Dot COM vs. Dot ORG
ORG vs COM: TWO LETTERS MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE
Two letters can make a big difference. When I purchased the successfulsavior.org domain name I was unaware of some of the adjacent properties on the internet. In particular, I did not know about the website successfulsavior.com - that’s “dot com” not “dot org.” There’s only a two letter difference between those domain names, but there is a world of difference between what those two sites promote. The “dot com” site is maintained by those who promote the doctrine of Universalism - the notion that ultimately everyone will be eternally saved. Their “Jesus” is a “successful savior” because he saves literally everyone. A “Jesus” who saves all of humanity requires that one turn a blind eye to the many things that Jesus said regarding eternal damnation. In other words, the universalist “Jesus” successfully saves while also successfully contradicting his own testimony regarding hell and eternal punishment found in the New Testament.
THE LORD TAUGHT THE ETERNAL PUNISHMENT OF THE GOATS
Consider the words of Christ regarding the final judgment:
”And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:” (Matthew 25:32-34)
Here we see the Lord himself telling us what he will do in the final judgment. It involves a separation of the sheep (God’s elect) from the goats (the non-elect) and the giving of a kingdom inheritance to the sheep. He goes on to say:
“Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:” (Matthew 25:41)
Here we see the final disposition of the goats: “everlasting fire.” This is reiterated later in that same passage:
“And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.” (Matthew 25:46)
That Jesus Christ taught the eternal punishment of the wicked is manifestly evident in the word of God. Indeed, were it not for the Lord’s ministry, we would have very little revealed to us about eternal damnation. Most Universalists make much out of translation issues, insisting that aionios (translated “everlasting” and “eternal”) actually means “a long period of time” and not truly “everlasting.” While there may be instances in Greek where this definition of aionios is supported, translating it this way in the bible is not supported by either context or logical consistency in that it creates untenable conflicts in regard to the extent of the atonement (Matthew 1:21, John 10:11,26), God’s holiness (I John 1:5), and His disposition toward evil (Psalm 5:5, 11:5).
It is no overstatement to say that there is a huge difference between the Jesus preached by the Primitive Baptists and the “Jesus” preached by the Universalists. We want everyone to know that we stand where we have always stood on the matter of eternal damnation. The Harmony PBC Articles of Faith include the following statement:
”We believe in the resurrection of the dead and in a general judgment, and that the felicity of the righteous will be eternal and the punishment of the wicked everlasting.” (HPBC Articles of Faith #11)
EFFECTUAL VS INEFFECTUAL ATONEMENT - WHICH IS THE GREATER ERROR?
All that being said, I would be remiss to overlook a key point of doctrinal agreement between the Primitive Baptists and the Universalists - that of Effectual Atonement. Universalists are absolutely correct to insist that the atonement “got the job done.” In other words, if Jesus Christ died for someone they shall be eternally saved. Primitive Baptists completely agree with that assertion, because we too believe that the atonement is utterly effectual. This doctrine of Effectual Atonement, however, distances Primitive Baptists theologically from the vast majority Christendom, given that most teach universal atonement (i.e., that Christ died for all men) and that Christ’s atonement alone is insufficient to procure salvation. They believe that unless man improves upon or ratifies Christ’s atoning work in some fashion, whether by belief or works or some combination thereof, then none will be saved. Universalists and Primitive Baptists alike reject the doctrine of Ineffectual Atonement because it pours contempt on the blood of Christ. This error, while far more common than the errors of Universalism, is more severe in my estimation. While Universalists err with regard to the extent of the atonement, they do not err with respect its efficacy. The former is a misunderstanding of God’s intent, the latter an assault on the value of Christ’s saving work.
At first blush, the relative rarity of the Universalism’s errors might make them seem more severe than the more common error of Ineffectual Atonement, embraced by much of Christendom. But in my estimation, Ineffectual Atonement is a greater error. To convert the Universalist, one need only address the extent of Christ’s atoning work. They already agree that His work is utterly effectual. To convert the Ineffectual Atonement believing Christians, one must convince them that Jesus Christ actually got the job done.
- Elder Daniel Samons