- Feb 13, 2012
- 924
- 206
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
The Bible teaches that 1 God wants to save everyone, 2 that he can do anything, and 3 that eternal punishment awaits those who persist in wickedness instead of accepting salvation.
There is some tension between these points, which Christians have tried to solve in three ways.
1. Weaken the third; universalism--God will eventually save everyone. The Greek word for eternal is where we get our word 'eon' which is how long it'll take for some of the worst to be saved.
2. Weaken the second; Arminianism--perhaps its not logically possible for God to save everyone, since it depends on wills, and it is by definition impossible to force someone to freely will something.
3. Weaken the first; Calvinism-- God doesn't want to save everyone as much as he wants to demonstrate his justice or otherwise glorify himself.
This is the order of their appeal to me, and also the order of how much they glorify God. Sending people to hell doesn't make God look good any more than smushing an ant that crosses the sidewalk makes a grown man look strong. Universalism does glorify God: the amount of love, patience, and wisdom he would display in saving everyone over the span of ages is wonderful. As a Molinist, I'm not convinced of #2, though it seems to be what kept C S Lewis from being a universalist. It is possible that universalism is too close to making this a 'toy world' where our choices' consequences are limited and thus lack as much significance. A world of greatest significance might bring more glory to God and value to us, but I doubt it; an eon of consequences for our choices seems enough. Anyway I trust God will do what is best.
There is some tension between these points, which Christians have tried to solve in three ways.
1. Weaken the third; universalism--God will eventually save everyone. The Greek word for eternal is where we get our word 'eon' which is how long it'll take for some of the worst to be saved.
2. Weaken the second; Arminianism--perhaps its not logically possible for God to save everyone, since it depends on wills, and it is by definition impossible to force someone to freely will something.
3. Weaken the first; Calvinism-- God doesn't want to save everyone as much as he wants to demonstrate his justice or otherwise glorify himself.
This is the order of their appeal to me, and also the order of how much they glorify God. Sending people to hell doesn't make God look good any more than smushing an ant that crosses the sidewalk makes a grown man look strong. Universalism does glorify God: the amount of love, patience, and wisdom he would display in saving everyone over the span of ages is wonderful. As a Molinist, I'm not convinced of #2, though it seems to be what kept C S Lewis from being a universalist. It is possible that universalism is too close to making this a 'toy world' where our choices' consequences are limited and thus lack as much significance. A world of greatest significance might bring more glory to God and value to us, but I doubt it; an eon of consequences for our choices seems enough. Anyway I trust God will do what is best.