“And in nothing terrified by your adversaries: which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to you of salvation, and that of God.” -Philippians 1:28 (KJV)
It would be worthwhile for me to revisit T. Talbott’s thoughts on the destruction of an enemy of God and salvation, but in the meantime I was hoping to get some takes on this verse. The juxtaposing of salvation and destruction certainly seems to present a problem for the Universalists, no?
Gabe.
you said: It would be worthwhile for me to revisit T. Talbott’s thoughts on the destruction of an enemy of God and salvation, but in the meantime I was hoping to get some takes on this verse. The juxtaposing of salvation and destruction certainly seems to present a problem for the Universalists, no?
Aaron37: Absolutely! This verse and many others present problems for the Universalist.
The word “terrified” in the Greek is a strong term referring to the shying away of a horse that has been startled. The “adversaries” who caused this fear were unbelievers who showed hatred and hostility to the Philippian believers. So, Paul is speaking of persecution against the Philippian believers. The persecution these adversaries brought against the Philippians was a token that the persecutors were headed for perdition. If they were true believers, they would not be fighting their own.
On the other hand, to those who are the persecuted, persecution is a token that they are truly born again. Jesus taught that godly people would be persecuted (Mt. 5:10-12) and so did Paul (2 Tim. 3:12). The fact that these believers were being persecuted confirmed their salvation and at the same time revealed their persecutors as being enemies of Christ with the result of eternal perdition.
The suffering of persecution is not an indication of divine disapproval but rather a sign of true adoption into the family of God. For we are called, not only to believe in Christ, but also to suffer for His sake (v. 29). The Philippians were experiencing the same type of persecution that Paul was going through (v. 30). Paul is stating to the Philippian believers that they were in this fight together and should therefore receive encouragement and strength from each other.
source : Andrew Wommack
Thanks for the post, Aaron37.
I’d like to hear from some of the Universalists here.
BTW, I’m still waiting to hear back from you in the fiery coals thread. 
It all comes down to the definition of “perdition”, doesn’t it?
No–at least I don’t find it a problem. Destruction and salvation are always opposites. We are all lost until we are saved. We are all dead in our sins until we are made alive in Christ. (Lost and destroyed are translated from the same word in many cases)
Philisophically, the most convincing argument for universalism (in my opinion) is the character of God which is shown in scripture to be such that His purpose in punishment is the repentance of the sinner. He does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked. God will not allow any to continue in sin (which is death)–He loves too much for that. His loving wrath will faithfully follow each one who insists on self-destruction. The clay pot that was marred is not happy to be crushed by the Potter’s hand, but when he is made anew he will rejoice.
(I hope that’s coherent, lol–gotta run–busy day today!)
Sonia
I think the problem can be resolved by simply understanding the “salvation” of which Paul speaks here as being temporal and not final. So what’s being juxtaposed is a temporal destruction and a temporal salvation. This, of couse, would not mean that Paul had nothing at all to say about our “final” salvation or destiny; it would just mean he didn’t have it in view here in this verse.
Hi Sonia,
No doubt this is true, yet Philippians 1:28 and like verses speak of destruction as something that happens to the wicked after this life, and not merely as the state that the wicked are presently in. See Philippians 3:19, for example. The end of the wicked is destruction, as opposed to the end of the righteous, which is salvation.
Aaron,
I must admit that the context of Philippians 1:28 does not rule out the possibility you propose.
But where does the Bible elsewhere attest to a temporary salvation that believers enjoy prior to their eternal salvation?
Well, being an “ultra-universalist,” I believe that every passage in the OT and NT which speaks of a salvation being enjoyed by people prior to the literal resurrection of the dead is necessarily a temporal salvation. So I think they’re actually quite numerous. In another thread I wrote:
"In the NT alone we read of salvation from enemies (Luke 1:71-74), the Gentiles (Acts 26:17), sickness (Luke 7:50; 13:16), love of money (Luke 19:8-10), sinking (Matt 8:24-25, 14:30), earthly trials (2 Peter 2:9), Egyptians (Jude 1:5), and the fear of death (Heb 2:14-15). But by far it is moral corruption and evil from which people are said to be saved, or to be in need of salvation. For example, we read of salvation from sin (Matt 1:21; 6:13; Luke 1:77; John 1:29; 8:33-36; Acts 5:31; 13:36-39; 26:18; Rom 6:16-23, 7:21-25, 8:1-4; 1 Tim 1:15; 1 Pet 2:21-25), from slavery to evil behavior and passions (Tit 3:3-5), the kingdom of darkness (Col 1:13-14), captivity to the present evil age (Gal 1:3-4), impiety and worldly passions (Tit 2:11-14), a corrupt generation (Acts 2:40), the defilements of this world (2 Pet 2:20), a life of futility in following the ruling power of evil (Eph 2:1-5), futile ways of living (1 Pet 1:18-19; 2:1-2), going astray (1 Pet 2:21-25), etc. There are a few verses that speak of being saved or delivered from God’s wrath (Rom 5:9; 1 Thess 1:10; 5:9). But nowhere is it indicated or suggested that God’s wrath ever refers to a punishment to be experienced after death. Instead, God’s “anger” or “wrath” refers to his disapproval of sin expressed in temporal judgments upon the guilty, during this lifetime (e.g., Ex 22:24; 32:10; Num 16:46; Deut 29:23, 28; 2 Kings 22:17; Job 14:13; Isaiah 9:19; 13:9; Jer 7:20; 42:18; 44:6; Eze 9:8; 21:31; 22:20; Luke 21:23; John 3:36; Rom 1:18; 2:5, 8; 12:19; 13:4; 1 Thess 2:16; 5:3, 9; etc.).
