The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Do Phil 2:10-11 and Col 1:20 really support UR?

Evangelical Universalism Arguments against Evangelical Universalism
#21

I’m not going to debate you what the Prodigal son is about but It doesn’t mean “God never stops seeking to reconcile sinners” The context of the Prodigal supports a severely back slidden believer who is restored back to God.

No, just a simple question. I suspect most people would answer the same way you have…So, you are saying you become apart of God’s creation as soon as you exist. If this is true, why are humans born with a sin or spiritual death nature? If babies come from God would not they be born with spiritual life instead of spiritual death? Also does the current condition of creation come from God?

#22

Revival,

No, just a simple question. I suspect most people would answer the same way you have…So, you are saying you become apart of God’s creation as soon as you exist.

Well, I didn’t. John did. :slight_smile:

If this is true, why are humans born with a sin or spiritual death nature?

There was this snake and this naked woman and this tree and it all went downhill from there. :wink:

If babies come from God would not they be born with spiritual life instead of spiritual death? Also does the current condition of creation come from God?

To answer your questions more seriously, “death” is not creation; it’s uncreation. It’s the dissolution of God’s good creation. Spiritual death cannot be God’s creation because it’s not a creation at all. Where are you going with this?

#23

Actually sin created death…Anyway… So, therefore you agree that babies( when they come to exist) cannot be God’s creation or come from him because of the spiritual death nature they are born with?

#24

Revival,

Actually sin created death…

We will agree to disagree for now, unless this becomes relevant.

So, therefore you agree that babies( when they come to exist) cannot be God’s creation or come from him because of the spiritual death nature they are born with?

I don’t agree to that. It isn’t biblical, isn’t reasonable, and doesn’t follow. Who else’s creation would they be? You’re not going to start pushing some kind of idea about Satan creating babies, are you? At any rate, I’ll let God Himself do the talking here:

Whoever sheds man’s blood,
By man his blood shall be shed,
For in the image of God
He made man. (Genesis 9:6)

That’s God speaking. Notice that’s Genesis 9, six chapters after the Fall, in a conversation with Noah and his children. Notice that man is still seen as God’s image-bearing creation.

#25

Actually, those who do not have faith in Jesus do not have hope of life after death because of Jesus regardless of whether UR is true or not, so UR does not give them “false hope” because they don’t have hope in Christ to begin with. UR empowers those who already have faith in Jesus for themselves to have faith in Jesus for others also. Infernalism, on the other hand, encourages believers to not have faith in Jesus for the salvation of others, but to have faith in Jesus for the damnation of others, or to have faith/fear that some/most will be lost in spite of what Jesus did at the cross. This is what saddens me most about Infernalism, other than it being erroneous, is that it LIMITS the Atonement. Calvinism Limits the Scope of the Atonement affirming that Jesus did not die for all, but only for some. Arminianism Limits the Power and Effect of the Atonement affirming that the death of Jesus doesn’t really save anyone, it only makes salvation available for some. Infernalism Limits, Minimizes, Shades the glorious light of what Jesus did on the cross! And I don’t know which branch of Infernalism (Calvinism or Arminianism) limits the wonderful work of Christ more!

#26

Revival - 2 serious questions spring to mind re: the above…

  1. Why would Jesus tell a parable about backsliding Christians to a Jewish audience?

  2. How does this interpretation of the story square with Hebrews 6:4 where it is indicated that it is impossible for someone who has tasted the good things and turned away to be brought again to repentance? If the prodigal son is, as in your interpretation of the story, representative of a Christian then it would seem he could never have come back to the father after blowing his inheritance and living with the pigs (an image not wasted on a Jewish audience).

#27

Everything that is is part of God’s creation. For the creation (kosmos) was subjected to futility, not willingly but because of Him who subjected it, in earnest expectation that the creation will be set free from its bondage to corruption, into the freedom of the Sons of God.

where do you get the idea that we become a part of God’s creation? He is the creator of all things there is no other.

Revival : “No, God makes it perfectly clear in Col 1:21 And YOU, that means you redhot were alienated and a enemy of God prior to accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior.( if you have done this)”

Col 1:21 And you, who once were alienated and enemies [size=150]in your mind [/size]by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled

Thats my whole point we were enemies in our minds, not in the mind of God, which is what really matters. He was not counting trespasses against us.

What I was alluding to earlier about where your faith comes from:
Phi 1:6 being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ;
Phi 1:28 but to you of salvation, and that from God.

