When all does not mean all.

[Gregory Thompson]

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

So all die in adam and so all will be made alive.

However, since - eternal torment -

It means some people don't die, since most people will not be made alive in Christ.

Comments?

 

[Hammster]

Those in Adam die. Those in Christ are made alive.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Those in Adam die. Those in Christ are made alive.

I see you put some real thought into that one, very logically sound.

Thanks for posting.

 

[topher694]

All means all. Christ's sacrifice was sufficient and available to all, and all who are in Him are made alive.

 

[Hammster]

I see you put some real thought into that one, very logically sound.

Thanks for posting.

No need for snark. Some of us have just spent more time on this than others.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Those in Adam die. Those in Christ are made alive.

sweet. simple. concise. Well done.

 

[Navair2]

So all die in adam and so all will be made alive.

However, since - eternal torment -

It means some people don't die, since most people will not be made alive in Christ.

Comments?

" For since by man [came] death, by man [came] also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming." ( 1 Corinthians 15:21-23 ).

The highlighted tells me the context for the "all" in the second part of the verse, "in Christ shall all be made alive."
I also agree with what @Hammster said.

In addition, the "every man" in verse 23 is defined by the highlighted in the last half of the verse.
Otherwise, if taken as just one verse, I see that it is too easy to think that all men are going to be made alive in Christ...

Which they are not.

Side note:

Based on what I see in other passages, to be "in Adam" is to be a spiritually dead sinner.
To be "in Christ" is to be a sinner saved by God's grace and mercy alone ( Romans 9:14-24 ) and a sinner justified by His blood and made alive by the working of the Holy Spirit;
In other words, no longer a sinner in God's eyes ( Romans 5:1-11, Romans 8:1-33 ), but a son or daughter.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

No need for snark. Some of us have just spent more time on this than others.

Apologies if it seemed that way, there was no snark.

God bless.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

All means all. Christ's sacrifice was sufficient and available to all, and all who are in Him are made alive.

This is a good way of relating it also.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

" For since by man [came] death, by man [came] also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming." ( 1 Corinthians 15:21-23 ).

The highlighted tells me the context for the "all" in the second part of the verse, "in Christ shall all be made alive."
I also agree with what @Hammster said.

In addition, the "every man" in verse 23 is defined by the highlighted in the last half of the verse.
Otherwise, if taken as just one verse, I see that it is too easy to think that all men are going to be made alive in Christ...

Which they are not.

Side note:

Based on what I see in other passages, to be "in Adam" is to be a spiritually dead sinner.
To be "in Christ" is to be a sinner saved by God's grace and mercy alone ( Romans 9:14-24 ) and a sinner justified by His blood and made alive by the working of the Holy Spirit;
In other words, no longer a sinner in God's eyes ( Romans 5:1-11, Romans 8:1-33 ), but a son or daughter.

Good commentary.

 

[Mark Quayle]

" For since by man [came] death, by man [came] also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming." ( 1 Corinthians 15:21-23 ).

The highlighted tells me the context for the "all" in the second part of the verse, "in Christ shall all be made alive."
I also agree with what @Hammster said.

In addition, the "every man" in verse 23 is defined by the highlighted in the last half of the verse.
Otherwise, if taken as just one verse, I see that it is too easy to think that all men are going to be made alive in Christ...

Which they are not.

Side note:

Based on what I see in other passages, to be "in Adam" is to be a spiritually dead sinner.
To be "in Christ" is to be a sinner saved by God's grace and mercy alone ( Romans 9:14-24 ) and a sinner justified by His blood and made alive by the working of the Holy Spirit;
In other words, no longer a sinner in God's eyes ( Romans 5:1-11, Romans 8:1-33 ), but a son or daughter.

Correct. Which is why I like Hammster's post. What he said applies to all possible uses (not interpretations) the context and the rest of Scripture allows.

My take on it has to do with the fact that there are none who are made alive, unless by Christ. Hammster's post succinctly allows that, needing no further explanation. (Which I guess makes my take irrelevant, haha.)

