Calvinism and its Secret Universalism

[JM]

What you say conflicts with the clear meaning of 2 Peter 3:9. Notice that the object any and all - means all of mankind. Its there twice so that there will be no confusion.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.​

You are playing scriptural Whac-A-Mole. Instead of dealing exegetically with the texts you whac it down with another scripture...out of context.

Who is the "us" in 2 Peter? Peter is writing to Christians and the "us" includes Peter and the Christians he is writing to. So yes, God is not slack concerning His promises to "us" Christians.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

 

[John Mullally]

You are playing scriptural Whac-A-Mole. Instead of dealing exegetically with the texts you whac it down with another scripture...out of context.

Who is the "us" in 2 Peter? Peter is writing to Christians and the "us" includes Peter and the Christians he is writing to. So yes, God is not slack concerning His promises to "us" Christians.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

We are now living in the New Testament. Sounds like you prefer dodge ball. You strategically avoided saying what you think of the second half of 2 Peter 3:9.

2 Peter 3:9 9 The Lord is not slow concerning his promise, as some regard slowness, but is being patient toward you, because he does not wish for any to perish but for all to come to repentance​

 

[Hammster]

No you love to assume. You assume that God loves some sinners and hates others - whereas scripture says he is kind and patient to all (Romans 2:4) in order that they may repent. Judgement only comes after a lifetime of rejection to his calls for repentance.

Okay, anyway I would like your understanding of those verses because I don’t want to assume your meaning. But if you are just going to be insulting, then maybe we should just move on.

 

[John Mullally]

Okay, anyway I would like your understanding of those verses because I don’t want to assume your meaning.

You say "It’s His right to hate all who sin against Him.".

Romans 5:8 says that Christ demonstrated his love for sinners by dying for them - its very transparent. 1 John 2:2 reinforces the point by declaring that Christ's atoning sacrifice (propitiation) was made for all men. Therefore, to say that Christ died for some sinners and not other sinners is contradicted by scripture. The sermon Peter preached in Acts 2 declares that receiving the benefit of the atonement is within reach of men on earth. The above demonstrates that God loves sinners.

If you still disagree, read 2 Peter 3:9 where Peter says that God is not willing that any perish, but that all should come to repentance. And then there is always John 3:16 which lays out Christs purpose in coming to earth.

 

[Hammster]

You say "It’s His right to hate all who sin against Him.".

Romans 5:8 says that Christ demonstrated his love for sinners by dying for them - its very transparent. 1 John 2:2 reinforces the point by declaring that Christ's atoning sacrifice (propitiation) was made for all men. Therefore, to say that Christ died for some sinners and not other sinners is contradicted by scripture. The sermon Peter preached in Acts 2 declares that receiving the benefit of the atonement is within reach of men on earth. The above demonstrates that God loves sinners.

If you still disagree, read 2 Peter 3:9 where Peter says that God is not willing that any perish, but that all should come to repentance. And then there is always John 3:16 which lays out Christs purpose in coming to earth.

What it says is that Christ died for us. The us in question is the church he was writing to. Same thing with 2 Peter. There’s the actual readers in mind, not every person who ever lived.

 

[John Mullally]

What it says is that Christ died for us. The us in question is the church he was writing to. Same thing with 2 Peter. There’s the actual readers in mind, not every person who ever lived.

In 1 John 2:2, John starts out saying that He (Christ) is the propitiation for our sins (i.e. the people John is writing to), and then he purposefully expands the scope of Christ's propitiation to include the sins of the "whole world" - so yes Christ died for all. If John meant to just include other believers outside his audience, he would have used some term other than "whole world".

Paul agrees with Peter (in 2 Peter 3:9) that it is God's will for all men to be saved, and he agrees with John (in 1 John 2:2) that Christ died for all.

2 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.​

Within Peter's discourse about the false prophets among the church (2 Peter 2), he indicates that the Lord died for these false prophets. Christ died even for those who would bring in destructive heresies and be destroyed - I can't think of a worse lot.

2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.​

 

[Hammster]

In 1 John 2:2, John starts out saying that He (Christ) is the propitiation for our sins (i.e. the people John is writing to), and then he purposefully expands the scope of Christ's propitiation to include the sins of the "whole world" - so yes Christ died for all. If John meant to just include other believers outside his audience, he would have used some term other than "whole world".

Why do you say that? Could whole world refer to just believers in the whole world?

 

[John Mullally]

Why do you say that? Could whole world refer to just believers in the whole world?

I say it because it is the plain meaning, and then I brought up other scriptures to reinforce it.

To reiterate my points: Paul agrees with John here, saying that Christ gave himself a ransom for all in 2 Timothy 2:6, and Peter points out in 2 Peter 2:1 that the Lord bought even the false prophets who deny him and bring in destructive heresies. How do you think the Lord bought these false prophets?

 

[Hammster]

I say it because it is the plain meaning, and then I brought up other scriptures to reinforce it.

To reiterate my points: Paul agrees with John here, saying that Christ gave himself a ransom for all in 2 Timothy 2:6, and Peter points out in 2 Peter 2:1 that the Lord bought even the false prophets who deny him and bring in destructive heresies. How do you think the Lord bought these false prophets?

Let me ask you this, then…what does propitiation mean?

 

[John Mullally]

Let me ask you this, then…what does propitiation mean?

