Christian Universalism. What's not to like?

[hedrick]

Contrary to what UR-ites say, scripture does NOT say that all mankind will bow "in reverent love for their Maker." etc.
Exomologeō occurs eleven times in the NT. in addition to Phil 2:11. In the other 10 it never means “whole-heartedly… without reservation (no holding back)”etc.
In Philippians 2:11exomologeō is an aorist, active, subjunctive. The subjunctive is the mood of possibility or potentiality. The action may or may not happen. Every knee should bow not “will bow.”

I only have two commentaries on Philippians. (Please excuse me, but I prefer to rely on published commentaries rather than posters that I know little about.)

The Word commentary (Hawthorne/Martin) sees the subjunctive not as obligation (as "should" can be in English) but as part of a conditional statement. God gave Christ the name above all names with the goal of making all submit to him joyfully. As you say, that does not state that it will definitely happen. The commentator thinks it's ambiguous, and that the question will be settled only by broader theological concepts.

My broader theological concept is that it's hard to believe that Paul would think God's purpose with Christ would not be fulfilled.

The other way to avoid universalism is to treat the bowing in vs 10 as potentially involving people who are still hostile but are forced to acknowledge Christ's supremacy. Witherington thinks that's possible. Hawthorne thinks vs 11 makes that impossible. I note that Witherington sort of skips that verse. There are OT examples of hostile submission, as you note. However it's not so clear that this is the same thing.

Obviously 1st Cent writers aren't bound by how I react to images. But my reaction is that it's one thing to say that hostile people submit to your authority, and another to say that people you're throwing into ECT would praise you. The latter suggests a kind of objective appreciation of God's righteousness that seems unlikely in that situation.

On the other hand, there's no question that Paul says certain types of people won't inherit eternal life.

Most contributors here want to ignore either his statements about God finally being all in all or his statements about judgement. My preference is to take both seriously. Not sure how that works. Maybe by conversion of enemies; maybe by their destruction. Maybe both.

See also Rom 11:32. Sure you can interpret your way around it. There are a couple of obvious ways to do so. But I think maybe Paul means it.

 

[Fervent]

I only have two commentaries on Philippians. (Please excuse me, but I prefer to rely on published commentaries rather than posters that I know little about.)

The Word commentary (Hawthorne/Martin) sees the subjunctive not as obligation (as "should" can be in English) but as part of a conditional statement. God gave Christ the name above all names with the goal of making all submit to him joyfully. As you say, that does not state that it will definitely happen. The commentator thinks it's ambiguous, and that the question will be settled only by broader theological concepts.

My broader theological concept is that it's hard to believe that Paul would think God's purpose with Christ would not be fulfilled.

The other way to avoid universalism is to treat the bowing in vs 10 as potentially involving people who are still hostile but are forced to acknowledge Christ's supremacy. Witherington thinks that's possible. Hawthorne thinks vs 11 makes that impossible. I note that Witherington sort of skips that verse. There are OT examples of hostile submission, as you note. However it's not so clear that this is the same thing.

Obviously 1st Cent writers aren't bound by how I react to images. But my reaction is that it's one thing to say that hostile people submit to your authority, and another to say that people you're throwing into ECT would praise you. The latter suggests a kind of objective appreciation of authority that seems unlikely in that situation.

While commentaries are exceedingly useful, ultimately exegesis should stand on its own so whether from an anonymous commentor or a world-renown scholar the issue is the text and the connections should be accessible enough that sophistication is not required to see the link.

In regards to Philippians, setting aside the question of the verse in isolation the rest of the letter should be examined to see if there is any indication that the original author intended an understanding of universalism or if there is anything that conflicts. It seems to me that the entirety of chapters 3-4 makes it impossible to rectify universalism with Paul's authorial intent. It simply cannot at once be held that everyone will be saved if there exist people whose destiny is destruction. So while there may be, in isolation, some ambiguity regarding whether the verse is conveying a universalist sentiment such a view cannot be rectified with the rest of the letter. Returning to the verse in hand, the ambiguity seems to be the contents of the confession as what is conveyed is an agreement with the truth. Those in ECT may very well praise God if, in God's presence, any pretense of innocence is removed and the punishment inflicted is universally recognized as perfect justice. So while the praise in such an instance cannot be held to be the celebratory cries of those saved it remains praise in the truest sense since God's glory is not only expressed in mercy but also in His adminstration of wrath.

