A Roman Gospel?

Neal - “I don't remember whether I heard it in high school or college but the concept blazed a trail across my mind: The word ‘gospel' comes from the Latin word that applied to the situation when the Roman army would conquer a town. The gospel [the good news] was announced to the populace that they were now Roman citizens with all the rights and privileges thereof. The only exceptions would be those who chose otherwise, in which case they thereby also chose death at sword-point. Immediately, on the spot.

Have you ever heard of this before? Do you think it's true? Do you think it an apt analogy to the Gospel as we know the word?”

Is this (Roman) use of the word “gospel” a valid analogy for the gospel as we know it?

      My response - I have not heard of this. It would be interesting to know if it is true. Perhaps some readers can enlighten us.

[NOTE: Reader responses indicate that such a use of the word "Gospel" is not true to historical fact.  Even though not factual this can be used as an analogy.  Aesop's Fables are not true but are used as analogies.]

       This concept can serve as an analogy to help understand the premise of Biblical Universalism, namely, that the “good news” is: “All persons will be saved except those who the Bible declares will be finally lost.”

The Obvious Flaw in This Roman Gospel :

       All the inhabitants of the cities conquered by Rome became Roman citizens by fiat not as a result of anything they had to do. Those who refused to live as Roman citizens forfeited the rights and privileges of the citizenship that had been sovereignly given to them.

       For more than 350 years, immediately following the writing of the New Testament, the leading church fathers embraced a somewhat parallel inclusive Gospel. The “good news” was that all persons will be saved (Origen) or that all persons will be saved except those who willfully reject the salvation that had already been sovereignly given to them (Athanasius). The early church based these inclusive views of salvation on the fact that the so-called “universalistic” texts * (See Posting # 2.) speak of “ all persons” in terms of a “certain to be realized” salvation not merely a potential or possible salvation.

       The texts that speak of “ all persons ” as recipients of “ salvation ” must be coordinated with those passages that describe those who will be finally lost. Athanasius harmonized these apparently contradictory truths by concluding that all persons are given salvation in Christ and those who “choose otherwise” forfeit the salvation that had been freely given to them, but graciously not “Immediately, on the spot.” Other than with such immediacy, the view of Athanasius is analogous to the Roman “gospel”

      Such a resolution for the tension between those passages that speak of “ all persons ” in terms a “ certain to be realized ” salvation and those that describe those who will be finally lost is not tenable. Eternal (unending) salvation can not be given for only a brief period of time.

       For the last 400 years evangelical Christians have divided into two camps in attempting to avoid the fact that the two concepts, “ all persons ” and “ certain to be realized salvation ,” are undeniably joined together in the Scriptures. It is appalling to see how these two schools of thought, instead of accepting this fact, have simply decreed what the so-called “universalistic” texts may or may not say. Calvinists do not permit those passages to refer to “ all persons .” Arminians deny those texts the right to speak of a “ certain to be realized salvation.”

       Biblical Universalism, together with the church during the first 350 years of its existence, accepts the fact that the so-called “universalistic” passages clearly speak of “ all persons” in terms of “ a certain to be realized salvation .” However, unlike the early church Biblical Universalism does not insist that the “universalistic” texts are absolute universals that allow no exceptions. Universal declarations that have KNOWN exceptions are called “generalizations.” Such generalizations are commonly found throughout the Bible and in other literature.

       Paul's view of Christian liberty is one of many such generalizations found in the Bible - “All things are permissible for me.” This does not mean there were no exceptions. It means “All things were permissible for Paul except those things explicitly forbidden by God.” In parallel fashion Biblical Universalism accepts the universalistic passages as saying - “All persons will be saved except those who the Bible explicitly describes as those will be finally lost.” Those who will be finally lost are those and only those who reject or remain indifferent whatever light (John 1:9) God has given to them, whether in creation/conscience or gospel proclamation.

  For a more thorough examination of the place of such “generalizations” in the Scriptures see Posting # 4 entitled, “ Biblical Fact #3, All Are . . . Some Are Not .”

The Ways in Which the Roman Analogy is Helpful

       In a way somewhat analogous to the “Roman gospel” those who will be saved are saved by grace apart from their own efforts. They were “chosen in him before the creation of the world” and “predestined to be adopted as sons.” All those who will be finally lost willfully choose not to live as citizens of heaven just as some of the inhabitants of the conquered cities willfully chose not to live as citizens of Rome.

