If the world is reconciled to God

[bugkiller]

To the contrary, the Christian universalist says all will be saved through Christ & Him crucified, as there is salvation in no other. Without Him no one would be saved. Furthermore, universalism does not deny a corrective "hell".

Sorry but that is not what the OP presents. You now seem to be promoting organized religion as Christianity. I hate to inform you it is not. I do not believe there is such a thing as a Christian Universalist. Please quote one of them with reference to what their basis is. In this case the basis is their school of thought such as the religious organization they belong or adhere to.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

To the contrary, the Christian universalist says all will be saved through Christ & Him crucified, as there is salvation in no other. Without Him no one would be saved. Furthermore, universalism does not deny a corrective "hell".

If universalism is true they must deny a hell, corrective or other wise. If there is such a thing as a corrective hell salvation is by works and not the shed blood of Jesus.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

If enemies (all mankind) were reconciled at the cross, then how is it they are still enemies? Can one who is reconciled to God, by God, be - considered by God as - His enemy, even if unbelievers consider themselves to be (or act as) enemies of God, especially when He is no longer holding their sins against them (2 Cor.5:19)?

Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
Rom 5:11 And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.
2 Cor. 5:19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.



Since the world is reconciled to God & He is no longer holding their sins against them, how is it that all will not eventually be saved?

Rom.11:15 For if their rejection brought reconciliation to the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

No one is reconciled against their will.

bugkiller

 

[ClementofA]

God was 'in, by, through' Christ reconciling the world to Himself.

How .....Christ being God come in the flesh of mankind. God/man. He was/is the reconciliation of the two.
To be a part of that reconciliation, one must be in Christ.

Not all men have died in Christ. So unless one believes in reincarnation or some other means of making that choice after death, not all men will choose to be reconciled to God through Christ.

As far as i can tell, those comments are suggesting God reconciled the world to Himself when Christ was incarnated. However the context suggests or implies that God reconciled the world when Christ became sin (or a sin offering) as per v.21. Moreover Romans 5:9-11 makes it clear that reconciliation occurred at the cross (see also Col.1:20, the blood of the cross making peace & associated with reconciliation).

Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
2 Cor.5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
Col.1:20 and through Him to reconcile to Himself all, whether on earth or in heaven, by making peace through the blood of His cross.
2 Cor. 5:19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

 

[ClementofA]

Trying to answer your several questions briefly:
1)Objective justification is real because Jesus entire life was for that purpose which ended when he shouted from the cross: "IT IS FINISHED!" ... that's what 2 Co 5:19 is speaking to.
That's the message of the cross ... which so happens that the same writer that universalists only purposefully selectively qoute for their narrative ... also writes that those who find the message of the cross foolish are not going to be reconciled at any time. 1 Co 1:18
People who are "perishing" will not be reconciled as Jesus taught.
-----------------------------
2) Taking Scripture in total it's not a either-or scenario as universalists present it. God said both is the truth, Jesus taught both is the truth .... objective and subjective.
Paul confirms both the truth, UR doesn't.
----------------------------------
3) Nope.
Paul writes "many live as enemies of the cross of Christ" (Philippians 3:18).
There is but one result for those who die in their emnity as enemies of Christ: Hebrews 10:27 \ John 3:36 \

Thanks for your replies. Other threads have already addressed passages that are imagined to be contrary to universalism, such as the url below. Here i am primarily interested in interpretations re & to understand "reconciliation" passages, so i appreciate your insights, which have furthered my knowledge.

BTW, I noticed this definition of the word rendered "reconciliation" ( 2 Cor.5:19):

Liddell-Scott-Jones Definitions
καταλλ-ᾰγή, ἡ,

I

1. exchange, esp. of money, Arist. Oec. 1346b24, PHib. 1.100.4 (iii B. C.).

2. money-changer's profit, agio, D. 50.30, Diph. 66.14, Euphro 3.4.

3. freight, merchandise, metaph., [ ἀραὶ ] βαρεῖαι κ. A. Th. 767 (lyr.).

4. change, difference, Phld. Mus. p.74 K.

II

1. change from enmity to friendship, reconciliation, καταλλαγὰς ποιεῖσθαι πρός τινας D. 1.4; κ. πολέμου Ar. Av. 1588.

2. reconciliation of sinners with God, 2 Corinthians 5:18; κόσμου Romans 11:15.

Strong's #2643 - καταλλαγή - Old & New Testament Greek Lexicon

Also these definitions:

Definition: reconciliation, restoration to favor.

reconciliation (restoration) as the resulting of Christ exactly (precisely) exchanging His righteousness (blood) for our guilt.

Strong's Greek: 2643. καταλλαγή (katallagé) -- reconciliation

Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

 

[jerry kelso]

If the world is reconciled to God & He is not holding their sins against them, explain why the following verses do not support eventual universal salvation. Do not bring up alleged anti-universalist "proof texts" from other contexts of the Scriptures (e.g. Jn.3:16), but base your argument on the following texts, such as the meaning of "reconciliation":



Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
Rom 5:11 And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.

2Co 5:18 Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation,
2Co 5:19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

2Co 5:20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.
2Co 5:21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

clementofa,

1. God reconciling the the world to himself has nothing to with saving a person from sin.
It also has nothing to with proving that all the world will be saved guaranteed.

2. Romans 5;
The first five verses is about Justification by faith and peace with God through our LORD JESUS CHRIST.
Verse 1. Access by faith into this grace I stand and rejoice in hope of of the glory of God.
Verse 2-5 Then it talks about glorying in tribulation and what it brings in the Christian life.
Verse 6. Then he talks about before we were saved; when we were yet without strength, IN DUE TIME CHRIST DIED FOR THE UNGODLY.
7 shows how much God loved us.
Verse 8: BUT GOD COMMENDETH HIS LOVE TOWARD US, IN THAT WHILE WERE YET SINNERS, CHRIST DIED FOR US.
V 9 is about being justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
The first nine verses is not talking about the world being reconciled to God.
It is talking about personal justification by faith.
The other part is about how great God’s love was that he would die for us on the Cross.

Romans 5:10;
For if, when we were enemies ( No hope of being reconciled without redemption) we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, we shall be saved by his life.
Hebrews 9:15: And for this cause he is the mediator of the New Testament of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
This verse by itself would mean only the Old Testament saints would be saved.
Because salvation is from the death of Christ it had to cover the past, present, and the future.
Hebrews 11:40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.
Under the Old Testament they only had types of blood and bulls of goats. They would have never been saved had Christ died and arose.
Now everyone has the chance to be saved but it doesn’t mean they will be unless they access it by faith.

3. Now going back to verse 10; God reconciling the world to himself by his death of his son, we shall be saved by his life.
This is the reconciliation he offers but gives to those who access it by faith verse 1.

4. Romans 5:11; And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the Atonement which are those accessed it by faith verse 1.

5. 2 Corinthians 5:18; God reconciled us to Jesus himself and hath given us the ministry of reconciliation.
If reconciliation is all of God, which it is in the only one who can save, then why would he give those he saves the ministry of reconciliation?

6. 2 Corinthians 5:19; It is true that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their sins unto them and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
Reconciling the world to himself couldn’t mean saving them automatically because we have to cooperate by freewill choice, for reconciliation nor relationship can be one-sided to be a true agape love relationship.
Not imputing or charging their sins to them.
Their is a Calvinistic belief that say God saves all past, present, and future sins of those who believe for he paid the price. They use it like a cash transaction. If this was true then at the cross would have been a debtor to pay back something he did not owe and the transaction would have ended all sins would have paid past, present, and future from then on and believers and non-believers would have been saved. Thus, there would be no need of grace or repentance or obedience of saved by faith etc. for that one act would have paid in full and ended the debt.
We were bought with a price, but it was the price of suffering for the penalty of sin not a cash transaction for debt of every individual’s sins.
Sins past, present, and future sins were done away by the suffering of Christ by his suffering on the cross.
I hope you understand the difference.
This is the proper way to understanding not imputing the world’s sin.

7. Verse 20 we are ambassadors for Christ How? On behalf of Christ and we are to be reconciled to God.

8. So in context of the scriptures there is no guarantee of UR in these scriptures.

9. UR adovocates would have to not believe in Eternal Hell which they don’t.
And the UR advocate have to believe in nothing but the supreme love of God and not his long term judgement.

10. In Revelation 21 we have the perfect state in which the Kingdom Of Heaven on Earth is in harmony with the universal Kingdom of God 1 Corinthians 15:24-28.
Revelation 21:4 says the former things will not be remembered.
Verse 7: He that overcometh all things will inherit all things and I will be his God and he shall be my son.
Verse 8: BUT THE FEARFUL AND UNBELIEVING AND THE ABOMINABLE AND MURDERERS AND WHOREMONGERS AND IDOLATERS AND ALL LIARS, SHALL HAVE THEIR PART IN THE LAKE WHICH BURNETHETH WITH FIRE AND BRIMSTONE WHICH IS THE SECOND DEATH.

11. The second death happened a thousand years after the First Resurrection Revelation 20:5; 12-15. This was during the millennial period.
So this shows everlasting hell will be forever for that is where they are in hell during the perfect state even though we won’t remember it Revelation 21:4. Jerry kelso

 

[ClementofA]

Trying to answer your several questions briefly:
1)Objective justification is real because Jesus entire life was for that purpose which ended when he shouted from the cross: "IT IS FINISHED!" ... that's what 2 Co 5:19 is speaking to.
That's the message of the cross ... which so happens that the same writer that universalists only purposefully selectively qoute for their narrative ... also writes that those who find the message of the cross foolish are not going to be reconciled at any time. 1 Co 1:18
People who are "perishing" will not be reconciled as Jesus taught.
-----------------------------
2) Taking Scripture in total it's not a either-or scenario as universalists present it. God said both is the truth, Jesus taught both is the truth .... objective and subjective.
Paul confirms both the truth, UR doesn't.
----------------------------------
3) Nope.
Paul writes "many live as enemies of the cross of Christ" (Philippians 3:18).
There is but one result for those who die in their emnity as enemies of Christ: Hebrews 10:27 \ John 3:36 \

As far as i tell, i guess the idea of an "objective reconciliation" is merely a potential reconciliation initiated by the cross, but has not actually reconciled the world. So should it be considered Scriptural?

You may reply, as per point 3 above, that Scripture elsewhere speaks of men as still being "enemies" & from that conclude that the world is not actually reconciled to God, as many understand 2 Cor.5:19 & perhaps Romans 5:10 & 11:15 as well. So how to reconcile this apparent contradiction? Should we just believe both & admit we don't understand how they harmonize? Do we understand how "all died" & Christ became "sin" (v.14,21), bore our sins, was slain before the world was, how God exists, etc? God "calleth those things which be not as though they were" (Rom.4:17) and declares the end from the beginning (Isa.46:10). 1 Tim.4:10 say God is - not will be, could be, is potentially - the Saviour of all mankind.

Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
2 Cor.5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
Col.1:20 and through Him to reconcile to Himself all, whether on earth or in heaven, by making peace through the blood of His cross.
2 Cor. 5:19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

Another thought is that reconciliation in 2 Cor.5:19-20 is considered by Paul as an "ongoing process" (p.256 of TDNT, Vol.1). The "phrase ήν καταλλασσων in 2 C. 5:19 does not denote a concluded work: "He was present to reconcile the world to Himself"; when and where this work will be concluded is not brought under consideration in 2 C. 5:19-20. For this reason we should not draw from the fact that Paul thinks of the world as the object of reconciliation the deduction that reconciliation for him consists exclusively in the removal of the relationship of guilt between man and God, since the world as a whole is not a new creation etc. This would amount to saying that what Paul explicitly calls the ministry of reconciliation and the self-reconciliation of man forms no part of reconciliation. Paul does not say that the world is reconciled (καταλλαγεις). The reconciliation of the world is as little finished as the απoβoγή of the Jews. Both have begun in the cross of Christ, and both are in the course of fulfillment (--> 258). We can call the world reconciled in the Pauline sense only as we anticipate the execution of that which is present in the purpose of God and in the foundation" (p.257, Friedrich Buchsel, ed. Gerhard Kittel).

 

[ClementofA]

6. 2 Corinthians 5:19; It is true that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their sins unto them and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

Reconciling the world to himself couldn’t mean saving them automatically because we have to cooperate by freewill choice, for reconciliation nor relationship can be one-sided to be a true agape love relationship.

Could it include freewill choice and be an ongoing process where God will complete the "reconciling the world to himself", e.g. after some have tasted the lake of fire?

 

[ClementofA]

Last night I wrote #49 just before going to bed and was not thinking clearly. Upon thinking more about it, I realized the deficiency of my response. So I would like to attempt and clear it up, provide a better response, if that is okay with you.

I believe 2 Cor 5:19 in the use of the word "world" is referring to ALL of God's people from every nation, tongue, and tribe throughout ALL of history, from the very beginning to the very end on earth as we know it. To be in Christ means we are forgiven, it means our trespasses are not counted against us, it means our relationship with God is restored. God himself became the sacrifice sufficient for ALL of the sins of His chosen vessels of mercy (to use Pauline language).

AW, that's an interesting take on the verse. I don't recall hearing it explained that way before. I wonder if this is how Reformed commentators usually see it. In this view if the "world" meant all the individuals of human history, would v.19 support universalism?

2 Cor. 5:19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

And yet we read in the words of Christ about an "unpardonable" sin, and I do not for one second think that Paul contradicts Christ. Strangely at this moment, I am thankful He brought up the unpardonable sin, because in my mind at least, that alone demolishes the notion of universal redemption, even though there are countless passages speaking to the judgements and wrath of God, speaking to vessels fitted for destruction (to use Pauline language).