Phi 3:9 and be found in him, not because I have my own righteousness derived from the law, but because I have the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness – a righteousness from God that is in fact based on Christ’s faithfulness. (this is from the NET bible, so I’m not sure you can accept it as the authorized word of God)
Notes:tn Or “faith in Christ.” A decision is difficult here. Though traditionally translated “faith in Jesus Christ,” an increasing number of NT scholars are arguing that πίστις Χριστοῦ (pisti" Cristou) and similar phrases in Paul (here and in Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20; 3:22; Eph 3:12) involve a subjective genitive and mean “Christ’s faith” or “Christ’s faithfulness”

(when I said corroborated by Romans I was thinking this verse although there are many in Romans that would suffice along with Heb, the author and perfector of your faith)
Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, (whats not of yourself? faith, it is the gift of God)

Why am I pointing this out? You have done nothing. You did not get yourself into the trouble in the first place. God subjected all of creation to futility, we’ve been given the covering cast over all faces (Isa 25), the death nature, the carnal mind. We are born dead, blind, deaf, without a hope in the world. Until God calls into the darkness let there be light. No one comes unless they’re called. We are given the faith to believe. You have done nothing. If you believe you have then you have room to boast. God takes all responsibility, He says all souls are MINE. He owns them all. He also said if I be lifted up from the earth I will drag all people to myself. Those who haven’t believed have not been called yet. Its part of His plan for the ages. To the administration of the fullness of time to sum up all things in Him things in heaven and things in earth.

From Him, through Him, to Him are ALL things. Past, present, future. Its all Him, the cause, the effect, the solution are all Him, boasting is excluded.

#28

Hi Jeff
I have no desire to discuss the depths of the parable of the prodigal son in this thread. If you would like to discuss it start a new post in the appropriate section. Thanks.

#29

Aaron,

Thanks. I said you offerered no argument against the arguments that Phil. 2:9-11 explicitly defines Jesus’ authority as accomplishing the precise definition of U.R. Your only response is to reassert, “It’s not talking about U.R.!” But you offer no basis (even an unconvincing one) for this that I can see.

On Col. 1, despite the plain language of vs. 20, you also reassert that Paul is “not saying all are reconciled.” But your only argument is that “all things” must be limited by 4,5 addressing the church. Why would this earlier reference to believers in language totally unlike vs. 20 trump the IMMEDIATE context in vs. 16 which uses the identical language of vs. 20**??**. Last summer I sat in J. I. Packer’s Colossians class, and even though he agrees with you completely that most people will be damned, even he said it’s indisputable that Paul insists here that all people are reconciled. I honestly am not seeing how you can assume that the agreed need for people to believe could cancel out the plain meaning of “all” things in its immediate context.

#30

Are you sure that man is still seen as God’s image-bearing creation? Stay with me here, snitzel. You just told me that “spiritual death cannot be God’s creation because it’s not a creation at all”

You’re right about spiritual death cannot come from God but wrong about sin not being the door which death and corruption came into the world. (Rom 5:12) You said we become apart of God’s creation when we exist. How can that be true when we are born with spiritual death natures that do not come from God? What does the word of God say about this? Lets find out.

Genesis 5:3 "And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth". Notice Adam begat a son in his own image and likeness and not God’s. Why is this? Answer: Because Adam had sinned and lost the life of God or the nature of God given to him when God created him( Gen 2:7) and it was replaced with the sin nature or spiritual death nature. Adam’s son was born in his own likeness and image with a sin nature or spiritual death nature and not God’s.

Luke 3:22-38. These are the generations of man from Jesus to Adam. I want you to look at all the generations of man in between Jesus and Adam what do they have in common? Answer: They all are born with a sin or spiritual death nature and not born of God. Who are the only two in these generations that were born of God? Answer: Jesus and Adam. They are the only two who are called the sons of God. The others are the sons of fallen man…created in their likeness and image(sin natures) and not God. Are you seeing this?

These verses above prove that God is not the creator of babies with sin or spiritual death natures…fallen man is. God told Adam to multiply and replenish the earth.( Gen 1:28) He told Adam this before the fall in Gen 3. God’s original plan was for Adam to multiply the earth with human beings that were born with the life of God or His nature but this happened after the fall and now we all are born with sin or spiritual death natures.

I have said all of that to say this: God’s plan is to restore as many people as possible and creation (heaven and earth) back to a Gen 1 and 2 state before the fall. This reconciliation started with God sacrificing his own son on behalf of the world to give them an avenue to be His literal son’s and daughters (just like Jesus and Adam). Heaven and Earth receives this reconciliation and will be restored back to Gen 1 and 2. Now, what is left?.. for this reconciliation to be complete… anyone that is separated from this reconciliation by the sin or spiritual nature must receive Jesus by faith and have their natures changed with His life and become a son or daughter of God.

Colossians 1:20 in no way is guaranteeing that every human will receive this reconciliation unto sons and daughters of God. The phrase “In earth and in heaven” is there for a reason. The All is for everyone that will receive or has received this reconciliation in earth or in heaven( believers). Earth is for everyone who is physically alive and either has received the reconciliation or has not received the reconciliation but still have an opportunity to receive it as long as they are physically alive… Heaven is for everyone that has physically died but received this reconciliation before they died and are waiting for their glorified bodies in heaven. But what about the people who physically died and did not receive this reconciliation? This is the reason why **Under **the earth is not included in Col 1:20 because it does not extend beyond the grave to unbelievers in hell.

#31

:confused: IMO, J.I. Packer is doctrinally wrong in most of his teachings. Look at my last response to snitzelhoff above. I go in more detail. God bless.