 

[Der Alte]

I only have two commentaries on Philippians. (Please excuse me, but I prefer to rely on published commentaries rather than posters that I know little about.)
The Word commentary (Hawthorne/Martin) sees the subjunctive not as obligation (as "should" can be in English) but as part of a conditional statement. God gave Christ the name above all names with the goal of making all submit to him joyfully. As you say, that does not state that it will definitely happen. The commentator thinks it's ambiguous, and that the question will be settled only by broader theological concepts.
My broader theological concept is that it's hard to believe that Paul would think God's purpose with Christ would not be fulfilled.
The other way to avoid universalism is to treat the bowing in vs 10 as potentially involving people who are still hostile but are forced to acknowledge Christ's supremacy. Witherington thinks that's possible. Hawthorne thinks vs 11 makes that impossible. I note that Witherington sort of skips that verse. There are OT examples of hostile submission, as you note. However it's not so clear that this is the same thing.
Obviously 1st Cent writers aren't bound by how I react to images. But my reaction is that it's one thing to say that hostile people submit to your authority, and another to say that people you're throwing into ECT would praise you. The latter suggests a kind of objective appreciation of God's righteousness that seems unlikely in that situation.

On the other hand, there's no question that Paul says certain types of people won't inherit eternal life.

Most contributors here want to ignore either his statements about God finally being all in all or his statements about judgement. My preference is to take both seriously. Not sure how that works. Maybe by conversion of enemies; maybe by their destruction. Maybe both.

See also Rom 11:32. Sure you can interpret your way around it. There are a couple of obvious ways to do so. But I think maybe Paul means it.

All we have to do is read a bit more of the context. c.f. the following vss. in particular.

Romans 11:15
15 For if the casting away of them [Jews] be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
Romans 11:17-18
17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, [gentiles] being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Romans 11:21-22
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.​

I think we can say without any doubt vs.32 is definitely conditional not a done deal, no matter what.

 

[hedrick]

All we have to do is read a bit more of the context. c.f. the following vss. in particular.

Romans 11:15
15 For if the casting away of them [Jews] be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
Romans 11:17-18
17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, [gentiles] being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Romans 11:21-22
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.​

I think we can say without any doubt vs.32 is definitely conditional not a done deal, no matter what.

In Romans, the rejection of the Jews is temporary. It's to provide an opportunity for Gentiles to be grafted in. Once that's done, all Jews will be saved. 11:32 summarizes the whole thing. Cherry-picking things about the Jews' rejection without the whole context will give misleading results.

There are certainly ways to avoid the obvious meaning of 11:32. The classic one is that he's talking about groups, not individuals. Another is that he means all Jews who are still alive at the end. But there are enough universal statements in Paul that interpreting your way around each one starts becoming hard to take. Bu you can't throw away his statements about judgement either.

 

[Fervent]

In Romans, the rejection of the Jews is temporary. It's to provide an opportunity for Gentiles to be grafted in. Once that's done, all Jews will be saved. 11:32 summarizes the whole thing.

No, not all Jews will be saved and reading the whole letter makes that clear since before Paul speaks of the salvation of "all Israel" he makes it clear that not everyone of Jewish heritage is truly a part of Israel.
Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

 

[hedrick]

No, not all Jews will be saved and reading the whole letter makes that clear since before Paul speaks of the salvation of "all Israel" he makes it clear that not everyone of Jewish heritage is truly a part of Israel.
Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

That’s the current situation. He is confident that in the end all of Israel will be saved.

 

[Fervent]

That’s the current situation. He is confident that in the end all of Israel will be saved.

Based on?

 

[Der Alte]

In Romans, the rejection of the Jews is temporary. It's to provide an opportunity for Gentiles to be grafted in. Once that's done, all Jews will be saved. 11:32 summarizes the whole thing. Cherry-picking things about the Jews' rejection without the whole context will give misleading results.

Are you accusing me of cherry picking? Most of them other folks complain because I include too much context. Refusing to read my posts calling them "a wall of text."

There are certainly ways to avoid the obvious meaning of 11:32. The classic one is that he's talking about groups, not individuals. Another is that he means all Jews who are still alive at the end. But there are enough universal statements in Paul that interpreting your way around each one starts becoming hard to take. Bu you can't throw away his statements about judgement either.

That's right I don't forget the judgement.

That’s the current situation. He is confident that in the end all of Israel will be saved.

Is that a fact?

