Paul's Universalism

Post by **_Paidion** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 9:44 am

The following URL points to Chapter 5 of Thomas Talbott's The Inescapable Love of God. The chapter is titled St. Paul's Universalism.

Several other chapters also are available for free download.

Paul's Universalism

Please comment freely.

Post by **_darin-houston** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 10:18 am

Looks interesting -- I'll read it further later, but he doesn't appear to address annihilationist view at all -- he criticizes eternal torment et al., but I tend to think annihilation answers some of the issues he addresses.

Post by **_Michelle** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 10:41 am

Darin, this is probably totally inappropriate to interject here, but when I read your posts, sometimes I seem to imagine your son saying your words because of his darling picture in your avatar.

Post by **_darin-houston** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 10:44 am

Michelle wrote:Darin, this is probably totally inappropriate to interject here, but when I read your posts, sometimes I seem to imagine your son saying your words because of his darling picture in your avatar.

Then my evil plan is a success! I think I need to change to a newer one, too - standby.

Post by **_Paidion** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 7:50 pm

In most of the chapter, Talbott quoted such passages as:

“And through him God was pleased to reconcile to
himself all things”

and went on to show that "all" meant "all" of the class of humans.

How could annihilation answer this "issue"? If over 99% of humanity is annihilated, then surely far from "all" will be reconciled to God.

Post by **_darin-houston** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 9:01 pm

Paidion wrote:How could annihilation answer this "issue"? If over 99% of humanity is annihilated, then surely far from "all" will be reconciled to God.

Perhaps all who "are" in the end will be reconciled and those who are annihilated will cease to be?

Post by **_TK** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 9:35 pm

what does "reconcile" mean in the verse quoted?

I found this definition(s):

1 a: to restore to friendship or harmony <reconciled> b: settle, resolve <reconcile>
2: to make consistent or congruous <reconcile>
3: to cause to submit to or accept something unpleasant <was>
4 a: to check (a financial account) against another for accuracy b: to account for
intransitive verb

Paidion- you seem to believe that definition 1 is what Paul is talking about; is it possible he is not?

TK

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Sat Aug 09, 2008 7:01 am

and went on to show that "all" meant "all" of the class of humans.

How could annihilation answer this "issue"? If over 99% of humanity is annihilated, then surely far from "all" will be reconciled to God.

But can't "all" be hyperbole for "many" or "majority"?

Post by **_Homer** » Sat Aug 09, 2008 12:17 pm

What are the "things" Paul speaks of in Colossians 1?

Colossians 1:9-23

9. For this reason we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding; 10. that you may walk worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing Him, being fruitful in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God; 11. strengthened with all might, according to His glorious power, for all patience and longsuffering with joy; 12. giving thanks to the Father who has qualified us to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in the light. 13. He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, 14. in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.
15. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18. And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.
19. For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, 20. and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.
21. And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled 22. in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight— 23. if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

It seems obvious from verses 16-17 that Paul has in mind all of creation that exists, visible and invisible: air, water vapor, rocks, trees, insects, animals, people, etc., etc. Are we to believe that every insect or bacterium that ever existed will be "resurrected"? By what manner of exegesis do you determine that Paul has in mind every person who has ever lived, and them alone? Or is Paul speaking of a different kind of reconciliation: the restoration of creation to the state that existed prior to the fall?

And doesn't verses 22-23 indicate that our reconciliation depends on our being in Him and remaining "faithful till death"?

Another thing to consider: if people are anihilated they do not exist - there is nothing to reconcile.

Post by **_darin-houston** » Sat Aug 09, 2008 12:43 pm

Homer wrote:And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled

Also, why after dealing with "all things" would he say "and you...reconciled" unless things are different than the people themselves ? I suppose it could be a literary device for emphasis, but it does at least open the possibility that "all things" doesn't relate to the souls of people, but to something more esoteric like systems and the like.

Another thing to consider: if people are anihilated they do not exist - there is nothing to reconcile.

Yes, I think that's the point I was "trying" to make.