The "unpardonable sin" is an interesting subject. Universalists have a variety of views & speculations about it, if you are interested:

Spirit blasphemy - unpardonable sin

 

[ClementofA]

Now that one verse which you reference in your first sentence and spell out later does address in some possible way universal salvation - namely:

2Co 5:19 .....God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

But here nothing is said to spell out the exact process of God reconciling the world to Himself in Christ - except to say that He doesn't hold their sins against them after they are reconciled by whatever process accomplishes that reconciliation in the end.

When He tells us here and elsewhere that our ministry is to call the world to be reconciled to God through their own actions (faith) - in so doing He is spelling out the entire process a little more thoroughly for us.

Nowhere does it say that the reconciliation was already a done deal at Calvary. In fact even for the elect of God that wasn't so.

Thanks for your comments Marvin.

I'm not sure if you're saying v.19 supports universalism or not.

If God is not holding the world's sins against them, then how can He abandon anyone to endless punishment or torments?

If re v.19 the world wasn't reconciled at Calvary, then when will it be? In the future? The context (v.14-15, 21) points to Calvary. And v.19 uses the past tense - "was".

Reconciliation:

"Definition: reconciliation, restoration to favor.

reconciliation (restoration) as the resulting of Christ exactly (precisely) exchanging His righteousness (blood) for our guilt."

Strong's Greek: 2643. καταλλαγή (katallagé) -- reconciliation

 

[jerry kelso]

Could it include freewill choice and be an ongoing process where God will complete the "reconciling the world to himself", e.g. after some have tasted the lake of fire?

clementofa,

1. There is no scripture that says after one dies they get a second chance but they get judgement Hebrews 9:27.

2. Those who believe in purgatory from 1 Corinthians 3:12-15 is really the judgement of believers works on how they built on the church, not their personal life due to salvation.
Verse 16-17 says that God will destroy him that destroys the temple of his body which is the Holy Ghost or something to that fact.
Our probationary period is here and now on earth for however long we live.

3. The true story of Lazarus, not a parable, was that Lazarus went to Abraham’s bosom which was Paradise at the time before Christ took them all to Heaven
The evil rich man was in actual hell and wanted to just dip his tongue with a little water to cool it.
He wanted to warn his brothers but Abraham said they have the law of Moses and the prophets and if they didn’t believe that they would not believe if someone was raised from the dead Luke 16:20:31.

3. Freewill choice was not accepted by God with Lazarus according to Abraham.
By and large sinners will have seared their conscience and they will do nothing to change except they’ll just keep cursing God.

4. God has already reconciled the world to himself which was at the cross for the penalty of sin 2 Corinthians 5:19.
There probationary period is here and now till the restitution of all things or the Great White Throne Judgement unless you die before or at the judgement of the nations Matthew 25:32-41.
The GWTJ is final and death and hell will all be thrown into the lake of fire for eternity which is not translated an age except endless ages.

5. There is no scripture or scriptural context that proves UR after death.
If Adam would have eaten of the tree of life after he had sinned he would have lived eternally in a sinful body.
Sinners will have immortal bodies just like Satan and his angels when they are resurrected. Acts 24:15 shows both the just and unjust will be resurrected.
Sinners will feel the burn and not burn up. It will be both mental and physical torment with wailing and gnashing of teeth.
So the answer to after the lake of fire, can they be reconciled to God is sadly, no!!!!!!!!!
Why? Because they will be trapped in a resurrected immortal sinful body forever. Jerry Kelso

 

[Marvin Knox]

I'm not sure if you're saying v.19 supports universalism or not.

On the surface of it - it seems to point to universalism. If that was the only verse we had to shine light on the subject, it would indeed teach universalism.

The same could be said for the verse which seems at first blush to teach the incorrect Mormon doctrine of proxy baptismal salvation for the dead.

But, as you must know, scripture informs scripture (or clear doctrine informs obscure doctrine). Taken as a whole - the scriptures do not teach universal salvation.

If God is not holding the world's sins against them, then how can He abandon anyone to endless punishment or torments?

For those who complete the reconciliation process in Christ - God does not hold their sins against them. But, as you must know, the process of reconciliation includes personal faith in Christ as Savior (we implore the world to "be reconciled to Christ"). It wasn't a complete salvation when Calvary was done - otherwise there would be no Church age where we preach the gospel to the world.

If re v.19 the world wasn't reconciled at Calvary, then when will it be? In the future? The context (v.14-15, 21) points to Calvary. And v.19 uses the past tense - "was".

Even you don't teach that it was a "past tense" reconciliation. Otherwise you wouldn't be talking about a "corrective Hell" (or "purgatory" as some would say the same thing).

