Is the Calvinist God too small?

[cygnusx1]

See above. I honestly think you can make an argument for both from scripture. I do wish I could find a scholar/preacher to explain the passages in 1 Cor 15 and Romans 5 to me. Before you say it, I don't want to ask my own pastor.

Jackie

Hi Jackie , the answer you seek concerning 1 Cor 15 and Romans 5 will not be found in Universalism , but you will find the answer in Federalism .

Many Christians think that the second Adam , Christ , is the head of all humanity as Adam "was" ........ they insist that these texts teach a reconciliation has taken place for all men , meaning that the dispensation of Adam (all men viewed as in Adam ) is finished! , and that through Christ , immortality is now placed upon all men , the assumption being that all men are mortal , and can only be made immortal by the work of Christ ........ this literally means that Christ's death both saves and makes all men immortal and capable of going to hell . That is the Orthodox view.

The Reformed view is that there are two heads constant , Christ is the Father of all the elect , Adam is the father of all the fallen. This continues simultainiously forever. The reconciliation of 'all' , is all the elect , only they are reconciled to God , and they must and will receive this reconciliation.
The Church are members of Christ and have always been in Christ (Ephesians 1) , yet the Lord suffered the Elect to be subsequently created in Adam so that after the fall they would be the objects of Redemption . While it is true that the elect viewed as fallen in Adam are like others "children of wrath" , it is also true that unlike others they have always been loved.

hope this helped , I am too tired at present but more about federalism later , God willing!

 

[Imblessed]

that's a really good explanation Cygnus.....thanks.

 

[cygnusx1]

that's a really good explanation Cygnus.....thanks.

thanks sister ......... God Bless

 

[heymikey80]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=case%2Bagainst%2Bhell

1 Cor 15:22-You could argue that only the elect are "in Christ", but are not all in Adam? How can Adam's fall be more significant (affect more people) than Christ's victory?

Well, essentially because humans are not the be-all and end-all of the entire universe. Our modern theology seems to focus Christian thought all around our salvation. What if that's one side -- but not all -- of the redemption of the world?

Calvinism tends to maximize the freedom of God. As such we can't restrain God to save everyone, or to intend everyone's salvation. It simply isn't stated in Scripture.

Now, you can find all sorts of people alleging all sorts of things about the verses. In general some of their critiques about the modern view of Hell are valid. But what they're establishing in its place doesn't seem to fit Scripture, either. The argument goes, "There's something wrong with the theology of Hell because of xx. We know why: because punishment in Hell isn't eternal." But establishing the finite existence of eternal punishment isn't exactly stable, either.

The argument is admittedly dependent on a problem with the modern theology of Hell. But when it seeks to build a solid foundation from Scripture ... that foundation isn't terribly stable. It's based on human preferences for universal salvation. And that's very hard to establish in Scripture.

 

[aisling7]

Well, essentially because humans are not the be-all and end-all of the entire universe. Our modern theology seems to focus Christian thought all around our salvation. What if that's one side -- but not all -- of the redemption of the world?

Calvinism tends to maximize the freedom of God. As such we can't restrain God to save everyone, or to intend everyone's salvation. It simply isn't stated in Scripture.

Now, you can find all sorts of people alleging all sorts of things about the verses. In general some of their critiques about the modern view of Hell are valid. But what they're establishing in its place doesn't seem to fit Scripture, either. The argument goes, "There's something wrong with the theology of Hell because of xx. We know why: because punishment in Hell isn't eternal." But establishing the finite existence of eternal punishment isn't exactly stable, either.

The argument is admittedly dependent on a problem with the modern theology of Hell. But when it seeks to build a solid foundation from Scripture ... that foundation isn't terribly stable. It's based on human preferences for universal salvation. And that's very hard to establish in Scripture.

I already conceded that. I admitted that to judge Adam's work as more significant based on human values was wrong. However, no one addressed the parallel of Romans 5:19 and 1 Cor 15:22, until Cygnus replied. He makes some good points, but I object to "the many" being equated with the elect. Aren't the elect usually referred to as the few?

Jackie

 

[heymikey80]

I already conceded that. I admitted that to judge Adam's work as more significant based on human values was wrong. However, no one addressed the parallel of Romans 5:19 and 1 Cor 15:22, until Cygnus replied. He makes some good points, but I object to "the many" being equated with the elect. Aren't the elect usually referred to as the few?

Well, "many" is relative to the subject. In Romans 5 that comparison is made versus "the one". So by "the one" Jesus, "the many" Christians are made righteous.

There's no statement of Paul's contrasting the extent of Adam's "many" with Jesus' "many". That's where you get the relative statement of "many" called vs. "few" chosen.

In 1 Cor 15:22, although you're looking at the actual order of the Greek words in most translations, it doesn't hit most English readers that Greek word order means something different than in English. English has to qualify "all" by postfixing -- "all of those in Jerusalem", while Greek rarely does: "of those in Jerusalem all came out to see". And when you put that alternate in, what Paul intends to say becomes clearer: "For just as all in Adam die, so also all in Christ will be made alive."