Romans 11:23-32
23 If the Jews do not persist in their unbelief, they will be grafted in again, because God is able to graft them in.
24 After all, if you were cut off from what is naturally a wild olive tree, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much easier it will be for these natural branches to be grafted back into their own olive tree!
25 For I want to let you know about this secret, brothers, so that you will not claim to be wiser than you are: Stubbornness has come to part of Israel until the full number of the gentiles comes to faith.
26 In this way, all Israel will be saved, as it is written, "The Deliverer will come from Zion; he will remove ungodliness from Jacob.
27 This is my covenant with them when I take away their sins."
28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake, but as far as election is concerned, they are loved for the sake of their ancestors.
29 For God's gifts and calling never change.
30 For just as you disobeyed God in the past but now have received his mercy because of their disobedience,
31 so they, too, have now disobeyed. As a result, they may receive mercy because of the mercy shown to you.
32 For God has locked all people in the prison of their own disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.​

Note the condition in vs. 23. That does not sound like Paul is certain all his countrymen will be saved.
Note, vs. 31 "they may receive mercy" conditional on "If the Jews do not persist in their unbelief, they will be grafted in again." That persistent unbelief continued throughout Paul's life. Even today Israel rejects their Messiah.
Is Paul talking about dead people in the grave? It appears to me he is talking about living people in Israel at the time he is speaking.
Dead people in the grave can't have anything including "unbelief" they can't repent, they can't change their minds.
There is no Zion, no nation Israel, no Jacob in the grave only individual dead bodies.
Something I just noticed vs. 32 brings to mind 1 Peter 3:19 re: prison.

 

[Shrewd Manager]

Note! There is a period after the word "swear." Where did that word "allegiance" come from it is not in the quoted vs.?

The KJV and a few others.
Isaiah 45:23 By Myself I have sworn; truth has gone out from My mouth, a word that will not be revoked: Every knee will bow before Me, every tongue will swear allegiance.

I bracketed it the first time in #4836. It's a case of stating the obvious, really. Perhaps there are different manuscripts.

Or do you think God means all the ends of the earth will fall to their knees and swear expletives at Him?

 

[Shrewd Manager]

Contrary to what UR-ites say, scripture does NOT say that all mankind will bow "in reverent love for their Maker." etc.
Exomologeō occurs eleven times in the NT. in addition to Phil 2:11. In the other 10 it never means “whole-heartedly… without reservation (no holding back)”etc.
In Philippians 2:11exomologeō is an aorist, active, subjunctive. The subjunctive is the mood of possibility or potentiality. The action may or may not happen. Every knee should bow not “will bow.”

Matthew 3:6 “confessing their sins,” Matthew 11:25 “thank,” Mark 1:5 “confessing their sins,” Luke 10:21 “thank,” Luke 22:6 “promised,” Acts of the apostles 19:18 “confessed their deeds,” Romans 14:11 “confess,” Romans 15:9 “confess Christ,” James 5:16 “confess your faults,” Revelation 3:5 “confess his name”​

…..Scripture says that every knee should bow but only believers will do so freely, willingly in love and faith, the others will be conquered enemies. How will the enemies of Jesus feel?

Matthew 7:21-23
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, *(fn) Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity
…..*(fn)"That day" =the day of judgment.]​

After judgment day and “I never knew you: depart from me,” there are no more chances for reconciliation.
The word of God says every knee should bow. It must be important because it is repeated 3 times.

1. Isaiah 45:23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.
2. Romans 14:11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
3. Philippians 2:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;​

But the " the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, murderers, sexually immoral, those who practice magic, idolaters, liars" etc.[Rev 21:8] everyone who denied God and Christ all their lives will be forced to their knees, i.e. become Jesus’ footstool, and forced to proclaim that Jesus is Lord.
This is another important point it is recorded 7 times in scripture. The followers of UR ignore these verses.

1. Psalms 110:1 A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
2. Matthew 22:44 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
3. Mark 12:36 For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
4. Luke 20:42 And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Luke 20:43 Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
5. Acts of the apostles 2:34-35
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool..
6. Hebrews 1:13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
7. Hebrews 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;.
Hebrews 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.​

What does “make your enemies your footstool mean?” Joshua, the OT type of Jesus, shows us in Josh. 10.
Josh 10:5-15 five kings band together to make war against Israel and were defeated.

Joshua 10:17 And it was told Joshua, saying, The five kings are found hid in a cave at Makkedah….
Joshua 10:22-24
22 Then said Joshua, Open the mouth of the cave, and bring out those five kings unto me out of the cave.
…
24 And it came to pass, when they brought out those kings unto Joshua, that Joshua called for all the men of Israel, and said unto the captains of the men of war which went with him, Come near, put your feet upon the necks of these kings. And they came near, and put their feet upon the necks of them.
…
Joshua 10:26 And afterward Joshua smote them, and slew them, and hanged them on five trees: and they were hanging upon the trees until the evening.​

The enemies of Joshua were made his footstool then destroyed. They did not become faithful, obedient members of his army.
The enemies of Jesus become His footstool, as the enemies of Joshua did, and nowhere is it specifically written that those enemies will be reconciled.

