Union with Christ, an argument against ECT?


Luke posted on his blog about union with Christ. Anyway, it just struck me that humanity’s union with Christ is so strong that it enables Christ to raise each and every one of us from the dead. However, even with that extraordinary union, God the Father then extracts most of humanity from Christ and throws them into Eternal Conscious Torment?! :confused:



Luke thinks everyone on earth right now is united with the First Adam and sharing his fate, but not everyone is united with the Second Adam, nor do they share his fate. Regrettably, it seems the First Adam trumps the Second Adam in almost every instance. Isn’t this a case of believing the bad news, but not the good news?



Not really fair, everyone had no choice being linked to the First Adam, but most people “don’t” get to be linked to the Second Adam :unamused:


I just don’t know why it doesn’t click for people, I’ve quoted 11 (& I’m sure there are more) passages saying basically the same thing. I bet you couldn’t find 11 passages saying the opposite!! I don’t think the passages (usually parables) which encourage people repent & believe, to realise/actualise (e.g settle out of court) it now, rather than later, diminish the scope.


Remember that famous optical illusion: Is it an old hag or a beautiful woman?


I prefer not to downplay evil.


:confused: Evil is evil and evil is a significant problem, however, Grace triumphs over evil…


Here she is. I’ve mentioned her before, too, as an example of different paradigms.


Thanks Sonia :slight_smile:


It’s not just a random list of verses, they are all dealing with the theme of Christ’s union with world/humanity, and how it’s now and not yet. Furthermore, some seem to be self-sufficient passages, e.g. Rom 5:18. Adam caused condemnation for all men, Christ caused justification for all men. If you limit the one, you limit the other. What context is there that changes that? Unlike Matt 25, which can be qualified by showing the underlying word aionios is primarily qualitative not quantitative, I’m not sure what you can do here? I guess you could say justification isn’t what I think it is? :confused: Similar to Joe, who now tells me the Biblical view of “reconciliation & restoration” isn’t relational but purely subjection! :open_mouth:

How do you qualify “whole world” in 1 John 2:2?

I assume you’re also rejecting Gregory of Nyssa’s understanding of 1 Corinthians 15:28? :frowning:

How do you deal with the fact that you think the scope of the Second Adam is much less than the scope of the First Adam? When the Second Adam is described as being far greater? Doesn’t Christ deserve 100% of mind, body & spirit, of 100% of Creation to be freely, lovingly worshiping Him?

We are vaguely on the same page, in that you see 10% of humanity walking around as non-Christians who are already unified, whereas I see 90% of humanity walking around as non-Christians who are already unified :slight_smile:

Even with Lewis that trajectory isn’t permanent after death e.g. The Great Divorce, where the man with the lizard of Lust on his shoulder was saved, and the MacD character who assures Lewis that the woman frightened by the unicorns may yet be saved, as he has seen it happen before.

We are all reprobates who are unified with Christ… but I see your point, the Calvinist view is that those elected to ECT are never unified with Christ (although I still find this strange because I thought the union with Christ, was what brought universal resurrection).



I’m not denying the need for everyone to qualify some passages, which is why I’ve shown you how I would qualify Matt 25. Please show me how you would qualify “all men” in Rom 5:18 and “whole world” in 1 John 2:2?

How do you justify the scope of the Second Adam being much less than the scope of the First Adam?

Does Christ deserve 100% of mind, body & spirit, of 100% of Creation to be freely, lovingly worshiping Him?


Me too. If you want to see how much human evil hurts our beautiful God, look at Jesus on the cross. But that evil, the worst we can do, is swallowed up by the power of God and transformed into glory.

Paul tells us to overcome evil with good, so it must be possible. It’s what God does. The greater the evil, the greater the good that is needed. But evil is finite. Like absolute zero, there comes a point where you cannot get colder; nor can you get darker than dark. There comes a point where evil hits dead bottom. But unlike evil, there is no upper limit to good. We therefore have a finite downside in opposition to an infinite upside. Where sin abounds, grace abounds even more. God will have the last word. Hell itself will be cast into the Lake of Fire and destroyed. The darkness will be filled with light. “And I saw a new heavens and a new earth, and there was no sea.” The ocean of chaos from Genesis 1 has been turned to glass.


Amen! Temperature is a clever analogy :sunglasses:


I’m not sure why some of the posts are out of order :confused:

I thought we were still talking about passages dealing with the scope of the ‘Union with Christ’? :slight_smile:

Anyway, before I look at your passages, please let me clarify my statement about qualifying. I think when we read the Bible with a systematic theology in mind, some of the passages line up with that system and some don’t line up, and therefore need qualification or further explanation. This happens with Calvinism, Arminianism and Universalism. If I had to qualify all the passages, then I would be worried about my system, likewise with you, if you had to qualify all passages, I’d be worried about your system. Does this make sense?