The Narrow Path Ministries

I do not recall the following statement of Jesus ever being mentioned in our long discussion of universalism. It would seem to clearly rule out any possibility of post-resurrection conversions:

John 6:37-40 (New King James Version)
37. All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. 38. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39. This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. 40. And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”

If all (the total number, "the strongest expression of totality" according to John Peter Lange) that the father has foreknown and given to Jesus will be resurrected at the last day, how can there be any conversions to follow? According to Vincent, the "all that" in v.37 is neuter singular indicating all believers as one complete whole. We see this corporate body again referenced by Jesus in John 17:

John 17:2 (New King James Version)
2. as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him.

John 17:20-26 (New King James Version)

20. “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21. that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: 23. I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.

24. “Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. 25. O righteous Father! The world has not known You, but I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me. 26. And I have declared to them Your name, and will declare it, that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.”

If universalism is true, Jesus' statement is very difficult to understand. What would be the point of His repeated reference to those the Father has given him, if everyone is "given" Him? And their being raised up, having eternal life, if universalism is true?

Homer,

Apart from the question of universalism, it is my understanding that the phrase "those that the Father has given me" is a reference to the faithful Israelite remnant in Christ's generation—of whom He says elsewhere—"They were yours [the Father's] and you gave them to me" (John 17:6). The fact that those that the Father gave to Christ were people who already belonged to the Father requires that these be identified with those who, prior to their encounter with Jesus, were already of the believing remnant who belonged to God (Mal.3:16-17). The remnant were always those in Israel who received the witness of the contemporary prophets of their day, and it is not surprising that the remnant in Jesus' day would follow Jesus. I understand Jesus' words to suggest that the Father not only allowed these people to recognize Jesus as another prophet from God, but that He had actually transferred "ownership" of this remnant to Christ, as their Lord.

When I pointed this out to James White, his reaction was the same as might be that of many non-Calvinists: "You mean to tell me that Jesus only makes these promises to a few Jewish people of a single generation in the past?"

My answer is: In these passages, yes. That was the group (a few Jewish people of His own generation) that Jesus was addressing, wasn't it? He mentions nothing, one way or another, about any future generations. He uses the past tense—"the Father has given me." Those that the Father might add to that group in the future are not, in these statements, mentioned.

Of course, the promises would apply to anyone else (the branches later grafted in with the remnant) as well. He is not specifically intending to limit His statements to those ones that were currently believing in Him (as though later believers would be excluded from such promises). He is simply not addressing a situation that might develop at some future point (i.e., the conversion of Gentiles). He is addressing the situation that He and His listeners were in. They were Jews—some of them of the believing remnant, and some not. His comments applied to those who were of that remnant, and served to make a distinction between their destiny and that of the unbelieving Jews, who were also in the crowd.

Later writings, written after the conversion and inclusion of Gentiles, clearly extend the same destiny to believers of any race.

Your question about universalism, though, does not take into consideration that these verses in John 6 do not discuss anything that may occur subsequent to the resurrection—and that is the point where universalists would have something distinctive to say. They believe that, after the resurrection—even in the lake of fire—there will be conversions.

Your question about universalism, though, does not take into consideration that these verses in John 6 do not discuss anything that may occur subsequent to the resurrection—and that is the point where universalists would have something distinctive to say. They believe that, after the resurrection—even in the lake of fire—there will be conversions.
steve







Yes and Jesus prayed "that the world may believe that you sent me" so this indicates that Jesus wants the world to believe, so the issue is whether God will answer his prayer and he will indeed be what scripture called him "the Savior of the world."