The Evangelical Universalist Forum

My Top Six Scriptures That Show Jesus Will Save All People


It seems the favorite anti LFW Scriptures are in Romans 9. The following are some sites i was reading yesterday that interpret Romans 9 in harmony with a pro LFW interpretation:

I’ll leave you with that for now, as i also have some things to do.


Ill try to check them out when I get a second. I’ve also left some sources that might be food for thought for you as well. Even if we end up disagreeing with each other’s sources its always good to look in depth at other people’s side of a debate.


I behold pas as being the radical all. There are instances where all is less inclusive, but there is a word that is the super radical all koine of ta panta. Not panta, but that wee ta preceeding it. "From Him the all comes, through Him the all exists, and in Him the all ends.


The Radical ALL=

Plan b=

As in Adam some die so in Christ shall some be made alive


Hey David. It looks like it’s been awhile since you wrote this, so maybe you have found some answers to the questions you posted. It’s been a long time since I’ve been on this site, but you’re questions got me to thinking.

Regarding free will, this is no issue to God. The only beings in creation concerned with human free will are humans. God does what He does regardless of our “free will.” He obviously ignores our will in judgment. Must God obtain the free will permission of the human before He casts him into the lake of fire? No. And God does not need the free will permission of the human to save him. God turns an unbeliever into a believer simply by overwhelming him with grace, as He did with unwilling Saul on the road to Damascus. And He can do this whenever it suits His will. Grace is not always poured out by God in the same measure. When He pours out overwhelming grace, who can resist? No one. Could we say then that God forces someone to be a believer against their will. Sure. And who would complain about this. No one because God has changed their heart to love Him.

“Ages of ages” simply refers to the supreme ages, just as “holy of holies” refers to the holiest place. And King of kings refers to the supreme King. The ages of the ages are the last two ages in which Christ rules - the age which includes the 1000 years and the new heaven and earth age. These are the supreme ages for obvious reasons. And these ages are all wrapped up at the consummation when Christ completes His work (1 Cor 15:21-28). This includes the vivification and subjection of all, and the defeat of death by our Savior.


Hi there Wes: I registered on this site many moons ago and forgot about it after my dear death experience 10 years ago.

I see all of us being a will that has been badly damaged by sin and therefore not quite as “free” as we would like to believe… Wee wills must yield to the Will of all wills. Yes, my friend, God does exactly what He intends and will draw/drag off/ impel all mankind unto Himself!

Overwhelming grace: Dear Abba I do believe “exceedingly abundantly beyond all we can ask or think” is in the same wonderful dimension of You.


Dear Wes: what were the questions presented?


Dear Dave Leach: You posted "Great list of verses. God can indeed do anything He wants, and He wants everyone to be saved. Surely this verse is enough to disprove the traditional assumption of everyone but Universalists that once people are in Hell, God no longer has any interest in saving them.

But does He want to save people who don’t WANT to be saved? It is observed on this thread that God will not FORCE any knee to bow. Doesn’t that same theorized unwillingness of God to snuff out our free will apply to saving us?"

Do not worry Dave! Bowing before the Lord of Glory and confession IN/EN His Name is not by perfunctory genuflections. God forces no one, no being in the heavens, the earth and the underworld to worship Him, every last being bows in willing subjection IN His Name.

Furthermore my friend, God does not “want” all mankind to be saved; He willeth/wills all mankind to be saved. The koine is thelo, He wills all mankind to be saved. Little wills yield to the Will of all wills, every last rebellious one!


Welcome to the Hornets


All Does Not Mean All? -Part 1-

  1. 1Tim 2:4 God will have all mankind to be saved.

plan b= God will have some of mankind to be saved.

  1. 1Tim 2:4 God wills all to come to the knowledge of truth.

plan b= God wills some to come to the knowledge of the truth.

  1. 1Tim 2:6 Salvation of all is testified in due time.

plan b= Salvation of some is testified in due time.

  1. Jn 12:47 Jesus came to save all.

plan b= Jesus came to save some.

