As the saying goes, “a text without a context is a pretext for a prooftext”. Taking a biblical passage out of its original context does a great disservice to both the original writer and the reader. Unfortunately, many universalists are accused of doing exactly this when it comes to universalist prooftexts like Romans 5:18 and 1 Timothy 4:10. Because of this, I would like to show why that claim is absolutely false, and that the vast majority of universalist texts are strengthened, not weakened, by their context.
Romans 5:18 in its context
because of this, even as through one man the sin did enter into the world, and through the sin the death; and thus to all men the death did pass through, for that all did sin; for till law sin was in the world: and sin is not reckoned when there is not law; but the death did reign from Adam till Moses, even upon those not having sinned in the likeness of Adam’s transgression, who is a type of him who is coming. But, not as the offence so also [is] the free gift; for if by the offence of the one the many did die, much more did the grace of God, and the free gift in grace of the one man Jesus Christ, abound to the many; and not as through one who did sin [is] the free gift, for the judgment indeed [is] of one to condemnation, but the gift [is] of many offences to a declaration of ‘Righteous,’ for if by the offence of the one the death did reign through the one, much more those, who the abundance of the grace and of the free gift of the righteousness are receiving, in life shall reign through the one — Jesus Christ. So, then, as through one offence to all men [it is] to condemnation, so also through one declaration of “Righteous” [it is] to all men to justification of life; for as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners: so also through the obedience of the one, shall the many be constituted righteous. (Rom. 5:12-19)
Paul’s main point in Romans 5, and especially in this passage, is how much greater in power and extent Christ’s righteous act was than Adam’s sin. For, as he goes on to say, “where the sin did abound, the grace did overabound” (Rom. 5:20). As should be obvious, rather than limiting the “all men” who receive justification of life, the surrounding parallelisms actually strengthen the conclusion that, indeed, all of humanity has received justification. The same amount who, by Adam’s sin, died (vv. 15), were condemned (vv. 16, 18), and were made sinners (v. 19), by Christ’s righteous act have received abundant grace (vv. 15), been declared righteous (vv. 16, 19), and been justified (v. 18). Because the first category includes all people, the second category does as well, through parallelism.
This interpretation is sometimes contested on the grounds that verse 17 contradicts it by limiting the number of those justified to “those who... are receiving the free gift of righteousness”. However, there is nothing in this verse to suggest that the number of those who are receiving righteousness is any less than all people; to suggest this is to read one’s own preconceptions into the text. Nothing in the context limits “the many” and “all men” who are justified to anything less than “the many” and “all men” who are affected by Adam’s sin, which is all of humanity without exception. To suggest that not all people will be justified is to say that not all people are sinners and affected by mortality, which goes against both scripture and common sense (and comes dangerously close to the ancient heresy of Pelagianism).
1 Corinthians 15:20-28 in its context
This passage has already been dealt with in detail, in a previous extensive exegesis of mine which demonstrates that the salvation of all is clearly in view within this passage. In fact, this is likely the strongest evidence for Pauline universalism, as it emphatically refutes both infernalism and annihilationism, while upholding universalism.
2 Corinthians 5:14 in its context
for the love of the Christ doth constrain us, having judged thus: that if one for all died, then the whole died, and for all he died, that those living, no more to themselves may live, but to him who died for them, and was raised again. So that we henceforth have known no one according to the flesh, and even if we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know him no more; so that if any one [is] in Christ — [he is] a new creature; the old things did pass away, lo, become new have the all things. And the all things [are] of God, who reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and did give to us the ministration of the reconciliation, how that God was in Christ — a world reconciling to Himself, not reckoning to them their trespasses; and having put in us the word of the reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:14-19)
A superficial reading of v. 14, bolded above, seems to demonstrate that all people have died [to sin] in Christ, and so are already justified (Rom. 6:5-7). This also makes sense of Rom. 6:11, in which Paul does not say that we ourselves must die to sin, but that we merely need to recognize that we are already dead to sin. However, many non-universalists (especially Calvinists) argue that v. 15 limits the scope of the “all” in v. 14 only to those who are living for Christ, that is, believers.
However, this is not actually what Paul says in this verse. In v. 15, the verb “to live” is in the subjunctive mood, which describes an ideal situation rather than an actual situation. Paul’s point here is that because Christ died for all people, all people should live for Christ; however, he recognizes that this is unfortunately not the case. Indeed, the fact that this verb is in the subjunctive mood demonstrates that there must be at least some of those for whom Christ died that are not living for Christ, which increases the scope of the “all” in v. 14 (those for whom Christ died) beyond just believers.
