If you read his Institutes you will find most Calvinists are really hyper-Calvinists according to him.

 

Salvation is a choice. God knows what choice you will make because he is God, and that doesn't mean you have no choice. If I went back in time in a time machine, I would know exactly what would happen with major world events, but my foreknowledge wouldn't mean they have no choice.

 

Larry, God does not choose only certain people to be saved. Jesus himself said it's not His will for any to perish. Logically speaking, that means anyone who was ever born has the opportunity, if they have heard the gospel, to become saved.

For us to sit around and worry about whether this person or that person is of the "elect" if such a waste of time.

 

Jerusalem, Jerusalem. How oft I would have gathered you unto me as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, but ye would not.
Clearly Jesus shows that there is choice involved.
Whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
Clearly this shows that some will not be saved.

Kinda kills universalism, arminianism and calvinism all in one shot.
As Ed would say,
Tee Hee.
In His service;
Jim