  1. Eph 1:11 God works all after the counsel of His will.

plan b= God works some after the counsel of His will.

  1. Jn 4:42 Jesus is Savior of the world.

plan b= Jesus is the Savior of some of the world.

  1. 1Jn 4:14 Jesus is Savior of the world.

plan b= Jesus is Savior of very few of the world.

  1. Jn 12:32 Jesus will draw all mankind unto Himself.

plan b= Jesus will draw a few to Himself.

  1. Col 1:16 By Him all were created.

plan b= By Him were some created.

  1. Rm 5:15-21 In Adam all condemned.

plan b= In Adam some are condemned.

  1. 1Cor 15:22 In Adam all die, in Christ all live.

plan b= In Adam some die, in Christ some live.


God knows all things. But it is logically impossible to know in advance what a free will agent will choose. That cannot be known in advance because the free-will agent has not yet made his choice.

If someone knew (it doesn’t have to be God) that you were going to eat an apple tomorrow, then it would be impossible for you to refrain from eating an apple tomorrow. For if tomorrow you choose NOT to eat and apple that would indicate that that someone didn’t know after all.

By the way, when you look up the passage about God knowing the end from the beginning, it is clear that it is speaking of Him knowing the end from the beginning of his plans. In no way is the passage speaking about God knowing the end from the beginning of all events. That is but a presumption.

Open Theism: is it true, possible or biblical?

“…we have the redemption through His blood, the release from sins, coming with the rich gift which He poured into us with all wisdom and intelligence; making known to us the mystery of His intention, with His decision which He had determined with Himself to administer at the completion of the periods, when everything was to be centred again in the Messiah, both upon the heavens and a upon the earth : in Him, by Whom we have also inherited according to His purpose Who foresees and energizes all things, which have been prepared to accomplish the intention of His will;…”

Please note:

The restitution of the all is a “mystery” that must be “made known” by the Lord. This mystery is His “intention” & "His “decision” determined “with Himself”.

There is no consultation with anyone, it is exclusively determined within Himself!


This is the issue. Does the power of sin and despair reign supreme in Adam1, or does the “all the more” of the Last Adam, Jesus Christ prevail?

Grace Abounding Over Adam’s Fall

“Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life”
(Romans 5:18).

A.E. Saxby, in God in Redemption 1, gives us a wonderfully logical reason for rejecting the notion that God will condemn anyone to eternal damnation and suffering, and rather proves that He has provided for the salvation of all mankind.

He says,

If a human act was effectual for ruin, how much more shall a Divine act be effectual for salvation?
How quickly we believers will latch on to some fragment of a verse, in a whole context, to prove a negative perception and then propagate it as truth, to the total exclusion of the whole context of the doctrine being presented.

Why do we so easily jump to conclude all men to condemnation, but find it so terribly difficult to accept with the same unabashedness the accompanying text which says that “the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life”?

How can anyone think that as the first Adam’s act could bring about the “ruin” of all of his descendants, that the second Adam’s act was nowhere near as efficacious to provide the remedy whereby all of those descendants would be rescued from such a penalty? It’s really quite an illogical act of mental gymnastics to interpret Romans 5that way.

It is rather amazing that we never consider that as sin abounded in its effect on all of the first Adam’s posterity, God’s “grace did much more abound” (Romans 5:20).

Thus, if the first Adam’s act was so powerful as to affect the ruin of all of his future generations, how much less of an effect would God’s grace be through the redeeming act of the Second Adam, that even one of those offspring could be eternally lost forever to the loving grace of His Creator and Father?

It is too much to comprehend that we serve a God and Father so callous to the welfare of His creation, that He would allow any one of His dear creatures to go unprovided for in the eternal plan of His “great love wherewith He loved us.”

Note: 1. God in Redemption by A.E. Saxby, reprinted by Bible Student’s Press (2008).

Are our broadest hopes broad enough? Shall there be a nook or abyss, in all the universe of God, finally unlightened by the Cross? Shall there be a sin, or sorrow, or pain unhealed? Is the very universe, is creation in all its extent, a field wide enough for the Son of God?