Basic HTML Version
380
point. But it is perfectly evident from Scripture that the term “world” has a variety of meanings,
as a mere reading of the following passages will prove conclusively, Luke 2:1; John 1:10; Acts
11:28; 19:27; 24:5; Rom. 1:8; Col. 1:6. It also appears that, when it is used of men, it does not
always include all men, John 7:4; 12:19; 14:22; 18:20; Rom. 11:12,15; in some of these passages
it cannot possibly denote all men. If it had that meaning in John 6:33,51, it would follow that
Christ actually gives life to all men, that is, saves them all. This is more than the opponents
themselves believe. In Rom. 11:12, 15 the word “world” cannot be all-inclusive, since the
context clearly excludes Israel; and because on that supposition these passages too would
prove more than is intended, namely, that the fruits of the atoning work of Christ are actually
applied to all. We do find in these passages, however, an indication of the fact that the word
“world” is sometimes used to indicate that the Old Testament particularism belongs to the past,
and made way for New Testament universalism. The blessings of the gospel were extended to
all nations, Matt. 24:14; Mark 16:16; Rom. 1:5; 10:18. This is probably the key to the
interpretation of the word “world” in such passages as John 1:29; 6:33,51; II Cor. 5:19; I John
2:2. Dr. Shedd assumes that the word means “all nations” in such passages as Matt. 26:13; John
3:16; I Cor. 1:21; II Cor. 5:19; and I John 2:2; but holds that in other passages it denotes the
world of believers, or the Church, John 6:33,51; Rom. 4:13; 11:12,15. Kuyper and Van Andel
also assume that this is the meaning of the word in some passages.
b. Closely related to the passages to which we referred in the preceding, are those in which it is
said that Christ died for all men, Rom. 5:18; I Cor. 15:22; II Cor. 5:14; I Tim. 2:4,6; Tit. 2:11; Heb.
2:9; II Pet. 3:9. Naturally, each of these passages must be considered in the connection in which
it is found. For instance, the context clearly shows that the “all” or “all men” of Rom. 5:18, and I
Cor. 15:22 includes only those who are in Christ, as contrasted with all who are in Adam. If the
word “all” in these passages is not interpreted in a limited sense, they would teach, not merely
that Christ made salvation possible for all men, but that He actually saves all without exception.
Thus the Arminian would again be forced into the camp of the absolute Universalist, where he
does not want to be. A similar limitation must be applied in the interpretation of II Cor. 5:14,
and Heb. 2:9, cf. verse 10. Otherwise they would prove too much, and therefore prove nothing.
In all these passages the “all” are simply all those who are in Christ. In the case of Tit. 2:11,
which speaks of the appearance of the grace of God, “bringing salvation to all men,” the
context clearly shows that “all men” really means all classes of men. If the “all” is not restricted,
this passage too would teach universal salvation. The passages in I Tim. 2:4-6, Heb. 2:9; II Pet.
3:9 refer to the revealed will of God that both Jews and Gentiles should be saved, but imply
nothing as to the universal intent of the atonement. Even Moses Stuart, who believes in
universal atonement, admits that in these cases the word “all” cannot be taken in a universal
sense.