Did Apostle Paul Really Believe In Universal Reconciliation?

[Revival]

The context of chapters 9-11 of Romans speaks to the salvation of Jews. Does Paul state that
every single Jew will be eventually saved? Nope, he makes it clear that only the children of the
promise will be saved.(Rom 9:8) If Paul believed in universal reconciliation, he would
have no need to wish that he were accursed for the sake of his brethren (Rom 9:2-3). Furthermore,
Paul did not argue that God’s promise was fail proof because everyone will eventually be saved;
instead, he stated that only a remnant shall be saved.(Rom 9:27) Notice also that the grafting into the olive tree (i.e. a picture of salvation) happens in this life, not after death.

The Greek word for **accursed **means “estrangement from Christ and His salvation”. The word does not denote punishment intended as discipline, but given over or devotion to divine condemnation! It denotes an indissoluble vowel.

Jesus never in His earthly ministry taught universal reconciliation. The Apostles received their doctrine from Jesus therefore never teaching universal reconciliation.

This conclusively refutes any idea that the Apostle Paul believed or taught universal reconciliation.

What about all the UR proof texts in the NT? Those texts exist only because man has ignored the context of those passages and have relied on their human logic and reasoning to interpret them. Context is king!

[davidbo]

Rom 11:26 and in this way all Israel will be saved.

…

32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

[Revival]

Rom 11:26 and in this way all Israel will be saved.

…

32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

You just proved my “ignoring the context” point, davidbo.

Rom 11:26 can’t mean that everyone in Israel will be saved it would contradict other passages such as 9:2-3; 8 and 9:27. Paul was stating that all Israel shall be saved in the same way as the Gentiles by being grafted into the olive tree by faith.

If you leave Rom 11:32 in context… In verses 30-31, Paul argues that just as the Gentiles were once
disobedient and have been shown mercy, the Jews will also be shown mercy. The “all” is defined for us. Paul is pointing out that God’s plan includes showing mercy to both Jews and Gentiles. UR was not Paul’s intention at all in these verses.

[Username1]

Hello Revival

Good to speak with you. Although sadly I fear we are not going to see eye to eye on this subject.

The context of chapters 9-11 of Romans speaks to the salvation of Jews. Does Paul state that
every single Jew will be eventually saved? Nope, he makes it clear that only the children of the
promise will be saved.(Rom 9:8)

I beg to differ. My Bible says in Romans 11 vv25-26: “I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, and in this way all Israel will be saved.”

I don’t see any qualification about “all Israel” being limited to your so-called “children of the promise”. (Mind you, I don’t have your faith in the inerrancy of the KJV, so perhaps I’m missing something here …)

Jesus never in His earthly ministry taught universal reconciliation. The Apostles received their doctrine from Jesus therefore never teaching universal reconciliation.

This conclusively refutes any idea that the Apostle Paul believed or taught universal reconciliation.

Er, no. That is a non sequitur, a logical fallacy at every stage if ever I saw one:

Jesus never taught universal reconciliation, you say. So, we throw out His statement about being lifted up and drawing all men unto Him, do we?

The Apostles received their doctrine from Jesus, did they? Mmmm, funny how Paul came out with all that stuff about just as all died in Adam, so shall all be made alive in Christ. Perhaps Paul made that bit of doctrine up off his own bat.

And these baseless statements “conclusively refute any idea that Paul believed or taught universal reconciliation”, do they? I very much doubt that, my friend.

And all the ‘pro-UR proof texts’ only exist because we’ve “ignored their context” do they? Funny, I thought they existed because the men who wrote the NT put them there. And I thought as Christians we are supposed to believe the Bible is inspired - maybe inerrant even?! (Not that I believe the Bible is literally inerrant, because quite clearly it ain’t. No translation - not even your cherished KJV - can ever give a completely theologically unbiased rendition of the original Hebrew and Greek scriptures.)

Shalom

Johnny

[davidbo]

Rom 11:26 and in this way all Israel will be saved.

…

32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

You just proved my “ignoring the context” point, davidbo.

I merely posted 2 scriptures directly from the NIV.

How is it that this has somehow proved your point?

Your claim is absurd.

[Revival]

Hello Revival

Good to speak with you. Although sadly I fear we are not going to see eye to eye on this subject.