In a similar manner, the contrast between v. 19 and v. 20 also demonstrates an ideal vs. an actual situation. Verse 19 states that Christ has conciliated the cosmos to Himself (albeit proleptically, as this has not been fully realized yet; Rom. 8:21 cf. Col. 1:20), whereas verse 20 exhorts believers to beseech others to be conciliated to God, in anticipation of that ideal state when all things will indeed be reconciled. Furthermore, we are told that Christ is “not reckoning to them their trespasses”, and yet he has “put in us the word of the conciliation” - the first group is clearly distinguished from the second group (believers), which means that God is not reckoning unbelievers’ trespasses either. Therefore, these universalist prooftexts from this passage (both vv. 14 and 19) are absolutely unqualified by their contexts.
Philippians 2:10-11 in context
For, let this mind be in you that [is] also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, thought [it] not robbery to be equal to God, but did empty himself, the form of a servant having taken, in the likeness of men having been made, and in fashion having been found as a man, he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death — death even of a cross, wherefore, also, God did highly exalt him, and gave to him a name that [is] above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee may bow — of heavenlies, and earthlies, and what are under the earth — and every tongue may confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Php. 2:5-11)
The scope of this passage is not limited by the context, and the majority of non-universalists recognize that this indeed refers to all people. It is sometimes argued that Php. 1:28 and 3:19, which describe the destruction of those who are opposed to the truth, limit the scope of those who will voluntarily worship Christ; however, no scriptural universalist argues that God will not judge and condemn, instead, it is believed that everyone will again turn to Him after their condemnation. Because whoever confesses the Lord Jesus and believes that He has been raised from the dead will be saved (Rom. 10:9-10), if all people meet these conditions, then all will be saved.
There are two primary non-universalist objections to this reading of the passage. First, some object that the verbs “to bow” and “to confess” are in the subjunctive mood (see above), and so represent an ideal situation rather than an actual situation. This is true, but it ignores that this passage is actually a quotation of an Old Testament passage (Isa. 45:23), where these verbs are in the indicative mood in the LXX. In fact, in the original context, the statement “every knee will bow to me and every tongue will confess to God” is a decree of YHWH himself; God Himself will make sure that this event comes to pass. Why, then, did Paul purposely misquote and reapply this Old Testament passage? His point was most likely that, because Christ has been exalted so highly, all people should bow to and worship Him, and so God will cause this to come to pass (per Isa. 45:23).
The second objection is that the ‘subjection of all things to Christ’ which is in view here is not voluntary, but a forced recognition of Jesus’ lordship over all. However, this goes against Isa. 29:13-14, which states that YHWH hates those who worship Him with their lips, though their hearts are far removed from Him; God would not allow all unbelievers to falsely worship Him in this way. Similarly, the immediate context of the Old Testament passage which Paul quotes in Php. 2:10-11 states that the people will say, “Only in YHWH do I have righteousness and strength” (Isa. 45:24). Does this sound like the cry of someone who is being condemned and trodden down upon by God, or someone who is being uplifted and saved?
Similarly, elsewhere in the Pauline epistles, the theme of Christ’s subjection of all things is connected to reconciliation, not judgment. 1 Cor. 15:27 describes the subjection of all in the context of the final resurrection and universal salvation, while Eph. 1:22 connects the subjection of all under Christ’s feet to the same subjection by which He is head of the Church, namely, reconciliation. Therefore, all three of the non-universalist counter-readings of Php. 2:10-11 fail upon further examination of the context, leaving only the universalist interpretation.
Colossians 1:20 in its context
Giving thanks to the Father who did make us meet for the participation of the inheritance of the saints in the light, who did rescue us out of the authority of the darkness, and did translate [us] into the reign of the Son of His love, in whom we have the redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of the sins, who is the image of the invisible God, first-born of all creation, because in him were the all things created, those in the heavens, and those upon the earth, those visible, and those invisible, whether thrones, whether lordships, whether principalities, whether authorities; all things through him, and for him, have been created, and himself is before all, and the all things in him have consisted. And himself is the head of the body — the assembly — who is a beginning, a first-born out of the dead, that he might become in all [things] — himself — first, because in him it did please all the fulness to tabernacle, and through him to reconcile the all things to himself — having made peace through the blood of his cross — through him, whether the things upon the earth, whether the things in the heavens. (Col. 1:12-20)
Non-universalists usually take two routes to argue that this passage does not teach universalism: first, they often argue that the “all” in v. 20 is not all-encompassing and does not include unbelievers, and second, they often argue that “reconcile” in v. 20 can also mean to merely ‘subjugate’. This first argument, that the “all things” does not include unbelievers, is shown to be false by the context where this “all” is clearly defined. It is defined as all of those things which have been created through and for Christ, and over which He is preeminent; all things both in the heavens and upon the earth. To argue that the “all things” which will be reconciled to Christ does not include unbelievers is to say that He is not truly Lord over unbelievers. This is clearly not a sustainable position, as Jesus says, “Given to me was all authority in heaven and on earth“ (Matt. 28:18).
