Election

Essentially, God knows, before a person is born whether they will go to heaven or hell.

Some Christians believe that since God is omniscient, it is necessary that he knows in advance who will be saved or not.

Additionally, in some versions of Christian teaching, God does not simply know who will be saved, but, he actually makes that decision himself, this is consistent with the idea of an omnipotent God for whom it is within his power to choose who will be saved.

Limited election

Limited selection is the notion that only a few Christians will be saved.

Augustine

Augustine argued that since all humans have inherited the sin of Adam, they are undeserving of a relationship with God. The tendency towards cupiditas and away from Caritas is further evidence of the fact that humans will consistently disobey God and are therefore, in the eyes of Augustine, completely undeserving of salvation.

Augustine points to the parable of the workers in the vineyard. In the parable, a landowner promises to pay the workers for a day's work in the vineyard. Some of the workers arrive early in the morning and work all day, others arrive towards the end of the day and work for a short while yet, all workers are paid the same promised amount.

Whilst on the surface this might seem unfair, the parable is intended to illustrate that the payment was not a reward for hard work, rather it was the fulfillment of the promise made by the landowner.

In the same way, Augustine argues that salvation is not something that humans can earn through their own merit, but rather is a gift from God and a fulfillment of God's promise to humanity.

As these ideas developed he believed that not only did God know who would be saved, but, he had chosen them. This idea is based on the passage "For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son" (Romans 8:28-30) and "in him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him" (Ephesians 1:3-12).

Calvin

Calvin developed the Doctrine of Election whereby he posits that God has pre-determined some people for eternal life and others for eternal damnation.

Calvin proposed that there is simply nothing that humans can do to have autonomy over their eschatological destination as God chooses the elect according to his own will and not according to the behavior of humanity.

Calvin encapsulates this view when he writes "We are all created on equal terms, but, some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation".

Limited election

Strengths

• These ideas are consistent with an omniscient God for whom it makes logical sense to already know who is destined for heaven and hell in the afterlife
• These ideas are consistent with the Biblical notion of the fall which has been hugely influential on Christian hermeneutics, thus, it makes sense for us to provide the same level of privilege to the story when considering the afterlife too.

Weaknesses

• Augustine's views on the limited election are built on the concept of original sin and the fact that all humans are born with the burden of the fall. This view is inconsistent with ideas from thinkers such as John Locke who argue that humans are born with a blank slate and are not inherently corrupt. Exam tip: If you are using this as a weakness of a limited election, you need to link the idea to the election. Those who argue for unlimited and universal election can also be used to critique Augustine and Calvin's views here, but, you would need to use the same system as above to avoid writing an

Unlimited election

Strengths

• This idea is consistent with scripture which clearly states that through belief in Jesus, you can be saved
• Consistent with a just and fair God who has given humans a chance to reconcile their broken relationship with him through the crucifixion.
• Unlimited election makes the concept of the crucifixion purposeful – if limited election or unlimited election are correct then ultimately there would have been no need for the crucifixion of Christ. Given that this event is so central to Christian doctrine it would be difficult to argue that it was unnecessary.
• Some argue that this is more in line with an omnibenevolent God because the idea of an eternity of suffering in hell is simply too harsh of a punishment for a loving God to provide

Weaknesses

• The limited election would contest the notion that salvation is in the hands of the individual. Unlimited election seems to imply that an individual has a form of control over their salvation and that their personal choices e.g. to believe in Christ, will have an impact on their afterlife – Augustine would argue that the consequences of the fall have made human action redundant in the quest of being with God.
• The concept of universal salvation can be used to argue that it is unjust of God to only provide salvation to those who believe in Christ as perhaps there are some people who live in parts of the world where they have not heard of Christ, or, are victims in the system and have been unable to show faith in God before they die – particularly if they die young such as in the case of Sue. Hick would argue that a truly omnibenevolent God would not deny salvation in these cases

Universal salvation

• The concept of universal salvation is necessary for the success of Hick's vale of soul-making argument.
• If you agree that suffering results in moral and spiritual development into the likeness of God then, by extension, you also agree with the notion of universal salvation.
• Some may argue that universal salvation is inconsistent with the just nature of God because it is simply unfair that people who dedicate their entire lives to God would be in heaven alongside those who do not.