PROPITIATION, noun propisia'shon.
1. The act of appeasing wrath and conciliating the favor of an offended person; the act of making propitious.
2. In theology, the atonement or atoning sacrifice offered to God to assuage his wrath and render him propitious to sinners. Christ is the propitiation for the sins of men. Romans 3:25. 1 John 2:2.​

Well since you did not answer my last question, know that 2 Peter 2:1 removes all doubt that the "whole world" that Christ made Propitiation for in 1 John 2:2 includes those who would later be damned.

Christs Propitiation is only of profit to those who appropriate its benefit through faith.

Hebrews 4:4 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. 3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.​

 

[Hammster]

PROPITIATION, noun propisia'shon.
1. The act of appeasing wrath and conciliating the favor of an offended person; the act of making propitious.
2. In theology, the atonement or atoning sacrifice offered to God to assuage his wrath and render him propitious to sinners. Christ is the propitiation for the sins of men. Romans 3:25. 1 John 2:2.​

Well since you did not answer my last question, know that 2 Peter 2:1 removes all doubt that the "whole world" that Christ made Propitiation for in 1 John 2:2 includes those who would later be damned.

Christs Propitiation is only of profit to those who appropriate its benefit through faith.

Hebrews 4:4 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. 3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.​

You can’t have it both ways. Either Christ’s sacrifice assuaged God’s wrath, or it didn’t.

 

[JM]

We are now living in the New Testament. Sounds like you prefer dodge ball. You strategically avoided saying what you think of the second half of 2 Peter 3:9.

2 Peter 3:9 9 The Lord is not slow concerning his promise, as some regard slowness, but is being patient toward you, because he does not wish for any to perish but for all to come to repentance​

Right, God is not willing that any of "us" come to parish. Doh!

 

[JM]

PROPITIATION, noun propisia'shon.
1. The act of appeasing wrath and conciliating the favor of an offended person; the act of making propitious.
2. In theology, the atonement or atoning sacrifice offered to God to assuage his wrath and render him propitious to sinners. Christ is the propitiation for the sins of men. Romans 3:25. 1 John 2:2.​

Well since you did not answer my last question, know that 2 Peter 2:1 removes all doubt that the "whole world" that Christ made Propitiation for in 1 John 2:2 includes those who would later be damned.

Christs Propitiation is only of profit to those who appropriate its benefit through faith.

Hebrews 4:4 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. 3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.​

Propitiated sins cannot be punished.

 

[Hammster]

Propitiated sins cannot be punished.

But…free will.

Or something.

 

[John Mullally]

You can’t have it both ways. Either Christ’s sacrifice assuaged God’s wrath, or it didn’t.

The word of God speaks for itself. Hebrews 4:4 declares how Christs propitiation (i.e. entering into his rest) is received - it is received through faith - whereas, you state it is purely a matter of the sender. The limiting factor is not whether God gave it to you or not- because Christ died for all and God is not willing that any should perish - its a matter of you exercising faith (i.e. taking action) to receive it. Reference Acts 2:38.

Many times Christ said something akin to "your faith has made you whole" or "be it according to your faith" in the Gospels. This identifies the limiting factor.

 

[Cormack]

Why do you say that? Could whole world refer to just believers in the whole world?

That would be a fairly redundant thing to write. If the first section (e.g. “our sins”) talks about the whole scope of the recipients of Christ’s atoning sacrifice, namely Christians, then the author adds “but not just our sins”(!) “but the sins of the whole world…) they would be doing nothing by that but contradicting themselves, since they wrote in between the whole thing “not just our sins.”

Well, is the author reiterating his point or introducing a new group? Seems fairly obvious he’s inviting a wider scope.

If someone thought that the author meant the already mentioned group within the world, that would be such a useless and nonsensical thing to write.

Useless because the author already mentioned the whole group, and nonsensical because they wrote “not just our sins…”(!)

That interpretation is so laboured, clunky and unnatural. It’s a walking contradiction, almost as if there’s some large philosophical presupposition underpinning the whole interpretation.

 

[John Mullally]

almost as if there’s some large philosophical presupposition underpinning the whole interpretation.

Yeah, its that presupposition that states that God, whom the scripture declares to be love, hates much of humanity before they were even born.

JM termed that the doctrine of "Divine Reprobation" earlier on this thread. Calvin was the first to state it.

 

[Cormack]

But…free will.

Or something.

Real good job of steel manning the opposing point of view here.

 

[Cormack]

Yeah, its that proposition that God, whom the scripture declares to be love, hates the bulk of humanity.

I can see believing in that idea if you only had Deuteronomy, Leviticus and the book of Psalms to draw from, but I can’t see that view coming about in a Christ centric religion.

 

[Hammster]

The word of God speaks for itself. Hebrews 4:4 declares how Christs propitiation (i.e. entering into his rest) is received - it is received through faith - whereas, you state it is purely a matter of the sender. The limiting factor is not whether God gave it to you or not- because Christ died for all and God is not willing that any should perish - its a matter of you exercising faith (i.e. taking action) to receive it. Reference Acts 2:38.

Many times Christ said something akin to "your faith has made you whole" or "be it according to your faith" in the Gospels. This identifies the limiting factor.

You aren’t seeing the problem. If God’s wrath is satisfied, that means He’s no longer angry at the sinner. That means that Christ’s sacrifice actually did something. He took the punishment that was deserved. So if the Father sends someone to hell, in your understanding, then He is unjust because He’s punishing someone for sins that His Son paid for. There’s just no basis for sending someone to hell. This is why “whole world” in 1 John cannot mean every person who ever lived. It puts a rift in the Trinity.