Byrnesys Blabberings

I dont want to run through the regular arguments of Universalism, there are many sources for that and many that are far more eloquent in their description than I could hope to be.

In essense Universalism is the belief that in the infinality of existence, God will indeed save all, whether or not they professed faith or any other catergory which you might hold to be evidence for being part of the elect.

When I originally read Barth in CDII/2 I felt uncomfortable at his departure from the orthodox understanding of election, this departure is commonly considered to lead him to a form of Universalism (though it is important to enforce that he is not guilty of the form Universalism he insistently denied) and I had to really try to discern what it was that made this ‘hope’ so abrasive and unnerving to me.

Although I think there are probably many good arguments against Universal salvation, and Barth’s doctrine of election, not least that it works to dillute our ability to have an assurance of salvation, I realised that it was not really my conscience seeking to defend historical orthodoxy. Rather the Abrasion and uncomfortableness I felt reading Barth was the same reaction and abrasion found in Luke 15 by the prodigal sons brother:

  20 So he got up and went to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him.

    21 The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’

    22 But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet.

    23 Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate.

    24 For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate.

    25 Meanwhile, the older son was in the field. When he came near the house, he heard music and dancing.

    26 So he called one of the servants and asked him what was going on.

    27 ‘Your brother has come,’ he replied, ‘and your father has killed the fattened calf because he has him back safe and sound.’

    28 The older brother became angry and refused to go in. So his father went out and pleaded with him.

    29 But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends.

    30 But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’

    31 ‘My son,’ the father said, ‘you are always with me, and everything I have is yours.

    32 But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’

Whatever our arguments against Universal Salvation we should be careful that we do not limit the Grace that has been so freely poured over us, thinking that in some way our decisions or works have reconcilled us with the Father…that would be a huge error. Our pride creeps in telling us that the sacrifices or works of our lives for Christ has somehow earned us our election in Christ, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. How ever much we disagree with doctrines of election which result in a Universal Salvation we should keep ourselves in check that we have not become the brother of the prodigal son and that we live with the same desire that God has in 1Timothy 2:4

 3This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,

 4who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

 5For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.