It talks about God reconciling the world "in Christ". It says nothing about that particular portion of Christ's work at Calvary being only when and how He accomplished it.

If I told you that I was correcting your faulty doctrine in this post - it would not mean that when I typed the words you see here you were brought to understanding of the error of your doctrine.

It would require that I send out the corrective message on the internet, that you read the corrective message, and that you understood and accepted the corrective message.

In like manner, it is obvious to all who preach the gospel at the command of the Lord, that the full reconciliation was not a done deal at Calvary.

You can't have things both ways. Either say that the reconciliation was completed at Calvary or leave off the preaching of the gospel to the world and leave off your teaching of a "corrective Hell".

Because of the manner the Holy Spirit has chosen to present His truth to us in the scriptures - we don't have the luxury of pointing to a single verse by itself to form doctrine concerning baptism for the dead, salvation by water baptism, transubstantiation, or to refute the idea of the Trinity. Nor do you get to grab a particular verse and build a doctrine of universal salvation for all men and angels.

You should know that by now just as I do (even though I would like universal salvation to be true as much as you do).

 

[bling]

I'll add here that - IMO - there isn't a Christian in the world who would not wish universal salvation to be true. But there are very few who would assert as you do that it is true and even fewer who would assert that the scriptures as a whole support it - because they don't.

.

So God is not doing exactly what you want Him to do?

So if it was up to you everyone would go to heaven?

You can have a personal desire, but should your real desire and wish be “God’s will be done”?

The world might be very happy to live in a Muslim type “heaven” for eternity (selfish and carnal), but that is not what heaven is like. Heaven is like one huge Love Feast, but there is only Godly type Love (unselfish, sacrificial, unconditional, charitable), which those going to hell do not like, want or are willing to accept. People might want to be “loved” for the way they want others to perceive them to be, but do not like or want to be Loved in spite of who they really are. They would not be “happy” in a place of only Godly type Love, so where can they go?

The whole reason we spend time on earth is so we can obtain and grow Godly type Love and thus fulfill our Mission of Loving God (and secondly others) with all our heart, soul, mind and energy. Earth is the only place I see where we can obtain Godly type Love since it cannot be programmed into us (a robotic type love) and it cannot be forced on us (like with a shotgun wedding and God holding the shotgun).

Those that never have the opportunity to obtain Godly type Love could go to heaven with only a wonderful child for wonderful parent type love, but they never refused Godly type Love.

 

[Marvin Knox]

So God is not doing exactly what you want Him to do? So if it was up to you everyone would go to heaven?

Sure - just like Jesus had a desire that salvation be accomplished another way than God had chose for it to be done.

Yes - if it were up to me only given what I can see from this side of things - everyone would go to Heaven.

You can have a personal desire, but should your real desire and wish be “God’s will be done”?

Of course, just as it was for Christ in the garden before the trial and crucifixion.

And - like Christ - I do have a real desire and wish that God's will be done.

Do you see somewhere where I don't?

The world might be very happy to live in a Muslim type “heaven” for eternity (selfish and carnal), but that is not what heaven is like. Heaven is like one huge Love Feast, but there is only Godly type Love (unselfish, sacrificial, unconditional, charitable),

As the people at Geico are fond of saying - everyone knows that. What's your point?

........which those going to hell do not like, want or are willing to accept. People might want to be “loved” for the way they want others to perceive them to be, but do not like or want to be Loved in spite of who they really are. They would not be “happy” in a place of only Godly type Love, so where can they go?

You don't know that they would not be happy in Heaven. How could you possibly know that?

We know for sure that the rich man would have gladly crossed over from Hell to Paradise in a nano second given the chance to do so.

The whole reason we spend time on earth is so we can obtain and grow Godly type Love and thus fulfill our Mission of Loving God (and secondly others) with all our heart, soul, mind and energy.

Where does it say that is the only reason we are on earth?

Earth is the only place I see where we can obtain Godly type Love since it cannot be programmed into us (a robotic type love) and it cannot be forced on us (like with a shotgun wedding and God holding the shotgun).

Do you see somewhere in my writings that I believe those things? Show me where please.

In point of fact - I am arguing against that very concept in arguing against the idea of a "corrective Hell" where people are brought to salvation through pain and suffering.

Have you perhaps mistaken one of my posts for one of Clement's posts?

Those that never have the opportunity to obtain Godly type Love could go to heaven with only a wonderful child for wonderful parent type love, but they never refused Godly type Love.

I have no idea what that means.

 

[twin.spin]

As far as i tell, i guess the idea of an "objective reconciliation" is merely a potential reconciliation initiated by the cross, but has not actually reconciled the world. So should it be considered Scriptural?

