The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Another Way of Presenting the Arm/Cal/Rec difference

Evangelical Universalism Arguments for Evangelical Universalism
#1

I’ve been working on another way to present the basic differences between Augustinian Calvinism, Arminianianism, and Reconciliationism (Evangelical Universalism). It’s based on their basic affirmation or denial of the following four propositions. Note that there are many scriptures that at “face value”, even “contextually” seem to indicate each of the following four affirmations about God in regards to salvation of humanity:

  1. God sovereignly elects, predestines, and calls some of humanity.
  2. God passionately loves all humanity.
  3. God powerfully saves all humanity.
  4. God wrathfully judges and punishes evil, even some/most/all of humanity.

CALVINISTS (Augustinianists)
Affirm:
1) God sovereignly elects, predestines, and calls some of humanity.
4) God wrathfully judges and punishes evil, even some/most/all of humanity.
But because they believe God’s judgment and punishment of evil is Retributive and Endless (as in Hell), they:
**Deny **(explain away)
2) God passionately loves all humanity.
3) God powerfully saves all humanity.

ARMINIANISTS
Affirm:
2) God passionately loves all humanity.
4) God wrathfully judges and punishes evil, even some/most/all of humanity.
But because they believe God’s judgment and punishment of evil is Retributive and Endless (as in Hell), they:
**Deny **(explain away)
1) God sovereignly elects, predestines, and calls some of humanity.
3) God powerfully saves all humanity.

**RECONCILIATIONISTS **(Universal Reconciliation, Christian Universalism)
Affirm:
1) God sovereignly elects, predestines, and calls some of humanity.
2) God passionately loves all humanity.
3) God powerfully saves all humanity.
4) God wrathfully judges and punishes evil, even some/most/all of humanity.
And we can accept all these because wey believe God’s wrathful judgment and punishment of evil
to be Remedial and Not Endless, a just means of Reconciliation.

I plan to add a list of the primary scriptures that seem at face value to indicate each point. So what do think?

#2

Wey? :mrgreen: (they/we editing blip! :laughing:)

That’s a good start–I like the Rec abbreviation, too. Another big distinction, though, is that Arms and Recs think of election primarily in terms of being elected for preaching (or at least for somehow helping to support the progress of) the gospel, not primarily in terms of being elected for salvation (though that, too. And of course the other way around for Calvs, since they don’t typically deny the elect are elected to support the progress of the gospel.)

Unfortunately, this means the question of denying or affirming the (1) category is too simple. And I’m not sure how to resolve it in the context of the comparison attempt.

#3

Rec resolves the Arm/Cal paradox perfectly :slight_smile: