8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

1/14

Week 12, Session 1

Dr. Mark E. Hardgrove, Professor

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

2/14

Be sure to read both theassigned Geisler reading andthe book chapters posted as

articles by Dr. Hardgrove.

Geisler, Vol. 3, chapters 12-13

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

3/14

Geisler, Norman Vol. 3Geisler, Norman Vol. 3Chapter 12Chapter 12

The Extent ofThe Extent ofSalvationSalvation

(Limited or Unlimited(Limited or UnlimitedAtonement)Atonement)pp. 347-388pp. 347-388

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

4/14

Limited or UnlimitedLimited or Unlimited

AtonementAtonementStrong Calvinists argue for limited atonement,

which means that salvation is only availablefor those elect which God has predestined tobe saved. The rest are predestined to be lost.

Moderate Calvinists, Wesleyans, and most other

Orthodox Christians teach unlimitedatonement, which means that salvation isavailable to everyone, but applied only tothose who respond in faith to Gods grace.

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

5/14

Essentialism vs.Essentialism vs.

VoluntarismVoluntarismVoluntarism, in which the doctrine of limited

atonement is rooted, insists that something isright because God wills it; that is, God decidessomething is right, and then it is right.

Essentialism, declares that God wills

something because it is right; that is it isalready in accord with His unchanging nature.

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

6/14

Voluntarism as defense for LimitedVoluntarism as defense for Limited

AtonementAtonementStrong Calvinists are forced to appeal to voluntarism

as a defense for limited atonement. The criticismof limited atonement is that it doesnt look like

justice, which is an attribute of God. In otherwords, limited atonement would violate justicebecause it indiscriminately chooses some andrejects others with no regard to faith, desire, or

freewill on the part of humanity. So the onlyanswer is that it is right because anything God doesis right. This is an example of circular reasoning.

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

7/14

Arguments AgainstVoluntarismGods immutabilityIf God does not change, then for Him to

arbitrarily change what is right or not right by virtue of decreealone would indicate that God Himself changes at afundamental level of His being.

Gods pure actuality would be prohibitive of God changing at

such a fundamental level of His being.

Gods perfection likewise would be prohibitive, in thatperfection cannot be improved, and a change would eitherimprove or diminish absolute perfection.

Gods simplicity prohibits change in that change implies

composition, and there can be no change in an absolutesimple Geing.

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

8/14

Geisler, Norman Vol. 3Geisler, Norman Vol. 3Chapter 13Chapter 13

The Extent ofThe Extent ofSalvationSalvation

(Universalism)(Universalism)pp. 389-410pp. 389-410

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

9/14

The other extremeFrom claiming that only a preselectedgroup have been chosen and therefore

the atonement is only for them, to theother extreme that since the atonementis for everyone, therefore everyone

must be and will be saved, we have thetheology ofuniversalism.

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

10/14

Universalism DefinedFrom the word apokatastasis (i.e., restoration, in Acts

3:21), it is the belief that eventually everyone will besaved. It was first proposed by Origen (c. 185-c.

254), a partially unorthodox church father.

This theology has been gaining some ground recentlyand it should be noted that it is without merit or

theological grounding. Geisler does a good job ofrefuting this position, and in the process undermineshis own view of eternal security (cf. pp. 403-404)

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

11/14

Geislers Evaluation ofGeislers Evaluation of

UniversalismUniversalismUniversalism Is Contrary to the Image of God:

God made humankind in His image, which includesthe freedom to choose. In order to guarantee that

everyone will be saved, those who refuse to love Godwould have to be forced to love Him against their will,and forced freedom isnt freedom at all.

With respect to Wesleyan Theology, Wesleyans

argue that love is voluntary and is an act of freewill.As such, love can be recanted, and along with it, faithin Gods grace. It would then be a violation of humanfreewill to force someone into heaven who has chosento reject salvation.

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

12/14

Geislers Evaluation ofGeislers Evaluation of

UniversalismUniversalismUniversalism Is Contrary to Gods Love:

Forced love is not only contrary to freedom, it isntlove at all, but hate. Forced love is a kind of

assault. No one who is truly loving forces him- orherself on another

With respect to Wesleyan Theology (seeprevious slide).

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

13/14

Geislers Evaluation ofGeislers Evaluation of

UniversalismUniversalismUniversalism Is Contrary to Gods Justice: God

is absolutely holy, and as such He must punishsin. Therefore, as long as people are living in sin

and rebellion against God, He must punish them.

With respect to Wesleyan Theology there iscomplete agreement with what Geisler states.Wesleyans also believe that this applies aftersalvation as well.

8/14/2019 Geisler Vol 3 Chaps 12 and 13

14/14

Geislers Evaluation ofGeislers Evaluation of

UniversalismUniversalismUniversalism (and associated annihilation) Is

Contrary to Biblical Teaching on Hell: Onceagain, Jesus taught that not only is there a hell

that was created for Satan and his angels, but,tragically there will also be persons in it.

With respect to Wesleyan Theology there iscomplete agreement with what Geisler stateshere.