I think the best way to determine what the “salvation” was of which Paul spoke in Phil 1:28 is to determine who the opponents of the Philippian Christians were. I submit that they were the same opponents of the believers in Thessalonica - i.e., the unbelieving Jews (1Thess 2:14-16; 2Thess 1:5-9; Acts 17:5-8, 13; cf. Phil 3:2, 18-19). So when were they “destroyed?” Answer: when their nation was overthrown by the Romans in 70. At this time, I believe the kingdom of God “came with power” (Mark 9:1; Luke 21:31-32; cf. v. 28), and all believers everywhere were granted entrance into it, to enjoy for as long as they lived. This inheriting of the Messianic kingdom by believers (both Jews and Gentiles) was, I believe, the salvation of which Paul speaks in Philippians 1.
Hi Gabe,
That passage could (and usually is) read to mean the **absolute and final **end of the person–but I don’t see that Paul *necessarily *means it that way. Jesus said there are two roads–one leading to life, and one leading to destruction. The end of the path is destruction–but after that, what? The Potter destroys his marred vessel, and makes it anew.
I could tell a person “if you keep that up you will ruin your life” or “end up in jail”–but I don’t mean that he will be forever in jail, or that the ruined life will not ever be salvaged.
Paul’s focus in this is to urge his hearers to be sure that they are really walking as they ought to, to be humble, willing to suffer, considering others more important, etc–because “many” are walking (I assume these are ones who think they are Christians) and are really the enemies of God. I relate this the times when Jesus said that people will calll him “Lord” and think they are doing service to him, but he will say “I never knew you” and send them away in disgrace, “weeping and gnashing their teeth”. – That could be called the destruction of all their hopes and expectations–the riches they thought they had stored up, the mansion they thought they had built, the praise, glory, crowns, robes, streets of gold which they thought were waiting for them, all gone and nothing left but rags and shame.
But I don’t see that as the final irrevokable end of the person. God may abase the proud, but He also lifts up the humble.
Sonia
Gabe asks a serious question for the universalist. Why would Paul call destruction the “end” of the enemies of the cross?
If universalism is true, wouldn’t it true to say that their “end” is salvation?
Philippians 3:18-19 (New American Standard Bible)
18For (A)many walk, of whom I often told you, and now tell you even (B)weeping, that they are enemies of ©the cross of Christ,
19whose end is destruction, whose god is their (D)appetite, and whose (E)glory is in their shame, who (F)set their minds on earthly things.
“Destruction” is their temporal end (i.e., their end in this life, as mortals), not their final end (as immortals). Paul speaks of their final end in the two verses that follow (vv. 20-21): “But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all to himself.” Even those whose end in this life is “destruction” will ultimately be raised immortal by Christ and subjected to him, so that God may be “all in all” (1Cor 15:21-28).
Destruction is their end in this life? How so?
I guess in a similar way that other people are said to be “destroyed” in this life without their post-mortem existence or ultimate destiny being in view:
“But the Pharisees went out and conspired against him, how to destroy him.” Matt 12:14
“The king was angry, and he sent his troops and destroyed those murderers and burned their city.” Matt 22:7
“They were eating and drinking and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.” Luke 17:27
“…but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all…” Luke 17:29
“He will come and destroy those tenants and give the vineyard to others.” When they heard this, they said, “Surely not!” Luke 20:16
“And it shall be that every soul who does not listen to that prophet shall be destroyed from the people.’” Acts 3:23
“For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died.” Romans 14:15
“If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple.” 1Cor 3:17
“And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died.” 1Cor 8:11
“We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents, nor grumble, as some of them did and were destroyed by the Destroyer.” 1Cor 10:9-10
“While people are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.” 1Thess 5:3
“But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.” 1Tim 6:9
“But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.” 2Pet 2:1
Paul likely has in mind the same “destruction” of the Jewish people that he spoke of in 2Thess 1:5-10: 2 Thess 1:5-10
“And in nothing terrified by your adversaries: which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to you of salvation, and that of God.” -Philippians 1:28 (KJV)
Who were the adversaries? The Jews.
What was the ‘token’ (the proof - the evidence) of their destruction? Hindering the advance of Christ’s kingdom.
What was their destiny? Wrath and destruction.
Will all of Israel be saved in spite of that wrath and destruction? Yes, according to Paul.
So what’s the lesson? Be a good token yourself. Stop gloating.
How can you say that the Philippians only had the Jews as their adversaries?
Because that’s what history tells us. Taking Paul’s letter out of historical context creates problems. The Jews were the adversary up to 70ad when they were destroyed and Nero was taken out of the way. Men are drawn to Christ and the Gospel everywhere and at all times.
No one should be blamed for rejecting another gospel. They are not the adversary. ‘All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you.’ phil3
You said:
“No one should be blamed for rejecting another gospel.”
I don’t know what was meant!
Examples of other gospels:
Islam is another gospel. In their gospel Christ returns, everyone is resurrected and evildoers are tormented for eternity, according to the Koran.
The full-preterists have another gospel that says the resurrection has occurred and is occurring invisibly.
A person is not blameworthy for rejecting these and other gospels.
Are you saying this in response to some assertion that I, or someone else uttered?