You may reply, as per point 3 above, that Scripture elsewhere speaks of men as still being "enemies" & from that conclude that the world is not actually reconciled to God, as many understand 2 Cor.5:19 & perhaps Romans 5:10 & 11:15 as well. So how to reconcile this apparent contradiction? Should we just believe both & admit we don't understand how they harmonize? Do we understand how "all died" & Christ became "sin" (v.14,21), bore our sins, was slain before the world was, how God exists, etc? God "calleth those things which be not as though they were" (Rom.4:17) and declares the end from the beginning (Isa.46:10). 1 Tim.4:10 say God is - not will be, could be, is potentially - the Saviour of all mankind..

Again, your response indicates that UR is a "either \ or" mindset ... "potential vs. actual".
There is no contradiction when taking both as being true:

• God reconciled the world ... Jesus successfully meet everything that God requires under the law whether a person believes or not.
• God holds people accountable for their unbelief\alternative gospel message of faith in Jesus' work of reconciliation with his perfect life and death as our 100% substitute.

 

[ClementofA]

Again, your response indicates that UR is a "either \ or" mindset ... "potential vs. actual".
There is no contradiction when taking both as being true:

• God reconciled the world ... Jesus successfully meet everything that God requires under the law whether a person believes or not.
• God holds people accountable for their unbelief\alternative gospel message of faith in Jesus' work of reconciliation with his perfect life and death as our 100% substitute.

The contradiction as i see it is between:

1. The world is reconciled (2 way peace = salvation) to God &

2. The appeal of "Be reconciled to God".

However TDNT offers a solution (& it is as i see it supportive of universalism):

Another thought is that reconciliation in 2 Cor.5:19-20 is considered by Paul as an "ongoing process" (p.256 of TDNT, Vol.1). The "phrase ήν καταλλασσων in 2 C. 5:19 does not denote a concluded work: "He was present to reconcile the world to Himself"; when and where this work will be concluded is not brought under consideration in 2 C. 5:19-20. For this reason we should not draw from the fact that Paul thinks of the world as the object of reconciliation the deduction that reconciliation for him consists exclusively in the removal of the relationship of guilt between man and God, since the world as a whole is not a new creation etc. This would amount to saying that what Paul explicitly calls the ministry of reconciliation and the self-reconciliation of man forms no part of reconciliation. Paul does not say that the world is reconciled (καταλλαγεις). The reconciliation of the world is as little finished as the απoβoγή of the Jews. Both have begun in the cross of Christ, and both are in the course of fulfillment (--> 258). We can call the world reconciled in the Pauline sense only as we anticipate the execution of that which is present in the purpose of God and in the foundation" (p.257, Friedrich Buchsel, ed. Gerhard Kittel).

 

[ClementofA]

4. God has already reconciled the world to himself which was at the cross for the penalty of sin 2 Corinthians 5:19.

Great. Then everyone is saved. They just don't know it yet. Reconciliation:

"Definition: reconciliation, restoration to favor.

reconciliation (restoration) as the resulting of Christ exactly (precisely) exchanging His righteousness (blood) for our guilt."

Strong's Greek: 2643. καταλλαγή (katallagé) -- reconciliation

1. Scripture teaches all those who are reconciled shall be saved in His life (Rom.5:10)

and

2. Scripture also teaches the world is reconciled, (Rom.5:10; 11:15; 2 Cor.5:19)

therefore

3. It follows that the world shall be saved in His life.

True or false?

Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

Romans 5:10 says that those who have been reconciled "shall be saved by His life".

Therefore it could be argued that if the world has been reconciled to God (cf. 2 Cor.5:19; Rom.11:15; 5:9-11), then likewise the world also "shall be saved by His life".

2 Cor. 5:19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

Rom.11:15 For if their rejection brought reconciliation to the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

However this comment seems to make better sense of the passage:

However TDNT offers a solution (& it is as i see it supportive of universalism):

Another thought is that reconciliation in 2 Cor.5:19-20 is considered by Paul as an "ongoing process" (p.256 of TDNT, Vol.1). The "phrase ήν καταλλασσων in 2 C. 5:19 does not denote a concluded work: "He was present to reconcile the world to Himself"; when and where this work will be concluded is not brought under consideration in 2 C. 5:19-20. For this reason we should not draw from the fact that Paul thinks of the world as the object of reconciliation the deduction that reconciliation for him consists exclusively in the removal of the relationship of guilt between man and God, since the world as a whole is not a new creation etc. This would amount to saying that what Paul explicitly calls the ministry of reconciliation and the self-reconciliation of man forms no part of reconciliation. Paul does not say that the world is reconciled (καταλλαγεις). The reconciliation of the world is as little finished as the απoβoγή of the Jews. Both have begun in the cross of Christ, and both are in the course of fulfillment (--> 258). We can call the world reconciled in the Pauline sense only as we anticipate the execution of that which is present in the purpose of God and in the foundation" (p.257, Friedrich Buchsel, ed. Gerhard Kittel).