The context of chapters 9-11 of Romans speaks to the salvation of Jews. Does Paul state that
every single Jew will be eventually saved? Nope, he makes it clear that only the children of the
promise will be saved.(Rom 9:8)

I beg to differ. My Bible says in Romans 11 vv25-26: “I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, and in this way all Israel will be saved.”

I don’t see any qualification about “all Israel” being limited to your so-called “children of the promise”. (Mind you, I don’t have your faith in the inerrancy of the KJV, so perhaps I’m missing something here …)

Jesus never in His earthly ministry taught universal reconciliation. The Apostles received their doctrine from Jesus therefore never teaching universal reconciliation.

This conclusively refutes any idea that the Apostle Paul believed or taught universal reconciliation.

Er, no. That is a non sequitur, a logical fallacy at every stage if ever I saw one:

Jesus never taught universal reconciliation, you say. So, we throw out His statement about being lifted up and drawing all men unto Him, do we?

The Apostles received their doctrine from Jesus, did they? Mmmm, funny how Paul came out with all that stuff about just as all died in Adam, so shall all be made alive in Christ. Perhaps Paul made that bit of doctrine up off his own bat.

And these baseless statements “conclusively refute any idea that Paul believed or taught universal reconciliation”, do they? I very much doubt that, my friend.

And all the ‘pro-UR proof texts’ only exist because we’ve “ignored their context” do they? Funny, I thought they existed because the men who wrote the NT put them there. And I thought as Christians we are supposed to believe the Bible is inspired - maybe inerrant even?! (Not that I believe the Bible is literally inerrant, because quite clearly it ain’t. No translation - not even your cherished KJV - can ever give a completely theologically unbiased rendition of the original Hebrew and Greek scriptures.)

Shalom

Johnny

Here’s Johnny… sorry couldn’t resist.

Romans 9:6-8
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect.** For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:**

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

You see Johnny, not all of Israel are children of God and the children of the promised seed. Rom 11:25-26 must be left in context. Paul said “until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, and in this way all Israel will be saved.” In this way, Johnny…In what way? The same way the Gentiles have come in and have been grafted in the olive tree… by faith. This same way all of Israel shall be saved.

John 12:32 has nothing to do with UR and everything to do with the way to salvation. Is there really a valid reason to believe that “all men” here extends even to those who have died? Certainly not! You would have to take it out of context to make it say that.

[Revival]

Also, Johnny, If Paul really believed in universal reconciliation, he would
have no need to wish that he were accursed for the sake of his brethren (Rom 9:2-3). Furthermore,
Paul did not argue that God’s promise was fail proof because everyone will eventually be saved;
instead, he stated that only a remnant shall be saved.(Rom 9:27) Notice also that the grafting into the olive tree (i.e. a picture of salvation) happens in this life, not after death.

[Revival]

Rom 11:26 and in this way all Israel will be saved.

…

32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

You just proved my “ignoring the context” point, davidbo.

I merely posted 2 scriptures directly from the NIV.

How is it that this has somehow proved your point?

Your claim is absurd.

I assume you understand what “context” is and what “ignoring the context” means pertaining to those verses you posted form the NIV?

[Paidion]

If Paul believed in universal reconciliation, he would have no need to wish that he were accursed for the sake of his brethren (Rom 9:2-3)… The Greek word for accursed means “estrangement from Christ and His salvation”. The word does not denote punishment intended as discipline, but given over or devotion to divine condemnation! It denotes an indissoluble vowel.

Where do you get your definition that the Greek word “αναθεμα” means “estrangement from Christ and His salvation”?
According to the Online Bible Greek Lexicon the word is derived from the Greek word “ανατιθημι”. This word is made up of the prefix “ανα” (up) and the root word “τιθημι” (to place). Thus the word “ανατιθημι” means “to set up”. The Online Bible Greek Lexicon gives the primary meaning of “αναθεμα”, the word in question, as “A thing set up or laid by in order to be kept.”

In case you think the Online Bible Greek Lexicon is biased in some way, I also offer these definitions from Abbott-Smith’s A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament:

1. That which is laid up to be kept.
2. A thing devoted to God.

Furthermore,Paul did not argue that God’s promise was fail proof because everyone will eventually be saved;instead, he stated that only a remnant shall be saved.(Rom 9:27) Notice also that the grafting into the olive tree (i.e. a picture of salvation) happens in this life, not after death.

