Like Button

Wednesday, September 14, 2022

Come, Let Us Reason Together

In Christendom there have always been voices that argued, "Everyone gets saved in the end." It's called "Universalism" and, as it turns out, it is not not biblical. That is, while a lot of people have pet doctrines devised primarily from personal preferences, this one can be traced to the Bible. But ... is it true?

One of the most puzzling texts that we find on this is in Paul's first letter to Timothy.
For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe. (1 Tim 4:10)
Now, remember, we want to be true to the text, not simply our traditions. So what do we make of the phrase that says that God "is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe"? Well, the obvious first choice is "If He is the Savior of all people, then all people are saved. End of story." But most believers will balk at that, primarily from the rest of Scripture that includes a lot about eternal torment. Jesus spoke more about that than He did about heaven. It is throughout the New Testament, literally from Matthew through Revelation. If all of that is wrong, then we have a real problem. But what about the text? Isn't that what it says? I would argue, "Not quite." If Paul intended to convey that God is the Savior of all men, then what does the next phrase mean? In what sense is it "especially of those who believe"? If we're all saved, how is "those who believe" in any sense special? That doesn't make sense.

So, those who hold to the whole of Scripture will argue, "No, it can't mean Universalism because the rest of Scripture is quite clear that not all are saved. Jesus was exceptionally clear on that (Matt 7:13-14)." These, then, most commonly add a word to the text (or, rather, to the intent) -- "potentially." Paul is saying here that God is the potential Savior of all men, but the actual Savior of those who believe. You see, then, how they incorporated that "especially of those who believe" into their argument. It is special for those who believe because they are actually saved. I'd say a solid majority see it this way. My only problem is, if Paul intended to say that God was the potential Savior of all men but didn't actually save all men, then the first phrase is meaningless ... at best. To the majority (those who do not believe), He isn't the Savior at all. Like the ponzi schemer who tells you, "Invest with me and I will make you rich" and, in the end, makes no one rich because he meant "potentially." I have a problem with that. Maybe that is the explanation, but I have a problem with it.

There is another possibility. Consider. Just two chapters before Paul used the same word. "Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control" (1 Tim 2:15). Now, clearly, Paul is not talking about a different means of salvation for women and men. "Men are saved by faith, but women become right with God by means of having babies." Nonsense. That's why the NASB translates it "women will be preserved through the bearing of children." "Saved" doesn't always mean "saved from sin," "saved from God's wrath," that kind of "saved." It can mean "saved" in any sense. So what if Paul is saying, "God is the Savior of all men" in the sense that God saves all men in a general sense? God gives all of us life, all of us breath, allows all of us to live. "In Him we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28). That kind of "save." Preserved. Continue to live. In this case, that "especially" takes on a different meaning. God preserves the life of all mankind, but saves eternally believers. He saves all in the physical, temporal sense, but saves believers both in the physical and eternal, spiritual sense.

I think that makes the most sense. I think that takes the text itself -- both phrases -- and makes sense. I think that takes all the Scriptures into account and comes to a coherent conclusion. It doesn't nullify Jesus's warnings about eternal torment, for instance, but it still makes this "saved" special for believers. But, hey, that's just me. You may come to a different conclusion. Just make sure it is coherent.

3 comments:

David said...

What about meaning that God is the only savior of all men? He's the only one available, there are no other saviors. He is also the savior to those who believe because they are actually saved.

Stan said...

I understand that, but that still falls in the "potential" category in the sense that "all men" are not saved, so He is the only potential Savior for all men. I think "Preserver" works better here, but it's not a hill I'll die on.

Craig said...

Excellent point.