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I post these questions because I live in them, it's like inviting some people over.

Thanks for posting, it's been a good read so far.

 

[Butterball1]

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive

So all die in adam and so all will be made alive.

However, since - eternal torment -

It means some people don't die, since most people will not be made alive in Christ.

Comments?

Some misuse the first part of this verse "for in Adam all die" as 'proof' of the universality of spiritual death/sin ie, original sin/sin nature/total depravity. If that is the case, then the second half of this verse 'proves' that same "all' will be spiritually saved and they create Universalism in 'all' being saved.
(They create this exact same problem in Romans 5 verses 17, 18 and 19. See page 6 beginning w/post #105 of this thread and the debate I am having with Clare73: Justification?)

But in this context I see Paul is not talking about the spiritual state of all men but the physical state. The prior verse (1 Corinthians 15:21) leading to v22 says "For since by man (Adam) came death, by man (Christ) came also the resurrection of the dead".

"Death" is contrasted to "resurrection".

As a CONSEQUENCE of Adam sinning (NOT because we inherited sin or a sin nature from Adam) we will all die physically, Hebrews 9:27. None of us are getting out of this alive, even Christ died physically. So ALL LITERALLY will die physically. On the other hand, as a CONSEQUENCE of Christ being resurrected from the dead ALL LITERALLY will come alive in the resurrection both those who done good and those who done evil, John 5:28-29. Some resurrected to everlasting punishment and the rest to everlasting life.

So 'all' means literally all both times it is used here.

Albert Barnes, a Calvinist, sees that this is NOT talking about original sin but physical death: (my emp)

"All die" - All mankind are subjected to temporal death; or are mortal. This passage has been often adduced to prove that all mankind became sinful in Adam, or in virtue of a covenant transaction with him; and that they are subjected to spiritual death as a punishment for his sins. But, whatever may be the truth on that subject, it is clear that this passage does not relate to it, and should not he adduced as a proof text.

For:

(1) The words “die” and “dieth” obviously and usually refer to temporal death; and they should be so understood, unless there is something in the connection which requires us to understand them in a figurative and metaphorical sense. But there is, evidently, no such necessity here.

(2) the context requires us to understand this as relating to temporal death. There is not here, as there is in Daniel 12:2; John 5:28-29.

(3) the form of the passage requires us to understand the word “all” in the same sense in both members, unless there be some indispensable necessity for limiting the one or the other.

(4) the argument of the apostle requires this. For his object is to show that the effect of the sin of Adam, by introducing “temporal” death, will be counteracted by Christ in raising up all who die; which would not be shown if the apostle meant to say that only a part of those who had died in consequence of the sin of Adam would he raised up. The argument would then be inconclusive. But now it is complete if it be shown that all shall be raised up, whatever may become of them afterward. The sceptre of death shall be broken, and his dominion destroyed, by the fact that all shall be raised up from the dead.

Be made alive - Be raised from the dead; be made alive, in a sense contradistinguished from that in which he here says they were subjected to death, by Adam. If it should be held that that means that all were made sinners by him, then this means, as has been observed, that all shall be made righteous, and the doctrine of universal salvation has an unanswerable argument; if it means, as it obviously does, that all were subjected to temporal death by him, then it means that all shall be raised from the dead by Christ.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Some misuse the first part of this verse "for in Adam all die" as 'proof' of the universality of spiritual death/sin ie, original sin/sin nature/total depravity. If that is the case, then the second half of this verse 'proves' that same "all' will be spiritually saved and they create Universalism in 'all' being saved.
(They create this exact same problem in Romans 5 verses 17, 18 and 19. See page 6 beginning w/post #105 of this thread and the debate I am having with Clare73: Justification?)

But in this context I see Paul is not talking about the spiritual state of all men but the physical state. The prior verse (1 Corinthians 15:21) leading to v22 says "For since by man (Adam) came death, by man (Christ) came also the resurrection of the dead".

"Death" is contrasted to "resurrection".