Peter very clearly indicated that the unrighteous are reserved to be corrected in judgment day:

The Lord knows how to rescue the devout from trials, but to keep the unrighteous for a day of judgment to be corrected. (2 Peter 2:9)

I know that some translations render the word “καλαζομενους” as “to be punished” rather than “to be corrected”. However, the lexical form of the word is “κολαζω” originally referred to pruning trees in order to correct their growth. Later, the word came to be applied to the correction of children (as well as adults). The means by which a parent corrects his children may be regarded by some as punishment. But a loving parent has only the betterment of his children in view when he corrects them. So it is with God:

And have you forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as sons?
“My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord,
nor be weary when reproved by him.
For the Lord disciplines the one he loves,
and chastises every son whom he receives.”
It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline? If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons.
Besides this, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live? For they disciplined us for a short time as it seemed best to them, but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. (Hebrews 12:5-10 ESV)

What father would punish his child by shutting him up in a dark basement for a year, and then torture him with a red-hot poker every day? Yet some of us believe that God who is pure LOVE would send over 99% of people to the Lake of Fire to suffer agony for all eternity with no purpose whatever except to wreak His vengeance on them because of their sins.

[Revival]

If Paul believed in universal reconciliation, he would have no need to wish that he were accursed for the sake of his brethren (Rom 9:2-3)… The Greek word for accursed means “estrangement from Christ and His salvation”. The word does not denote punishment intended as discipline, but given over or devotion to divine condemnation! It denotes an indissoluble vowel.

Where do you get your definition that the Greek word “αναθεμα” means “estrangement from Christ and His salvation”?
According to the Online Bible Greek Lexicon the word is derived from the Greek word “ανατιθημι”. This word is made up of the prefix “ανα” (up) and the root word “τιθημι” (to place). Thus the word “ανατιθημι” means “to set up”. The Online Bible Greek Lexicon gives the primary meaning of “αναθεμα”, the word in question, as “A thing set up or laid by in order to be kept.”

In case you think the Online Bible Greek Lexicon is biased in some way, I also offer these definitions from Abbott-Smith’s A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament:

1. That which is laid up to be kept.
2. A thing devoted to God.

Furthermore,Paul did not argue that God’s promise was fail proof because everyone will eventually be saved;instead, he stated that only a remnant shall be saved.(Rom 9:27) Notice also that the grafting into the olive tree (i.e. a picture of salvation) happens in this life, not after death.

Peter very clearly indicated that the unrighteous are reserved to be corrected in judgment day:

The Lord knows how to rescue the devout from trials, but to keep the unrighteous for a day of judgment to be corrected. (2 Peter 2:9)

I know that some translations render the word “καλαζομενους” as “to be punished” rather than “to be corrected”. However, the lexical form of the word is “κολαζω” originally referred to pruning trees in order to correct their growth. Later, the word came to be applied to the correction of children (as well as adults). The means by which a parent corrects his children may be regarded by some as punishment. But a loving parent has only the betterment of his children in view when he corrects them. So it is with God:

And have you forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as sons?
“My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord,
nor be weary when reproved by him.
For the Lord disciplines the one he loves,
and chastises every son whom he receives.”
It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline? If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons.
Besides this, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live? For they disciplined us for a short time as it seemed best to them, but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. (Hebrews 12:5-10 ESV)

What father would punish his child by shutting him up in a dark basement for a year, and then torture him with a red-hot poker every day? Yet some of us believe that God who is pure LOVE would send over 99% of people to the Lake of Fire to suffer agony for all eternity with no purpose whatever except to wreak His vengeance on them because of their sins.

The Greek word for “accursed” is “Anathema” from the same root verb anatithemai or anatithemi (394), to separate as anethema, a consecrated gift. A gift given by vow or in fulfillment of a promise, and devoted to destruction for God’s sake (Num 21:1-3; Duet 13:16-18) therefore, given up to the curse and destruction, accursed. (Gal 1:8-9; 1 Cor 12:3; 16:22). Spiros Zodhiates TH.D.

[Revival]

Also Paidon “Kolazo” contexually in 2 Peter 2:9 is in no way describing God pruning impenitent unbelievers (BTW, who are not His children) to correct their growth. They are being temporarily reserved in Hell/Hades until resurrected unto eternal punishment in Rev 20:10-15. BTW, God’s children are not considered “unjust” as described in this verse but just and righteous. God’s kids go to heaven when they die and are not reserved in Hell to be corrected. This contradicts Heb 12:5-8 and no where in the NT does God prune or correct impenitent unbelievers for remedial purposes for anything especially salvation!

