The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Blog: "why calvinism is more heretical than universalism"

Hi Sarah!

What I can’t stomach is bad teaching and I see is no where in scripture where God chooses or predestines any to be lost.
I don’t see double predestination in scripture so I would never teach nor would I entertain it. If it was there then I would teach it.

God hardens those who have already hardened their own hearts like Pharaoh, which is why I believe the sin of homosexuality is a strong sin as homosexuals believe they were born that way (which is true) just like we are all born susceptible to one sin or another but they don’t believe it is a sin which then causes them to harden their hearts but God only has so much patience before God turns them over to our sins…He gave them up…He gave them up…He gave them up which is what hardening means, “to let go”.

Once again God’s sovereignty is at play here. He shows judgment towards them by giving them up because they reject Him but He also shows mercy towards them in that God knows they will keep rejecting Him therefore any more exposure to the gospel will only increase their punishment in hell which is the reason that Jesus spoke in parables.

Nowhere in those verses does it say, God “predestine” those to be eternally condemned.

(Mathew 13:10-17)

The Purpose of the Parables

“Why do You speak to them in parables?” Jesus answered them, "To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him. Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says,

‘Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive; For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, And their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.’ But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear. For truly I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it"

Yeah, but the 90 people who didn’t get the $100 aren’t suffering in eternal hell for something that wasn’t offered to them.

I really don’t get what you are saying and that is really not the point. The point is how is God unloving if He doesn’t save everyone?

Oxy… can you explain these verses also

“But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use”? (Romans 9:20-21)

The LORD has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble” (Proverbs 16:4).

“For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,” (1 Thes. 5:9).

“For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.” So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe, “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone,” and “A stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense.” They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do” (1 Peter 2:6-8).

I guess you must not only call EU heretics, but Arminians too, because you seem to have the corner on what is the Truth.

How can you not get what I saying, yet at the same time tell me that is really not the point?

How is God unloving if He doesn’t save everyone? You tell me.

How loving is God if He does save everyone?

This is just mind-boggling to me. Your analogy COMPLETELY ignores the problem of sin and death that the people in the crowd find themselves in. In the next paragraph, you say we’re “fallen sinners” but you totally disregard that in your little story: you assume that they’re just 100 normal people, going about their lives, nothing whatsoever the matter. Therefore, this analogy is completely irrelevant to the human situation. (Besides the fact that you only love and care about 10 people and give not a whit about the rest)

Of course we “fallen sinners deserve nothing from God,” but the Bible is 100% clear that our God of LOVE is compelled by His LOVE to act mercifully and lovingly toward ALL his creation. Earlier, I posted several verses from Psalm 145 illustrating this, but you ignored them. You make such a big deal out of what the Bible says, so please consider these verses (and go on to the hundreds more that clearly state God’s sacrificial love for ALL humans that rescues them from the death and destruction and wrath and calamity brought by their sin), and then explain how God’s love is satisfied by electing just a portion to be saved.

As for universalism being man-centered, perhaps you’ve missed the following God-centered universalistic passages (besides the verses from Psalm 145, which clearly describe God’s character and nothing of man’s deserving love or grace): Colossians 1:15-20; 1 Cor 15:21-28. Universal reconciliation is a unilateral decision by the God of love, independent of whether mankind deserves it or not. Saying that Calvinism is biblical and God-centered while universalism is unbiblical and man-centered is completely untrue. The universalists here take God, the Bible, and sin at least as seriously as you do–that’s why we have the word “evangelical” in front of “universalist.” :smiley: Let’s stop with the “my belief system is God-centered and yours isn’t!” foofaraw, OK? Can we do that? Frankly, it reminds me of an argument 5-year-old boys might have… :laughing: :unamused:

Whatever God decides to do whether it is to send all or some to hell or save all is not a matter for debate as we have no right in our fallen state to question God’s love, goodness or wisdom.

I believe what I see in scripture is that everything was made for His purpose and glory. God uses everything even our evil deeds.


The bible are for believers therefore the wrath of God is not upon us because of the blood of Christ. This verse is not for unbelievers

Ohhhh…nice dig. I do not consider arminians heretics as both our systems fail to explain the unexplainable. I do consider predestination or the doctrine of election to be very important in understanding the sovereignty of God however I do not see predestination in scripture to be an essential for one’s salvation.

It doesn’t matter what one believes, what matters is what is in scripture and EU is not in scripture. It is a stretch starting with the presupposition that all are saved and uses that presupposition to interpret scripture. The other day I saw on the news that the “whole world” was watching the royal wedding…Really the whole world? I know I didn’t watch it. all, world, everyone etc…must be qualified.