The other option for non-universalists, to argue that the word “reconcile” can include the meaning ‘to subjugate’, is absolutely false. Paul uses this word (καταλασσω or αποκαταλασσω in Greek) to mean the common definition of ‘reconcile’, to be transferred from a state of enmity to a state of friendship, every time that he uses it.
for if, being enemies, we have been reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved in his life. (Rom. 5:10)
but and if she may separate, let her remain unmarried, or to the husband let her be reconciled, and let not a husband send away a wife. (1 Cor. 7:11)
and might reconcile both in one body to God through the cross, having slain the enmity in it (Eph. 2:16)
See also 2 Cor. 5:18-20, quoted above. Clearly, Paul did not consider this word to mean mere subjugation, but instead to come to a state of friendship. Furthermore, the immediate context of Col. 1:20 glosses ‘reconcile’ as “to make peace through the blood of His cross” - this cannot be understood as mere subjugation, by any means. As Paul goes on to say, we ourselves (as the Church) have been reconciled to “present [ourselves] holy and unblemished and blameless”, just as all things will eventually be reconciled; are we merely subjugated to Christ? Obviously not. Therefore, both non-universalist counter-readings of this verse are clearly refuted by the context.
As an analogy, imagine that someone is telling you about what they and four friends did today. They say, “We all went to the supermarket, and then we all went out to lunch, and then we all came home.” No reasonable person could conclude from that statement that only one of them actually came home, or that ‘to come home’ actually means ‘to stay away from home’. In the same way, when Paul says that “Christ is the firstborn [most preeminent] of all things, and all things were made through Him and for Him, and He will reconcile all things”, no one can reasonably conclude that the final “all things” is actually only one-tenth or less of the first “all things”, or that ‘to reconcile’ means ‘to not reconcile’.
1 Thessalonians 5:10 in context
so, then, we may not sleep as also the others, but watch and be sober, for those sleeping, by night do sleep, and those making themselves drunk, by night are drunken, and we, being of the day — let us be sober, putting on a breastplate of faith and love, and an helmet — a hope of salvation, because God did not appoint us to anger, but to the acquiring of salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who did die for us, that whether we wake — whether we sleep — together with him we may live; wherefore, comfort ye one another, and build ye up, one the one, as also ye do. (1 Thess. 5:6-11)
This is one of the few passages that explicitly recognizes that unbelievers will both be judged and, eventually, be reconciled and saved as well. At the start of this chapter in vv. 1 - 5, Paul begins by describing the Day of the Lord in which unbelievers (sons of the night and darkness) will be destroyed and shall not escape, contrasted with believers (sons of light and the day). He then goes on to further contrast unbelievers, who are ‘sleeping’ and thereby unaware of Christ’s advent, and believers, who are ‘awake’ in the day and thereby aware of and preparing for Christ’s coming. And yet, Paul says, “whether we wake [or] whether we sleep, together with Him we may live” (1 Thess. 5:10), a clear statement that both believers and unbelievers will be reconciled to Christ.
A common non-universalist objection to this reading is that it could be referring to “those who have fallen asleep”, that is, dead believers (1 Thess. 4:13), which would mean that Paul did not have the reconciliation of unbelievers in mind here. However, a different Greek word is used to describe dead believers (κοιμαομαι) versus unbelievers (καθευδω), and the word used to describe unbelievers is the one that appears here. Therefore, it is absolutely clear that Paul is saying that those who are of night and sleep, upon whom destruction will come (unbelievers), will also be reconciled to live together with Christ.
1 Timothy 2:4-6 in context
I exhort, then, first of all, there be made supplications, prayers, intercessions, thanksgivings, for all men: for kings, and all who are in authority, that a quiet and peaceable life we may lead in all piety and gravity, for this [is] right and acceptable before God our Saviour, who doth will all men to be saved, and to come to the full knowledge of the truth; for one [is] God, one also [is] mediator of God and of men, the man Christ Jesus, who did give himself a ransom for all — the testimony in its own times — in regard to which I was set a preacher and apostle — truth I say in Christ, I do not lie — a teacher of nations, in faith and truth. (1 Tim. 2:1-7)
These verses are interpreted differently by Calvinists, Arminians, and universalists. The Calvinist interpretation argues that the “all” here, whom God wills to be saved and for whom Christ died as a ransom, only includes believers and no others. However, the context clearly refutes this view, as Paul states in v. 2 that those for whom we should pray includes “kings and all who are in authority” - this epistle was written when Nero, a pagan and infamous persecutor of Christians, was emperor of Rome. If Paul was including even Nero in those whom God wills to be saved and for whom Christ died a ransom, then clearly it does not only include believers.