[BirdOfTheEgg]

God’s kids go to heaven when they die and are not reserved in Hell to be corrected.

Where do you get this from?

From my understanding, everyone goes to Sheol (i.e., Hell) when they die. Unless you take the Orthodox-ish interpretation, where the Parable of Lazarus may be taken literally.

Besides, who ARE the children of God?

All the references in 2 Peter 2 seem to deal with present-consequences.

Peter gives a detailed description of the sort that will be in trouble. They are not labeled as “people who do not call themselves Christians”.

[Revival]

God’s kids go to heaven when they die and are not reserved in Hell to be corrected.

Where do you get this from?

From my understanding, everyone goes to Sheol (i.e., Hell) when they die. Unless you take the Orthodox-ish interpretation, where the Parable of Lazarus may be taken literally.

Besides, who ARE the children of God?

Luke 16:19-31 gives you a picture of the afterlife before the cross. Yes, I do take what Jesus taught in Luke 16 as spiritual truth of the afterlife. It has been the position of the body of Christ since Jesus taught it.

Galatians 3:26
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

Only those who have received the nature of God by faith in Jesus are children of God. AKA being born again. You must be born into the family John 1:12;3:3 1 Pet 1:23.

[BirdOfTheEgg]

Luke 16:19-31 gives you a picture of the afterlife before the cross.

That’s a parable. My understanding of parables is that they’re not meant to be literal. In fact, taking that parable literally creates additional problems.

The Parable seems most concerned with the condition of the rich man (i.e., a Pharisee) and a Lazarus. The Pharisee is a believer accused of not understanding what he believes.

Yes, I do take what Jesus taught in Luke 16 as spiritual truth of the afterlife. It has been the position of the body of Christ since Jesus taught it.

If you are referring to the Orthodox position, you may be correct. But from what I understand you’re a Protestant.

Galatians 3:26
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

He’s speaking to the church in Galatians, from what I understand. What does that have to do with you and me?

Only those who have received the nature of God by faith in Jesus are children of God. AKA being born again. You must be born into the family John 1:12;3:3 1 Pet 1:23.

I get that. What makes you think you’re born again? When did Jesus or Paul ever said you were born again? When did they say you will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven?

“You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!” [James]

You seem convinced you are not of whom Peter speaks. Why so? What convinced you that you are not one of the wicked, broken sinners he describes? What convinced you that you are the true saint, child of God, born again, of those who will inherit the Kingdom of God and never enter a dark place?

[Revival]

Bird

Anyone who accepts Jesus as Lord and Savior by faith are the body of Christ ( the church) or the “Ekklesia” the called out ones or the assembly.

Romans 8:15-16
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

You see Bird the Bible says all who call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. When we do this by faith we receive the spirit or nature of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father or Daddy! The Holy Spirit bears witness with my spirit that I am a child of God! Hallelujah!

Hope this helps but can we come back to the topic of the OP? Thanks.

[BirdOfTheEgg]

You see Bird the Bible says all who call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." [Matthew 7:21|ESV]

Come again?

[Revival]

You see Bird the Bible says all who call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." [Matthew 7:21|ESV]

Come again?

Bird, Amen. I thought I was proving that I was a child of God not discussing overcoming and remaining a Christian. But I agree, you must hold onto the faith until the end.

[Caroleem]

You see Bird the Bible says all who call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." [Matthew 7:21|ESV]

Come again?

Bird, those were never saved to begin with. They used the Lords name to serve their own purpose. Those who truly call upon the name of the Lord will be saved, yes! On the other hand, John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Matthew 7:21 is not about losing ones salvation because one can’t.

[Revival]

You see Bird the Bible says all who call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." [Matthew 7:21|ESV]

Come again?
Bird, those were never saved to begin with. They used the Lords name to serve their own purpose. Those who truly call upon the name of the Lord will be saved, yes! On the other hand, John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Matthew 7:21 is not about losing ones salvation because one can’t.

Caroleem, How many unbelievers do you know who cast out devils and do miracles in Jesus’ name? These are believers who started out right but did not overcome and hold onto their faith.

[BirdOfTheEgg]

Bird, those were never saved to begin with.

How’s that in there at all?

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

I see nothing here about being saved after or prior or w/e. From the context, I’d say he’s either speaking of Pharisees or false prophets. Pharisees are often accused of being hypocrites, not practicing what they preached. False prophets are judged by their fruits.