(John 12:19)
So the Pharisees said to one another, “You see that you are gaining nothing. Look, the world has gone after him.”

Really the Chinese knew about Jesus? EU is a stretch. Believe what you want but if you can’t even admit that words like “all” “world” “everyone” etc… must be qualified then you are in deep denial. You could be right about EU being scriptural but even you would have to admit “all” must be qualified.

God is love regardless if He saves everyone or not. The bible says, God is love. It doesn’t say, God is love if…

This is a logical fallacy. Just because in SOME places “all” has to be qualified does not mean it has to be qualified in other places. For example, Col 1:15-20 clearly explains that “all” means “all”–every single cotton-pickin’ thing that has ever been created. This is clearly defined and brooks no qualification.

Also, you’re equating a saying by the Pharisees with something that God clearly says (like in John 12:32). Really? God’s words and the way he uses them aren’t any clearer than the Pharisees? One use of hyperbole by the Pharisees does not all of a sudden mean “all” needs to be qualified when God uses it. The need to qualify “all” is based on context. In a context like Col 1:15-20, it’s clear that no qualification is needed.

Yet again you are catering to your human emotion-human situation??? I see nothing in scripture that says, God only loves the ones He saves. God loves “EVERYONE” even the ones He doesn’t save evident in the story of the rich young ruler. I believe it was in the book of Mark when the rich young ruler walked away Jesus was extremely sad.

God is love whether He allows one, all or none to be saved. We can play tit for tat with scripture verses but in the end God’s sovereignty is in play here. I noticed how careful you got with your words by saying, “How is God’s love satisfied” I have no clue what that means nor do I see that in scripture. All I see is God is complete in Himself and being glorified. God doesn’t need us. If we deserve nothing then how is God unloving if He doesn’t save us?

I very much doubt 5 year old would be having a debate on predestination

Really …it’s not man centered? then please explain to me the “taking to account the human situation”? in fact most of what you stated above looked pretty man centered to me. Universalism says God isn’t love if He doesn’t save all. Calvinism says, God is love regardless if He saves all or none.

That is an assumption. I NEVER said that therefore it is no fallacy. I said, “all” “world” “everyone” must be qualified (CONTEXT)

The bible IS God’s word! The red words are not somehow more important than the other words furthermore ALL of the bible must be taken into context.

You say they “must be qualified.” But the only evidence you give is that the Pharisees made one hyperbolic statement. I’m saying, according to CONTEXT, some places it doesn’t have to be qualified. You’re still failing to justify your statement, ’ “all” “world” “everyone” must be qualified.’ I gave you a particular place where it doesn’t need to be qualified, and you completely ignored it, just as you’ve ignored every Scripture I’ve mentioned in this thread. By ignoring my Scriptural references, it appears that you’re just arguing based on your presuppositions.

I NEVER said that! Don’t put words in my mouth. The Bible also says “there is no God.” What do you do with that? Is that just as true as the “red words”? Or do you understand that by its context? (look in Psalm 14 if you don’t know where the Bible says, “there is no God.”)

How did you figure out that the rich young ruler ends up in hell? Where does the Bible say that? That’s very weak evidence for thinking that God permanently loses some people he loves. Just the opposite, he gave authority over all people to Jesus, and Jesus gives them eternal life (John 17:2). Also, you completely ignored my criticism of your analogy. Please show me where I’m wrong in that criticism.

As a friend of mine recently said, “I have no clue what that means nor do I see that in scripture.” :wink: On the other hand, I see God acting out of his love to save all of his creation. And he doesn’t “allow” people to be saved–that’s not in the Bible either. We’re all hopelessly dead in our sins, so he sovereignly acts to save us.

I’ve already answered this question and even gave you Scripture to support it, and you keep ignoring it. Please don’t ask me this question again until you deal with the Scripture I’ve mentioned in this thread. I can’t help you if you refuse to look at the Bible.

Based on this response, my only conclusion is that you’re not even reading my posts… :confused:

Once again, your Calvinist statement is completely extrabiblical, and your universalist statement is false. Universalism would say God’s love motivates him to save all, and his sovereignty guarantees that he accomplishes what he is motivated to do. May I remind you, before you reply to this post and argue with this specific point, please go back and deal with the Scriptural evidence I’ve provided previously. Thank you.