The Arminian view of this passage argues that, yes, God does will all to be saved and Christ died as a ransom for all people, but this ransom does not truly affect you unless you make the correct choice to believe in this life only. However, this goes against the clear teaching of scripture that Christ’s sacrifice was both sufficient and efficacious for every person whom He died for. We are told in Col. 2:13-14 that those for whom Christ died have been fully forgiven all their trespasses, and every single ordinance against us has been taken away; in 2 Cor. 5:21 and Gal. 3:13, that Christ became sin and a curse in order to free us from sin and the curse of the Law; and furthermore, the very word ‘ransom’ in 1 Tim. 2:6, αντιλυτρον, literally means ‘in-place-of [αντι] ransom-price [λυτρον]’, which implies that the debt of sin has already been paid through Christ for all.
The final interpretation is the universalist reading, which argues that both all people (regardless of current belief or unbelief) are in view in this passage and that God’s will and Christ’s sacrifice are fully efficacious. This is the only reading which stands up to scrutiny when these verses are examined in context.
1 Timothy 4:10 in context
These things placing before the brethren, thou shalt be a good ministrant of Jesus Christ, being nourished by the words of the faith, and of the good teaching, which thou didst follow after, and the profane and old women’s fables reject thou, and exercise thyself unto piety, for the bodily exercise is unto little profit, and the piety is to all things profitable, a promise having of the life that now is, and of that which is coming; stedfast [is] the word, and of all acceptation worthy: for for this we both labour and are reproached, because we hope on the living God, who is Saviour of all men — especially of those believing. Charge these things, and teach (1 Tim. 4:6-11)
This is one of the few universalist passages where it cannot be argued that the “all men” refers to only believers (although in the other passages, it is usually ruled out by the context; see above), as “those believing” are explicitly a subset (“especially”) of those for whom God is Savior. There are only two possible arguments for non-universalists to make: first, that “Savior” may merely mean ‘helper’ and not literally ‘savior’, and second, that “especially” really means ‘exclusively’. The first objection can be easily refuted, because every single time that the word ‘savior’ (σωτηρ) is used in the New Testament (out of 24 times), it is used in the literal sense of the word, that is, someone who brings about salvation.
The second objection is also just as easily refuted, as the word ‘especially’ (μαλιστα) is never used in Paul’s epistles to mean ‘exclusively’, but always in the usual sense of the word ‘especially’. In Galatians 6:10, he says that we should work good towards all people, but especially towards believers; in Philippians 4:22, “greet all the saints, especially those in Caesar’s household”; in 1 Timothy 5:17, the elders are to be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who strive in the scriptures; and in 2 Timothy 4:13, Paul wants Timothy to bring him his cloak along with the books, especially the parchments; in Titus 1:10, there are many empty talkers, especially those of the circumcision.
Universalists agree that believers will obtain a special salvation above that of unbelievers, called ‘age-during life’ in the New Testament (which essentially amounts to an early salvation and the privilege of living in the kingdom of God); but this does not change the fact that God is still Savior of all men, especially (not exclusively) of believers. Therefore, this verse is not weakened by the context, but proves that God truly will save all people, regardless of their current belief in Him.
Titus 2:11 in context
For the saving grace of God was manifested to all men, teaching us, that denying the impiety and the worldly desires, soberly and righteously and piously we may live in the present age, waiting for the blessed hope and manifestation of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, who did give himself for us, that he might ransom us from all lawlessness, and might purify to himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works; these things be speaking, and exhorting, and convicting, with all charge; let no one despise thee! (Titus 2:11-15)
Like the other passages considered above, the main non-universalist counter-reading of this passage is an argument that “all men” does not actually refer to every single human without exception, but rather only to believers. This is primarily based on the statement in v. 12 that those for whom the grace of God was manifested live piously in the present age and deny worldly desires. However, like in 2 Cor. 5:14-19, the verb “to live” is in the subjunctive mood, which describes an ideal situation; because the grace of God appeared to all men, all people should live piously and anticipate the appearance of Jesus Christ, but unfortunately this is not the case.
In fact, the very fact that some people for whom the grace of God appeared are not denying impiety and living righteously (because it is an ideal, not an actual situation) demonstrates that the “all men” in v. 11 cannot refer to merely believers, but includes at least some unbelievers as well. Therefore, the universalist reading is not weakened but strengthened by the immediate context.
Conclusion
There are a large number of passages in Paul’s epistles which suggest that he believed in universalism. Taken together, these demonstrate that all people without exception have been justified, conciliated, and (in God’s eyes) made righteous, and that all people will eventually be resurrected to immortality and reconciled to God. The context of each of these passages demonstrates that they cannot be simply referring to believers, but truly to all of humanity; all non-universalist counter-readings of these passages fail to stand up to scrutiny. We can be absolutely certain that Paul was a full universalist and preached universal salvation.
No comments:
Post a Comment