Union with Christ, an argument against ECT?

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

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?!

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

AllanS · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

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?

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

I:

My impression was that the Incarnation was the beginning of the union with Christ? Anyway, isn’t Christ said to be the Second Adam and to represent humanity. Which is why we get passages like “And when I [Christ] am lifted up from the earth, I will draw **everyone **to myself” (NLT)

“Just as the result of one trespass was condemnation of all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.” (Rom 5:18)

“And on the basis of the whole human nature with which the divinity was mixed, which is a certain sort of first-fruits of the common dough, humanity exists according to Christ, through whom all humanity is joined to the divinity.” (Gregory of Nyssa, Homily on 1 Corinthians 15:28)

“And now, Christ hath risen out of the dead - the first-fruits of those sleeping he became, for since through man [is] the death, also through man [is] a rising again of the dead, for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive, and each in his proper order, a first-fruit Christ, afterwards those who are the Christ’s, in his presence, then the end [the remainder]” (YLT 1 Cor 15:20-24a)

It’s a “now & not yet” e.g. is the Kingdom of God here? Yes, it is now, but no it’s not yet fully actualized/realized on earth, until the New Creation. So through the Cross, Christ has reconciled all Creation to Himself. “and through Him to reconcile the all things to Himself - having made peace through the blood of His cross - through Him, whether the things upon the earth, whether the things in the heavens.” YLT Col 1:20) However, it won’t be fully actualized/realized until the New Creation is complete (i.e. after the Resurrection, the Judgement Day & the Lake of Fire for most people).

Sure, the elect are the first-fruits of God’s salvation. Israel were elected to be part of God’s plan of salvation, similarly believers today are elected to be part of God’s plan of salvation.

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

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

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

I:

LOL

A qualified yes, as Paul rightly says, “each in his proper order”, which implies it’s a “now & not yet”.

Paul says a similar thing here, “This is good and acceptable in the sight of our God our saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus: Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” (1 Tim 2:3-6, KJV)

This fits well with “This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance. For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, Who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe. These things command and teach.” (1 Tim 4:9-11) i.e. Paul is describing the situation right now, where Jesus is the Savior everyone, but obviously it’s especially real/actual for those who believe that.

It also fits well with the following passages:

“The Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world.” (1 John 4:14)

Jesus is “the Christ, the Savior of the world.” (John 4:42)

Jesus “is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.” (1 John 2:2)

Jesus “did not come to judge the world but to save the world.” (John 12:47)

“Jesus, was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone.” (Heb 2:9)

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.

AllanS · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

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

Luke · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

I prefer not to downplay evil.

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

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

SLJ · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

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

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

Thanks Sonia

Luke:

As we’ve already discussed on previous occasions a long list of verses, without their context, neither proves nor disproves universalism. So for example; where I might qualify “all” you might qualify Jesus’ comments about only a few being saved.

Union with Christ, is a theme, a category, a way of understanding, that runs through all the doctrines of grace. It neither proves or disproves Universalism. In a sense there are non-Christians walking around already unified with Christ because they are in Christ when they are elected, just as there are people walking around who aren’t unified with Christ on their way to destruction. (CS Lewis picks this up well in his idea of all people in this world on a trajectory to heaven or hell.) It’s not, as you said in your first comment, that the reprobate are unified and then un-unified, but that they were never unified with Christ to begin with!

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

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? Similar to Joe, who now tells me the Biblical view of “reconciliation & restoration” isn’t relational but purely subjection!

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?

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

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).

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

Luke:

Again, you can’t claim that some verses are purely universalist while verses that appear to be against universalism require context. Where is the logical consistency in that claim? Either they all require explanation or none of them require explanation. You can’t have your cake and eat it!

BTW with the Great Divorce you neglect to mention Napoleon moving deeper and deeper into Hell and the passengers who saw the outskirts of heaven and preferred Hell, but nonetheless Lewis’ idea of trajectory that begins in this life is useful one.

No offence to Joe, I have no idea what he means by saying “the Biblical view of “reconciliation & restoration” isn’t relational but purely subjection!”

“I guess you could say justification isn’t what I think it is?” I’m not completely sure what you mean but I guess Universalism would have to apply all doctrines equally to everyone, this would be more straightforward with some which are by nature vaguer and more general, like ‘Union with Christ’, but more difficult with doctrines like say Predestination. But the default tradition of church history would be to not interpret the Doctrines of Grace (Ordo Salutis) as being Universalist.

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

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?

AllanS · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

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.

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

AllanS:

Luke:

I prefer not to downplay evil.

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

Luke:

We’re moving away from both ‘Union with Christ’ generally and more specifically the issue you raised, ‘does the doctrine of union with Christ prove Universalism.’ But I appreciate the discussion Alex!

I don’t mind explaining why Rom 5:18 or 1 John doesn’t support Universalism or why Matt 25 or Luke 13 supports the traditional doctrine of eternal punishment but we’re going to run into the same problem as in previous discussion. You’re saying we only need to " qualify some passages" And I’m wondering if you’re so keen to qualify Luke 13 or Matt 25 why can’t we qualify Rom 5:18? Somewhat ironically I’m asking you why not “qualify **all **passages”?

1 John 2:2 Is somewhat tricky because Amyraldians hold that Christ died for everyone (the world) but that it only counts when you have faith. They argue that verses such as this one drives them from the idea of “particular atonement” or “limited atonement.” I would argue that the world is more of a place/category then a word that means every-single-person. For example at the beginning of the John’s gospel it describes Jesus as “coming into the world.”

Rom 5:18 Verse 17 “those who receive” specifies a sub-category within the sweeping “all” statements of that section. Furthermore in the same book, in the same package of ideas, comes Romans 9:22 (“vessels of wrath prepared for destruction”).

Matthew 25; The parable argument is a weak one and you haven’t proved why Jesus would say only a few are saved or that some will be eternally punished but actually mean the opposite.

Luke 13; context is very useful in this passage because Jesus’ questioner may have been a unilateralist and asks “will only a few be saved?” We have to assume that the following comments from Jesus are his answer to that question, to your question Alex, “will only a few be saved?:”

Alex_Smith · March 9, 2018, 1:50am

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

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

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?