Hi Oxy,

Isn’t this like saying, "Yes, I’m hopeless at maths, but I do know for a fact that 9+6=17. :open_mouth:

If human logic is so deeply flawed, how can you possibly know that this is so? The reasoning that leads you to that conclusion will also be suspect. You might appeal to Scripture. First, your fallen nature will incline you to choose the wrong Holy Book. Second, your fallen reading of that book will inevitably lead to false conclusions. Last, if you say God has opened your eyes and revealed the truth to you, I can make precisely the same claim. So can a million others, all of whom disagree on the content of that revelation. In this case, the probability that you are the one chosen to receive authentic revelation will be very small. Almost certainly, given your low view of human reason, your sense of being chosen would also be false, a self-delusion fueled by sin.

Where does Jesus suggest your ability to reason is fallen? Our moral judgments are flawed, but not completely. “If you who are evil know how to give good gifts to your children…” “Judge for yourselves what is right…” “Which of you can accuse me of sin?” It’s not reason, but our willingness to obey, that is seriously broken.

We know twice two is four, and that you cannot draw a square circle. We know if God can choose Bill and Sally, but chooses only Sally, he therefore chooses not to choose Bill. It’s perfectly Biblical. Before they were even born, God chose Jacob and rejected Esau.

Is God’s election random? Like a lottery? A heavenly Green Card?

Here’s how I see it. God chose Noah and rejected the rest because through Noah Christ would come, and Christ would save the whole cosmos, including those drowned in the flood. Similarly, God chose Jacob and rejected Esau because Christ would come through Jacob, and save both Jacob and Esau. God hardened Pharaoh’s heart because He wanted to save Pharaoh. Pharaoh’s sin led to the nation of Israel, and from Israel came Christ, who died to save the whole world, including Pharaoh himself.

Here we see the true glory of God. Evil is compelled to do his will, and that will works for the blessing of all. This view not only magnifies God, but also resonates with our deepest intuitions of what it means to be good.

I wonder if only “some” of all scripture is God-breathed and useful for training people up in righteousness…

Good point, Allan!

Dang, I used to blow UP atheists back in college by using their own reasoning against them! :laughing: Maybe I need to dust off some of that mojo… :nerd:

Well said Oxy. And you might not be one of God’s elect.
But show me where in scripture it says that “elect” is synonymous with “saved”. It doesn’t and you’re bringing in traditions of men when you suppose that the only ones to be saved are God’s ‘elect’.

This notion of “elect” -so easy to misunderstand. Israel was “elect”, but they got caught up in their being “the chosen people”. Chosen for WHAT? To bring the story of a righteous creator to all mankind. Chosen to serve, elect unto service!

Now the Christian elect make the same mistake! “I’m chosen of God! Jesus is my friend…unlike you SINNERS”

We completely misunderstand the purpose of our election, like corrupt officials who fill their own coffers and disregard their duty to the people. These are those God “elected” us to help, to save, to serve.

Response to Allan. I know all analogies limp but that was a three legged horse.

I do love this question

Good point, Allan!

First I establish God’s word is inerrant and infallible

I see in scripture that because of sin I have fallen in my reasoning and logic

I see clear paradoxes in scripture like the trinity, Jesus being 100% man and yet 100% God etc… that my mind cannot
fully grasp

I establish once again that God is the architect of logic and if I truly believe that then I must accept tthat since my logic is flawed and can rest in the fact
that God’s logic is perfect even if it doesn’tmake sense to me. I will still teach the paradoxes in scripture because I only can teach what scripture says and I know it makes perfect sense to God.

If we could fully make sense of God then He wouldn’t be God, would He?

You yourself pick and choose the paradoxes you fight because I doubt you have no problem with the Trinity paradox along with many others.

Response to Allan. I know all analogies limp but that was a three legged horse.

I do love this question

  1. I establish God’s word is inerrant and infallible

  2. I see in scripture that because of sin I have fallen in my reasoning and logic

  3. I see clear paradoxes in scripture like the trinity, Jesus being 100% man and yet 100% God etc… that my mind cannot
    fully grasp and by human standards is not logical.

  4. I reestablish that God is the architect of logic and if I truly believe that then I must accept that since my logic is flawed I can rest in the fact that God’s logic is perfect even if it doesn’t make sense to me. I will still teach the paradoxes in scripture because I only can teach what scripture says and I know it makes perfect sense to God.

If we could completely make sense of God then He wouldn’t be God, would He?

You yourself pick and choose the paradoxes you fight and you yourself believe 9+6=17 because I doubt you have no problem with the trinity paradox along with many others.