I was struck by someone else’s claim that the reference in John 12:31, that Jesus is claimed to have said, “I will draw all men / people to myself.”, indicates that John was a universalist; What follows is my response.
The first 3 chapters of Revelation make it really difficult for me to see that John was a Universalist. Not saying for sure now, but I am persuaded that while Paul was a convinced Universalist, Peter, James and John were those Paul described in Galatians as “Goddamned perverts preaching another gospel”.
As a Universalist myself, I falter at using the John 12:31 reference to say what almost all modern versions say it does as neither the word “man” OR the word “people” are even REMOTELY in the original text. This interpretation of this verse was not even a dream until at least 600AD, after the Holy Roman Empire had DE-sainted the last Universalist church father Origen. (Funny that – I thought that the pope was infallible in who he saints).
This whole passage is about Judgement; Judgement is the ONLY subject in discussion. So with due dilligence towards context, greek grammar rules and common sense, IF we are gonna add to what the original verse says in order to more correctly interpret it, then the only possible rendition of this verse would be as follows; “If I be lifted up, I will draw all judgement to my self.” Now I AGREE that by extension, that affects all people / men, but they most certainly are not drawn. According to other passages (1 Cor 15 for example) all people were forcibly constrained into the body of Christ according to the Eternal Council from before the foundations of the world. 😉
Very well put… 🙂
Thank you Jane. This seems to be a big one for grace fans.
Well if we look at sin as a “disease “instead of our actions as my hyper grace teachers 🙂 …Steve McVey…Lee O’Hare…Don Heathly..etc. have been teaching me, this all makes such good God sense!!! My wonderful Savior and friend took all judgment for all time!
No more judgment
Judgement all in the past Marcel, eh?!
Beres do you consider yourself a Universalist or a Redemptionist?
Great question Michael. I define Universalism as an umbrella term for those theologies which declare that, by whatever means, all humanity shall be eventually “saved”, or brought into the Kingdom or find full acceptance by God, by grace, through His faith. It is a term not unlike “Protestants”, which covers many different paradigms. Most of the differences amongst Universalists, revolve around ‘when’ and ‘how’. This is certainly true of the Patristic Church Fathers such as Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa and others, who were fully convinced of the happy end for all humanity but were divided over whether Hell was a purifying means to this end.
So in that sense that Universalism is an umbrella term describing a number of divergent beliefs , yes, I am a committed Universalist.
Within the boundaries of Universalism, we find Redemptionism.
Redemptionism is the doctrine that all of humanity was redeemed through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and that the redemption of all was completed and concluded in Jesus’s resurrection, and that there was no further need for scriptural fulfillment thereafter. Redemptionism, when compared to other branches of Universalism, defines both the ‘how’ and the ‘when’ of the redemption of humanity. The ‘how’ was solely by the faith and actions of Christ, and the ‘when’ is at the death burial and resurrection of Christ.
So the bottom line is that I consider myself a Universalist of the Redemptionism variety.
In fact, it is a lot like my dog illustration , all poodles are dogs but not all dogs are poodles. All Redemptionists are Universalists but not all Universalists are Redemptionists lol
Great explanation, Thanks Beres