       There is a biblical mystery embedded in the preceding paragraph. God surely has the right to sovereignly and graciously grant his salvation to those whom he will. Those who willfully and persistently choose to reject or remain indifferent to the light that was given them (John 1:9) receive the just consequence of their deeds. They were never given the gift of salvation. Those who will be saved would have followed the same path as those who are finally lost, if it were not for the electing grace of God that gives them the gifts of repentance, faith and a willing obedience.

       Can those who will not be saved blame God for not giving them the gifts of repentance, faith and a willingness to walk in His ways? The Bible never talks that way and neither may we. Those who will be lost have no one but themselves to blame. God's discriminations do not make sense to us. Believers realize they have no obligation to resolve this perceived problem. One merely traces the lines as they are drawn in God's Word and humbly accepts them.

       It may be that in the towns Rome conquered one could readily discern between those living as a citizen of Rome and those who willfully made themselves targets of Rome 's sword. However, neither citizens of the Kingdom of Light nor members of the Kingdom of Darkness give a consistent and unmistakably clear witness to their real citizenship. There is theological truth in the dictum: “There is so much good in the worst of us and so much bad in the best of us . . .” — that even the most experienced practitioner can not, with absolute certainty, distinguish between the elect and the non-elect in this present age. There will be many surprises on that final day.

        However, the so-called “universalistic” passages do provide us the biblical warrant for assuming that all persons are elect children of God, until and unless we have knowledge to the contrary. By “biblical warrant” we mean that the Bible permits, authorizes and even requires us to view all persons as children of God. That is, we are to love, respect and relate to each of them as if he or she is a person for whom Christ died to bring them to salvation.

Believers Become Ambassadors

      “So from now on we [believers] regard no one from a worldly point of view.” Because “All this is from God, who reconciled us [believers] to himself through Christ and gave us [believers] the ministry of reconciliation; that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them . And he has committed to us [believers] the message of reconciliation. We [believers] are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us [believers]. We [believers] implore you [unbelievers] on Christ's behalf; Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us [believers and unbelievers], so that in him we [believers and unbelievers] might become the righteousness of God.” (emphasis added 2 Cor. 5:16-21).

       There is no good news to proclaim to unbelievers if we do not assume they are persons whose sins have been forgiven through Christ's blood. We have biblical warrant for continuing with such an assumption until or unless we have irrefutable evidence to the contrary. Such evidence to the contrary concerning any person or group of persons will never be given to us until “the last day.” In this assumption is found biblical basis for announcing and declaring this good news together with the command to repent and believe to all persons without discrimination to whom we bring the gospel.

       Why may we continue with this assumption until “the last day'? No matter how evil a person's words or deed are, we may not conclude he or she or they can not be reconciled to God.

       Picture the lifestyle of the “chief of sinners” before his conversion doing everything he possibly could “to oppose the name of Jesus.”    Yet he was one of God's elect. Or consider this worst-case scenario: A person confronted by Jesus himself rejects Jesus and the words he speaks. Even such apparent hardness of heart may not be judged as unredeemable before the last day. Jesus did “not judge” those “who rejected him and did not accept his words; that very word which he spoke would condemn them at the last day” (John 12:47, 48).

       There are those who insist that we can not be engage in “the ministry of reconciliation” on the basis of an assumption. Upon first hearing this seems to be a formidable objection. But the fact is we never have anything more than a biblically warranted assumption for saying to anyone “God loves you (in the redemptive sense)” or “Christ died for you (in the redemptive sense)” or “You have been reconciled to God in Christ.” Even regarding those who confess faith in Christ and whose lifestyle is consistent with that confession we must assume their profession is genuine and their deeds authentic. We never have absolute, irrefutable hard evidence that such actually is the case.

                    Cordially, Neal Punt whenindoubt1@charter.net

* — “The true light gives light to every man” ( John 1:9); — “One act of righteousness” brings “life for all men” ( Rom. 5:18); — In Christ “all will be made alive” ( 1 Cor 15:22); — God “is the Savior of all men.” ( 1 Timothy 4:10) ; —Jesus Christ is the atoning sacrifice for our sins and “for the sins of the whole world” ( 1 John 2:2). And many more such passages.