As a CONSEQUENCE of Adam sinning (NOT because we inherited sin or a sin nature from Adam) we will all die physically, Hebrews 9:27. None of us are getting out of this alive, even Christ died physically. So ALL LITERALLY will die physically. On the other hand, as a CONSEQUENCE of Christ being resurrected from the dead ALL LITERALLY will come alive in the resurrection both those who done good and those who done evil, John 5:28-29. Some resurrected to everlasting punishment and the rest to everlasting life.

So 'all' means literally all both times it is used here.

Albert Barnes, a Calvinist, sees that this is NOT talking about original sin but physical death: (my emp)

"All die" - All mankind are subjected to temporal death; or are mortal. This passage has been often adduced to prove that all mankind became sinful in Adam, or in virtue of a covenant transaction with him; and that they are subjected to spiritual death as a punishment for his sins. But, whatever may be the truth on that subject, it is clear that this passage does not relate to it, and should not he adduced as a proof text.

For:

(1) The words “die” and “dieth” obviously and usually refer to temporal death; and they should be so understood, unless there is something in the connection which requires us to understand them in a figurative and metaphorical sense. But there is, evidently, no such necessity here.

(2) the context requires us to understand this as relating to temporal death. There is not here, as there is in Daniel 12:2; John 5:28-29.

(3) the form of the passage requires us to understand the word “all” in the same sense in both members, unless there be some indispensable necessity for limiting the one or the other.

(4) the argument of the apostle requires this. For his object is to show that the effect of the sin of Adam, by introducing “temporal” death, will be counteracted by Christ in raising up all who die; which would not be shown if the apostle meant to say that only a part of those who had died in consequence of the sin of Adam would he raised up. The argument would then be inconclusive. But now it is complete if it be shown that all shall be raised up, whatever may become of them afterward. The sceptre of death shall be broken, and his dominion destroyed, by the fact that all shall be raised up from the dead.

Be made alive - Be raised from the dead; be made alive, in a sense contradistinguished from that in which he here says they were subjected to death, by Adam. If it should be held that that means that all were made sinners by him, then this means, as has been observed, that all shall be made righteous, and the doctrine of universal salvation has an unanswerable argument; if it means, as it obviously does, that all were subjected to temporal death by him, then it means that all shall be raised from the dead by Christ.

This is also one way of interpreting the passage.

It is the first of the interpretations that takes into account the resurrection to glory and shame.

However, it might be noted, the immediate context speaks of another type of life so this might be wrong in an aspect. However, it could be argued that since it is 1 Corinthians 15, it's about resurrection so I guess it's gnats and camels.

Still it was good to read.

 

[Butterball1]

This is also one way of interpreting the passage.

It is the first of the interpretations that takes into account the resurrection to glory and shame.

However, it might be noted, the immediate context speaks of another type of life so this might be wrong in an aspect. However, it could be argued that since it is 1 Corinthians 15, it's about resurrection so I guess it's gnats and camels.

Still it was good to read.

Well, we know it cannot be speaking about the spiritual state of man for that has the verse teaching Universalism.

 

[Magnanimity]

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

So all die in adam and so all will be made alive.

However, since - eternal torment -

It means some people don't die, since most people will not be made alive in Christ.

Comments?

1 Corinthians 15, the entire chapter, is an extended series of Pauline thoughts on resurrection. In a footnote to the NAB-RE, the editors note, "Some consider this chapter an earlier Pauline composition inserted into the present letter." It all goes together as a totality. The only thing that can be gathered from this chapter with any certainty on the universalism/eternal-Hell question is that the last enemy to be destroyed will be death. Death itself will pass away.

Those in Adam die. Those in Christ are made alive.

All die because of Adam, and all are resurrected because of Christ. Nothing here is mentioned in the chapter about any humans being excluded because they don't believe (or for any other reason).

Well, we know it cannot be speaking about the spiritual state of man for that has the verse teaching Universalism.