 

[ClementofA]

On the surface of it - it seems to point to universalism. If that was the only verse we had to shine light on the subject, it would indeed teach universalism.

The same could be said for the verse which seems at first blush to teach the incorrect Mormon doctrine of proxy baptismal salvation for the dead.

But, as you must know, scripture informs scripture (or clear doctrine informs obscure doctrine). Taken as a whole - the scriptures do not teach universal salvation.

For those who complete the reconciliation process in Christ - God does not hold their sins against them. But, as you must know, the process of reconciliation includes personal faith in Christ as Savior (we implore the world to "be reconciled to Christ"). It wasn't a complete salvation when Calvary was done - otherwise there would be no Church age where we preach the gospel to the world.

Even you don't teach that it was a "past tense" reconciliation. Otherwise you wouldn't be talking about a "corrective Hell" (or "purgatory" as some would say the same thing).

It talks about God reconciling the world "in Christ". It says nothing about that particular portion of Christ's work at Calvary being only when and how He accomplished it.

If I told you that I was correcting your faulty doctrine in this post - it would not mean that when I typed the words you see here you were brought to understanding of the error of your doctrine.

It would require that I send out the corrective message on the internet, that you read the corrective message, and that you understood and accepted the corrective message.

In like manner, it is obvious to all who preach the gospel at the command of the Lord, that the full reconciliation was not a done deal at Calvary.

You can't have things both ways. Either say that the reconciliation was completed at Calvary or leave off the preaching of the gospel to the world and leave off your teaching of a "corrective Hell".

Because of the manner the Holy Spirit has chosen to present His truth to us in the scriptures - we don't have the luxury of pointing to a single verse by itself to form doctrine concerning baptism for the dead, salvation by water baptism, transubstantiation, or to refute the idea of the Trinity. Nor do you get to grab a particular verse and build a doctrine of universal salvation for all men and angels.

You should know that by now just as I do (even though I would like universal salvation to be true as much as you do).

Thanks for your thoughtful & extensive commentary, Marvin.

Regarding your comment:

"Even you don't teach that it was a "past tense" reconciliation. Otherwise you wouldn't be talking about a "corrective Hell" (or "purgatory" as some would say the same thing)."

Let's assume for a moment that it was a past tense reconciliation accomplished at the cross, as many Bible commentators & posters take it. How could we make sense of that? That the penalty for all sins of all time has been fully paid for by the blood & death of Jesus? And that this is the guarantee of reconciliation of all, so that in God's eyes it is as good as done? For God "calleth those things which be not as though they were" (Rom.4:17) and declares the end from the beginning (Isa.46:10). Similarly 1 Tim.4:10 say God is - not will be, could be, is potentially - the Saviour of all mankind. This may seem illogical or mysterious, metaphysical, beyond our limited human comprehension that always likes an explanation we can comprehend rather than simply believing God. But do we understand how "all died" or Christ became "sin" (v.14,21), bore our sins, was slain before the world was, how God exists, etc? Romans 5:10 says "while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son". Not reconciled through faith in the death of His Son:

Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
2 Cor.5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
Col.1:20 and through Him to reconcile to Himself all, whether on earth or in heaven, by making peace through the blood of His cross.
2 Cor. 5:19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.
Rom.11:15 For if their rejection brought reconciliation to the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

Returning to your comment:

"Even you don't teach that it was a "past tense" reconciliation. Otherwise you wouldn't be talking about a "corrective Hell" (or "purgatory" as some would say the same thing)."

If Christ actually accomplished reconciliation & salvation for all on the cross, you might ask what then would be the point of "corrective Hell". Perhaps much the same as it was before, to help men come to a point where they realize & believe the salvation Christ effected for them on the cross, thereby coming into the subjective human enjoyment of it, such as in, for example, 1 Cor.5:4-5.