Very good, having all the earth come to God and fall to their knees renders them 'footstools'. Here's the closest pic I could find (apologies it's a caricature from some pagan story).

The next step is not hanging them from a tree, der Alte, or eternally roasting them on a spit for that matter. How does that glorify God?

 

[Shrewd Manager]

Rubbish! Your biased opinion is meaningless and irrelevant. Jewish scholars wrote down the history of Israel. You don't like it tough. They quoted the scripture and how they interpreted them. That is tons more than you have. You talk about how you interpret the scriptures 2000+ years later.
What I quoted from the three Jewish sources is what the Jews believed before and during the time of Jesus. Again your biased opinion is irrelevant.
What Jesus taught about the fate of the unrighteous did not contradict but mirrored what the Jews of His day believed. Your biased opinion is irrelevant.

You're really on my trail today der Alte, like Clint in the Pale Rider.

And I say the Jews' opinion is irrelevant if it's not supported by scripture. And there's none, perhaps apart for the vengeance of Lamech, that supports the proposition of infinite payback. Period.

 

[Saint Steven]

Very good, having all the earth come to God and fall to their knees renders them 'footstools'. Here's the closest pic I could find (apologies it's a caricature from some pagan story).

Thanks.
And that's the point, really.
Damnationism turns God into a cosmic tyrant equal to an angry volcano god. A matter of mistaken identity, me thinks. - lol

 

[hedrick]

Are you accusing me of cherry picking? Most of them other folks complain because I include too much context. Refusing to read my posts calling them "a wall of text."

That's right I don't forget the judgement.

Is that a fact?

Romans 11:23-32
23 If the Jews do not persist in their unbelief, they will be grafted in again, because God is able to graft them in.
24 After all, if you were cut off from what is naturally a wild olive tree, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much easier it will be for these natural branches to be grafted back into their own olive tree!
25 For I want to let you know about this secret, brothers, so that you will not claim to be wiser than you are: Stubbornness has come to part of Israel until the full number of the gentiles comes to faith.
26 In this way, all Israel will be saved, as it is written, "The Deliverer will come from Zion; he will remove ungodliness from Jacob.
27 This is my covenant with them when I take away their sins."
28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake, but as far as election is concerned, they are loved for the sake of their ancestors.
29 For God's gifts and calling never change.
30 For just as you disobeyed God in the past but now have received his mercy because of their disobedience,
31 so they, too, have now disobeyed. As a result, they may receive mercy because of the mercy shown to you.
32 For God has locked all people in the prison of their own disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.​

Note the condition in vs. 23. That does not sound like Paul is certain all his countrymen will be saved.
Note, vs. 31 "they may receive mercy" conditional on "If the Jews do not persist in their unbelief, they will be grafted in again." That persistent unbelief continued throughout Paul's life. Even today Israel rejects their Messiah.
Is Paul talking about dead people in the grave? It appears to me he is talking about living people in Israel at the time he is speaking.
Dead people in the grave can't have anything including "unbelief" they can't repent, they can't change their minds.
There is no Zion, no nation Israel, no Jacob in the grave only individual dead bodies.
Something I just noticed vs. 32 brings to mind 1 Peter 3:19 re: prison.

11:23 gives the normal rule. As you say, if left up to us the outcome would be unsure. The secret, however, is that God has a plan that will make sure they are actually all saved. That's obvious in 25-32. Note that the hardening is only until the full number of Gentiles have come in.

Where does that leave us?

Does 11:32 refer only to Jews? No, since the whole point is that God has plans to save both Jews and Gentiles.

Does this mean salvation without faith? That seems unlikely for Paul.

Does it mean salvation only for those alive in some future time when all have faith? That rejects the universal vision of 25 on.

I don't have a good solution. But I think we should resist attempts to solve it by removing one side of the paradox, whether by saying all doesn't mean all, that God's plan may not happen, or by saying faith isn't necessary.

 

[ozso]

Very good, having all the earth come to God and fall to their knees renders them 'footstools'. Here's the closest pic I could find (apologies it's a caricature from some pagan story).

The next step is not hanging them from a tree, der Alte, or eternally roasting them on a spit for that matter. How does that glorify God?