There is no way to exclude universalism a priori. The New Testament is quite ambiguous on this issue, having passages that seem to suggest support for both Hell and universalism. Given that not a few of the brightest minds of the church have held a view open to universalism throughout church history should be enough for us to approach the issue with humility. For every quote that an eternal-Hell advocate might present, a universalist can offer a quote from the NT that strongly suggests universalism.

Moreover, the united church of the first millennium never condemned universalism. The most that ever happened on this issue was that the emperor Justinian wrote a series of anathemas against aspects of the theology of Origen. The emperor asked that the fathers of Constantinople II include his anathemas within the decrees of that ecumenical council. But, modern scholarship has concluded that the anathemas were never incorporated into that council's decrees (see Norman Tanner's editorial notes on Constantinople II in his Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Georgetown University Press, 1990). So, it's likely that universalism has never been condemned in an ecumenical council.

Now, whatever are someone's personal beliefs on eschatology is a different story. Some folks are convinced of the Augustinian vision of an eternal Hell, maybe even believing that most people who have ever lived are headed there. Still others are oriented toward believing that the scriptures, theology and philosophy, when taken together, are strongly suggestive of universalism. Others opt for a "middle way," of a limited Hell with some sense of temporality/finitude intrinsic to it, with Heaven having an inequality due to how a person lived her life here (i.e., the last shall be first). And then there's the also-ran of annihilationism..

I've participated in these types of discussions many times over in the past. I know that folks get very impassioned that their particular view on eschatology must be the correct one (i.e., it's "biblical"). But, given the sheer numbers of big brains in our church's past who have disagreed with St Augustine's vision of eternal-Hell, the "openness" of the church's history on this issue, and the recent resurgence of scholarship on this topic should be enough to force a little humility here. We all want to think we have "the truth" on this issue, but as you dig deeper and deeper, the water gets muddier and muddier.

 

[Butterball1]

There is no way to exclude universalism a priori. The New Testament is quite ambiguous on this issue, having passages that seem to suggest support for both Hell and universalism. Given that not a few of the brightest minds of the church have held a view open to universalism throughout church history should be enough for us to approach the issue with humility. For every quote that an eternal-Hell advocate might present, a universalist can offer a quote from the NT that strongly suggests universalism.

Moreover, the united church of the first millennium never condemned universalism. The most that ever happened on this issue was that the emperor Justinian wrote a series of anathemas against aspects of the theology of Origen. The emperor asked that the fathers of Constantinople II include his anathemas within the decrees of that ecumenical council. But, modern scholarship has concluded that the anathemas were never incorporated into that council's decrees (see Norman Tanner's editorial notes on Constantinople II in his Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Georgetown University Press, 1990). So, it's likely that universalism has never been condemned in an ecumenical council.

Now, whatever are someone's personal beliefs on eschatology is a different story. Some folks are convinced of the Augustinian vision of an eternal Hell, maybe even believing that most people who have ever lived are headed there. Still others are oriented toward believing that the scriptures, theology and philosophy, when taken together, are strongly suggestive of universalism. Others opt for a "middle way," of a limited Hell with some sense of temporality/finitude intrinsic to it, with Heaven having an inequality due to how a person lived her life here (i.e., the last shall be first). And then there's the also-ran of annihilationism..

I've participated in these types of discussions many times over in the past. I know that folks get very impassioned that their particular view on eschatology must be the correct one (i.e., it's "biblical"). But, given the sheer numbers of big brains in our church's past who have disagreed with St Augustine's vision of eternal-Hell, the "openness" of the church's history on this issue, and the recent resurgence of scholarship on this topic should be enough to force a little humility here. We all want to think we have "the truth" on this issue, but as you dig deeper and deeper, the water gets muddier and muddier.

Matthew 7:13 cf John 3:36 there will be those that will be lost, [entering the wide broad gate to destruction] who "shall not see life" but God's wrath continually abides upon them.

We can only look to the inspired word of God to find such answers and not look to uninspired, fallible men.