However TDNT offers another perspective of 2 Cor.5:19 (& it is as i see one that may be supportive of universalism):

Another thought is that reconciliation in 2 Cor.5:19-20 is considered by Paul as an "ongoing process" (p.256 of TDNT, Vol.1). The "phrase ήν καταλλασσων in 2 C. 5:19 does not denote a concluded work: "He was present to reconcile the world to Himself"; when and where this work will be concluded is not brought under consideration in 2 C. 5:19-20. For this reason we should not draw from the fact that Paul thinks of the world as the object of reconciliation the deduction that reconciliation for him consists exclusively in the removal of the relationship of guilt between man and God, since the world as a whole is not a new creation etc. This would amount to saying that what Paul explicitly calls the ministry of reconciliation and the self-reconciliation of man forms no part of reconciliation. Paul does not say that the world is reconciled (καταλλαγεις). The reconciliation of the world is as little finished as the απoβoγή of the Jews. Both have begun in the cross of Christ, and both are in the course of fulfillment (--> 258). We can call the world reconciled in the Pauline sense only as we anticipate the execution of that which is present in the purpose of God and in the foundation" (p.257, Friedrich Buchsel, ed. Gerhard Kittel).

 

[Marvin Knox]

Let's assume for a moment that it was a past tense reconciliation accomplished at the cross, as many Bible commentators & posters take it.

I prefer to not assume that.

How could we make sense of that?

I couldn't.

Which is why I could never be a full blown Calvinist.

Romans 5:10 says "while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son". Not reconciled through faith in the death of His Son:

A reconciliation which includes our faith in the death of His Son includes reconciliation through the death of His Son.

If Christ actually accomplished reconciliation & salvation for all on the cross...

I don't believe that - nor have I said that I do.

you might ask what then would be the point of "corrective Hell". Perhaps much the same as it was before, to help men come to a point where they realize & believe the salvation Christ effected for them on the cross, thereby coming into the subjective human enjoyment of it, such as in, for example, 1 Cor.5:4-5.

I would not ask that - because the Bible doesn't teach that the scriptures teach a "corrective Hell".

We have the existence of the church age verified by the scriptures for us. We do not have purgatory or anything like it.

Another thought is that reconciliation in 2 Cor.5:19-20 is considered by Paul as an "ongoing process"

Now that - I consider a more valid doctrine - since it seems that it is played out in our persuading all men we can to be reconciled to God through faith in His Son's death and the fact that non are so reconciled without saving faith - even, I might add, the elect of God.

Absolutely the scriptures teach about a re-conciliatory process which includes the necessary application of saving faith by all men in this life for salvation. Everyone here believes that (I hope) - even the most full blown Calvinist, as I understand it.

What they reject is an application of saving faith which comes after death (and most certainly not after a time in Hell to "get their mind right").

No one wants anyone to have to go to Hell. And everyone I know of wants everyone to be saved in the end.

But no one in their theological right mind believes that people will go to Hell in order to be saved.

 

[jerry kelso]

Great. Then everyone is saved. They just don't know it yet. Reconciliation:

"Definition: reconciliation, restoration to favor.

reconciliation (restoration) as the resulting of Christ exactly (precisely) exchanging His righteousness (blood) for our guilt."

Strong's Greek: 2643. καταλλαγή (katallagé) -- reconciliation

1. Scripture teaches all those who are reconciled shall be saved in His life (Rom.5:10)

and

2. Scripture also teaches the world is reconciled, (Rom.5:10; 11:15; 2 Cor.5:19)

therefore

3. It follows that the world shall be saved in His life.

True or false?

Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

Romans 5:10 says that those who have been reconciled "shall be saved by His life".

Therefore it could be argued that if the world has been reconciled to God (cf. 2 Cor.5:19; Rom.11:15; 5:9-11), then likewise the world also "shall be saved by His life".

2 Cor. 5:19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

Rom.11:15 For if their rejection brought reconciliation to the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?

However this comment seems to make better sense of the passage:

However TDNT offers a solution (& it is as i see it supportive of universalism):

Another thought is that reconciliation in 2 Cor.5:19-20 is considered by Paul as an "ongoing process" (p.256 of TDNT, Vol.1). The "phrase ήν καταλλασσων in 2 C. 5:19 does not denote a concluded work: "He was present to reconcile the world to Himself"; when and where this work will be concluded is not brought under consideration in 2 C. 5:19-20. For this reason we should not draw from the fact that Paul thinks of the world as the object of reconciliation the deduction that reconciliation for him consists exclusively in the removal of the relationship of guilt between man and God, since the world as a whole is not a new creation etc. This would amount to saying that what Paul explicitly calls the ministry of reconciliation and the self-reconciliation of man forms no part of reconciliation. Paul does not say that the world is reconciled (καταλλαγεις). The reconciliation of the world is as little finished as the απoβoγή of the Jews. Both have begun in the cross of Christ, and both are in the course of fulfillment (--> 258). We can call the world reconciled in the Pauline sense only as we anticipate the execution of that which is present in the purpose of God and in the foundation" (p.257, Friedrich Buchsel, ed. Gerhard Kittel).