#32

Revival,

*Are you sure that man is still seen as God’s image-bearing creation? *

Yes. God said so. I showed you one place where. Take it up with Him. Want more?

Genesis 6:7 declares that God created even the dark, sinful men of Noah’s day.

Exodus 4:11 declares that God not only creates man (well, at least his mouth!) but even makes him mute and deaf for His own purposes!

Deuteronomy 26:19 tells us that God made all nations (surely you don’t think that means He just put borders on the land!)

Psalm 89:47 declares that He created “all the sons of men.”

Psalm 139:14 declares that people are “fearfully and wonderfully made.”

Isaiah 54:16 declares that He created even the blacksmith that creates the weapons used against Israel.

Malachi 2:10 issues the challenge, “Hasn’t God created us all?”

Acts 17:26-28 says that He made all nations of people and that all people are His children.

There are many more, from cover to cover. Never, in all of Scripture, is there any hint that mankind is anything less than God’s creation. If ECT requires the denial of such a basic, fundamental truth of Scripture in order for it to be true, surely it’s a doctrine on its deathbed. If ECT requires that Paul mean by “all things in Heaven and on Earth” something LESS than “all things in Heaven and on Earth,” then it’s flatly unbiblical. Once again, the attempts to defend it only highlight its inadequacies next to the Biblical doctrine of a God that never fails, that always seeks, that will have the whole counsel of His will fulfilled, that will see the travail of His soul satisfied, and that will make righteous all those that were made sinners.

#33

Wow, did you even read my last response in its entirety or are you just completely ignoring it? Either way, thanks for the discussion, snitzel. God bless.

#34

Revival,

I did read your response. I rejected it as using one thoroughly unbiblical idea to defend another thoroughly unbiblical idea. Your argument goes, more or less, thus:

  1. Fallen man is not God’s creation.
  2. Colossians 1:20 indicates that God wants to reconcile fallen man by making them His creation.
  3. Colossians 1:20 does not say that He will, in fact, accomplish that goal.
  4. Therefore, Colossians 1:20 does not indicate the eventual salvation of all.

I reject premise 1 because of the overabundant Biblical evidence against it.

I reject premise 2 because that is not what the verse says (“in Heaven and on Earth” includes humans because humans are on Earth).

I reject premise 3 because that is, in fact, the opposite of what the verse says (eudokeo is something God will bring to pass).

I reject the conclusion because I reject every single premise.

Again, if ECT must resort to this sort of argumentation to sustain itself, it’s better just to let the doctrine die.

#35

If babies come from God they would not be born with spiritual death natures. Would they not be born with spiritual life if they were from God as was Adam and every born again believer? Only life can come from God not spiritual death… that comes from man. God bless.

#36

Revival,

If babies come from God why are they born with spiritual death natures? Would they not be born with spiritual life if they were from God as Adam was? Only life can come from God not spiritual death… that comes from man.

“Spiritual death” is not a thing. It’s an unthing, a hole, a void. It can no more come from God than a hole can be made of rock. Of course a hole can’t be made of rock. A hole can’t be made of anything because it’s the lack of substance that makes it a hole. You’re clinging here to a theology that requires you to ignore a whole stack of very clear Scriptures that say exactly the opposite of the point you’re arguing–Scriptures that affirm that even in man’s present state, God is still the Creator and Maker of all mankind. At any rate, death, in all its forms, is an enemy that will be entirely defeated.

#37

Ok, but if babies come from God they would not be born with spiritual death natures. Gen 5;3 and Luke 3:22-38 show this. Would they not be born with spiritual life if they were from God as was Adam and every born again believer? Only life can come from God not spiritual death… that comes from man. God bless.

#38

Revival,

If you’re going to keep ignoring the Scripture that plainly, unambiguously says that man is still the creation of God, we have nothing left to talk about. Your conclusion is unbiblical because your premise is unbiblical. Further, even if you were right, mankind is still one of the “things on Earth,” and thus, within the scope of God’s reconciliatory work, the final outcome of which is certain in Colossians 1.

#39

Which I cover in detail in my response to you. The final outcomes of Col 1:20 are:

  1. The heaven and earth will be reconciled back to a Genesis 1 and 2 state.
  2. The people in earth will already have received this reconciliation(believers) or will have the opportunity to receive while their alive.(unbelievers)
  3. The in heaven people have already received and are waiting for their glorified bodies.(believers who have physically died)
  4. The people who have physically died without receiving this reconciliation… this reconciliation will not extend a second time past the grave in hell. ( unbelievers who have physically died)
  5. If you disagree with #4 then please show me evidence of this reconciliation extension being received beyond the grave and people being recorded in the book of life and exiting the lake of fire after the final judgment. God bless.
#40

Revival,

It works like this. All things in Heaven and on Earth, right now, are with absolute certainty going to be reconciled to God. Unsaved people are on Earth, right now. If they die without being reconciled with God, we must conclude one of two things:

  1. God’s reconciliatory promise has failed; there was something “on Earth” that was never reconciled to Him, after all.

  2. God will reconcile those people yet, fulfilling His Word.

Your theology picks the first conclusion. Mine picks the second. Simple as that.