 

[Magnanimity]

Matthew 7:13 cf John 3:36 there will be those that will be lost, [entering the wide broad gate to destruction] who "shall not see life" but God's wrath continually abides upon them.

We can only look to the inspired word of God to find such answers and not look to uninspired, fallible men.

As an example of my claim above that for every verse you might provide that is suggestive of a permanent, future separation between humans, a universal verse can be offered as a counter. Here's one: "For this we toil and struggle, because we have set our hope on the living God, who is the savior of all, especially of those who believe" - 1 Tim 4:10. The universalist aspect of the verse is easy enough to see. Jesus of Nazareth is the savior of every single person (all), but "especially" of those who believe. This exercise could go on all day. There is no shortage of universal language in the NT within the context of the salvation of humanity, especially in the writings of St Paul.

And, as I noted above, brilliant folks have come down on all sides of this issue. Humility is always warranted. Neither the scriptures nor the ecumenical councils of the church have definitely settled this matter. Every side that I have seen (with the possible exception of annihilationists) make ready and frequent appeal to the NT to support their beliefs.

 

[Mark Quayle]

The only thing that can be gathered from this chapter with any certainty on the universalism/eternal-Hell question is that the last enemy to be destroyed will be death. Death itself will pass away.

Death in what sense? Some might infer from that, that the living death in hell too will end.

 

[Butterball1]

As an example of my claim above that for every verse you might provide that is suggestive of a permanent, future separation between humans, a universal verse can be offered as a counter. Here's one: "For this we toil and struggle, because we have set our hope on the living God, who is the savior of all, especially of those who believe" - 1 Tim 4:10 The universalist aspect of the verse is easy enough to see. Jesus of Nazareth is the savior of every single person (all), but "especially" of those who believe. This exercise could go on all day. There is no shortage of universal language in the NT within the context of the salvation of humanity, especially in the writings of St Paul.

And, as I noted above, brilliant folks have come down on all sides of this issue. Humility is always warranted. Neither the scriptures nor the ecumenical councils of the church have definitely settled this matter. Every side that I have seen (with the possible exception of annihilationists) make ready and frequent appeal to the NT to support their beliefs.

Hi again,

There are verses speaking to Christ being the Saviour of the world, John 4:42 but these verses in no way teach the world has been predetermined for certain to be saved.

1 Timothy 2:4 "who would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth."
Matthew 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

God's will is described in at least 3 ways in the Bible:

1) God's decreetive will where God decrees things (God decreed the world into existence) and no man can deter or stop what God has decreed to come to pass.

2) God's permissive will where God allows/permits things to happen.

3) God's preceptive will which describes what God wants, desires. God created a pathway for man to salvation through Christ and God desires, wants, would all men take that path. God desires/wants this for God does not force men against their will to take that path. Both verses I cited above show God's preceptive will in what God "would" and we can see in Matt 23:37 when it comes to God's preceptive will He does not always get from man what He would/desires.

If it is a foregone conclusion that all men for a fact are predetermined to be saved (that is, God decreed all men be saved, see decreetive will #1 above) then why does God desire, want, wish all men be saved if "all saved" is an already predetermined certain fact?

2 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

The purpose of God's longsuffering is salvation (2 Peter 3:15) but if it already a done deal, predetermined that all men will be saved then there is no need for God to be longsuffering.

So verses as you cite above (1 Timothy 4:10) show that Christ is the Saviour of the world in the sense salvation has been offered to all men, but that does not mean all men will accept what Christ has offered hence Christ "would" all men be saved by accepting what He has offered....

"who is the Saviour of all men" refers to all men having the offer of salvation given them "especially of those that believe" refers to those who have accepted that offer. If God is going to save 'all men' how then does He go about "especially" saving believers? Such has unbelievers saved as believers.

Jesus calls Gods word "truth" John 17:17 and truth NEVER contradicts itself. So the only sides there can be to this issue is the right side and the wrong side. 1 Timothy 4:10 cannot contradict Matthew 7:13; John 3:36. I have over the years debated with Universlists on various sites and they have not remotely come close to proving their side.