My son thinks it does. I like the idea of course but am not quite sure.
Here’s the text:
The immediate context is disagreements on what different believers eat. But the assumption is that it’s important enough to effect ones standing with God. So you want to get it “right”. Except there is disagreement ON what is “right”. And while the overt emphasis seems to be on cutting each other some slack, there is also the strong suggestion that our concerns might not be the precise same ones as the Lords concerns. Further, there is the assertion that our standing is accomplished by the Lord, and has less to with us specifically. This of course sounds very much like God’s grace. So, while one might see this passage as narrowly applied to this small area of life, it seems quite reasonable to see a much broader truth being demonstrated. Yes, sincerely try to do the very best you can, but know that the “LORD will make you stand” in all sorts of matters; including all the salvific ones.
Sure, the specific context is a servants standing with their masters; but the broader context, since we see our master as being Christ is that He will make us stand in all matters in terms of our salvation.
Is that an acceptable reading – or is it way out of line and/or wishful thinking?
(Also, v9 – what does it mean that Christ is Lord of the dead and Living?)
PS – this is not a pressing question at all; no hurry on answering. I realize it’s fun and important to discuss dissect the obvious and overt Universalism texts, but as I read, there are LOTS of hints. Just wondering how you advise handling those passages. So far, I value those passages for devotional use (encouragement etc) but don’t bring them out when defending UR.