It seems to me that God conquesting mankind in that fashion would be like me subduing an ant farm.

 

[ozso]

You're really on my trail today der Alte, like Clint in the Pale Rider.

Maybe that's because you're one of the few people left who's willing to read flames like, "Rubbish! Your biased opinion is meaningless and irrelevant". Why bother communicating with someone who says things like that?

 

[Der Alte]

The KJV and a few others.
Isaiah 45:23 By Myself I have sworn; truth has gone out from My mouth, a word that will not be revoked: Every knee will bow before Me, every tongue will swear allegiance.
I bracketed it the first time in #4836. It's a case of stating the obvious, really. Perhaps there are different manuscripts.
Or do you think God means all the ends of the earth will fall to their knees and swear expletives at Him?

I just checked every version on my lap top. Hebrew OT, NIV, ISV, JPS, KJV, ASV, Brenton and ESV. The only one which has "allegiance" is the ESV. There is no word for "allegiance" in the Hebrew.

 

[Der Alte]

...And I say the Jews' opinion is irrelevant if it's not supported by scripture. And there's none, perhaps apart for the vengeance of Lamech, that supports the proposition of infinite payback. Period.

Once again unless you have an advanced degree with emphasis on Hebrew your interpretation of the Hebrew OT is meaningless and irrelevant. There is absolutely nothing you can say to change that.
I have documented the Jewish belief in a place of fiery eternal punishment which they called both sheol and Ge Hinnom, written as hades and Gehenna in the 225 BC LXX and the NT. This belief existed in Israel before and during the time of Jesus. Jesus was born into and grew up in this culture and would have know of this belief. Jesus never condemned this belief. You can stamp your feet all you want and protest but it is what it is.

 

[Der Alte]

Very good, having all the earth come to God and fall to their knees renders them 'footstools'. Here's the closest pic I could find (apologies it's a caricature from some pagan story).
The next step is not hanging them from a tree, der Alte, or eternally roasting them on a spit for that matter. How does that glorify God?

It seems to me that God conquesting mankind in that fashion would be like me subduing an ant farm.

If either of you don't like what the Bible says go talk to God. I didn't write it I only quoted it. Sticking ones head in the sand does not make the scripture go away.
This is another important point it is recorded 7 times in scripture. The followers of UR ignore these verses.

1. Psalms 110:1 A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
2. Matthew 22:44 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
3. Mark 12:36 For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
4. Luke 20:42 And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Luke 20:43 Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
5. Acts of the apostles 2:34-35
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool..
6. Hebrews 1:13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
7. Hebrews 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;.
Hebrews 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.​

Someone please show me where scripture says those conquered enemies become loving, faithful followers of jesus.

 

[Fervent]

11:23 gives the normal rule. As you say, if left up to us the outcome would be unsure. The secret, however, is that God has a plan that will make sure they are actually all saved. That's obvious in 25-32. Note that the hardening is only until the full number of Gentiles have come in.

Where does that leave us?

Does 11:32 refer only to Jews? No, since the whole point is that God has plans to save both Jews and Gentiles.

Does this mean salvation without faith? That seems unlikely for Paul.

Does it mean salvation only for those alive in some future time when all have faith? That rejects the universal vision of 25 on.

I don't have a good solution. But I think we should resist attempts to solve it by removing one side of the paradox, whether by saying all doesn't mean all, that God's plan may not happen, or by saying faith isn't necessary.

There is no paradox, as the letter up to that point already indicated that not all Israel is in fact Israel, which is never rescinded. All 11:25-32 indicates is that there are Jews who were hardened that are part of Israel, but not that all of the individuals after the flesh are part of Israel. It's only if that segment is read in isolation that any indication of universalism is present, as Paul has made clear the conditional nature of salvation. So while the fullness of Israel is not in the church, it does not follow that every ethnic Israelite will be saved. These letters have to be read as a whole unit, not one segment at a time.

 

[hedrick]

There is no paradox, as the letter up to that point already indicated that not all Israel is in fact Israel, which is never rescinded. All 11:25-32 indicates is that there are Jews who were hardened that are part of Israel, but not that all of the individuals after the flesh are part of Israel. It's only if that segment is read in isolation that any indication of universalism is present, as Paul has made clear the conditional nature of salvation. So while the fullness of Israel is not in the church, it does not follow that every ethnic Israelite will be saved. These letters have to be read as a whole unit, not one segment at a time.

If only Christian Jews are left in Israel, saying that God has a secret plan to save all of Israel makes no sense, because all of Israel is saved by definition.