• Barth would argue that if all people are going to go to heaven, then, the atoning sacrifice of Jesus on the cross would been futile. From this, he argues that the Christ Event is evidence for an unlimited election instead.
• Augustine would argue that humans are too fallen to be worthy of salvation and as such only a limited number would be saved

John Hick

• John Hick believes that humans are made imago dei, but, purposefully incomplete.
• Hick posits that humans are required to endure suffering so that they can morally and spiritually develop into the likeness of God, however, he held that there are many people who, through no fault of their own, fail to morally and spiritually develop through suffering e.g. as seen in the Case of Sue within the problem of evil unit whom Hick coins 'victims in the system'.
• Hick believes that it is only rational to believe that this development could continue after death because refusing to allow this option would be inconsistent with God's nature. This development takes place in purgatory before all people will eventually move into heaven.
• Hick presents the notion that all people will eventually be saved and that there is no such place as hell since eternal suffering is simply not something a just and omnibenevolent God could condone.
• Hick's belief that all religions can achieve salvation supports the belief in universal salvation.

✔️ In order to decipher the different hermeneutical views on how this judgment will work, we will consider the information from elsewhere in this unit. This information suggests that there are three overriding forms of judgment

1. Immediate: you will be judged by God as soon as you die
2. Final: When you die you will lay in wait for a judgement day where all people will be judged simultaneously
3. There will be no eschatological judgment

Immediate: When you die, you will go immediately to either heaven, hell, or purgatory

Judgment is immediate

The Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man:

Implies that judgment will be immediate because whilst in hell, the rich man desperately attempts to warn his family about the perils that await them if they do not change their ways. This suggests that the family is still on Earth and has the time to make these changes, thus, the rich man did not arrive in hell following a final judgment

Jesus' words on the cross:

Implied that judgment would be immediate when he said to the criminal "Tonight you will be with me in paradise".

The lexical choice 'tonight' indicates that as soon as the criminal dies he will immediately be placed into heaven and not waiting for final judgment.

A spiritual, eternal afterlife:

Implies immediate judgment. This is because if the afterlife exists as one eternal moment then there can be no process of waiting for the final judgment; experiencing the judgment, and then moving to your eschatological destination as a result.

Origen's concept of a perfect afterlife:

Can also be used to argue that judgment would take place immediately. You could argue that waiting, as one would be in the case of final judgment, is an inconvenience of being in an Earthly body and we will be rid of this when we die, instead experiencing a perfect state.

Judgment is final:

Final: There will be a judgment day where the eschatological destinations of all people will be decided at once

• Hick's idea of universal salvation holds that we will continue to morally and spiritually develop into the likeness of God when we die.
• This means that, for those who are not already worthy of heaven there will be a purgatory where they can continue this development.
• This means that we will all go to heaven at different times when we are adequately worthy and therefore will not all be judged together at a final judgment
• The Parable of the sheep and the goats implies that there will be a final judgment when it says "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats." This element of the passage indicates that there will be a time when Jesus returns to Earth and judges all of the people at the same time.
• The Apostles Creed signifies that there will be a final judgment when it says "he is seated at the right hand of the Father, and he will come to judge the living and the dead". The idea that Jesus will judge both the living and the dead indicates a final judgment day whereby Jesus will return to Earth and judge everybody, all at once. The afterlife as a physical place also implies a final judgment as it provides the opposite argument to the view that a spiritual afterlife would have immediate judgment.

There will be no eschatological judgement

If heaven, hell, and purgatory are symbols of our moral state on Earth then, there will be no judgement when we die.

Upon the realization that there will be no judgment from a transcendent being, each of the characters comes to realize that judgment of us exists in the minds of others. Therefore, Sartre can be used to argue that judgment is not something that happens when we die but is something that happens during our Earthly lives.

The parable of the sheep and the goats.

1. What are the available eschatological destinations? (Heaven, hell, purgatory) The parable of the sheep and the goats implies that there will be just heaven and hell, no purgatory since people are separated into sheep or goats and there is no in-between

2. What form will those destinations take? (Physical, spiritual, moral, eternal) The lexical choices within the parable such as "prepared" and "fire" make it reasonable to conclude that the afterlife will take a physical form given since these words describe physical phenomena. To 'prepare' something means to create and improve something, as such it is a physical concept given that a non-physical entity would not require preparation. Similarly, the reference to 'fire' alludes to a physical afterlife since fire is a physical element.

3. Who are these destinations for? (limited, unlimited, and universal election) Given that some people will be considered 'goats' and destined for hell, the parable can be used to refute the notion of universal election. Within the parable, Jesus describes that the sheep are those who have helped those in need and that they are therefore the ones destined to heaven. This suggests that election will not be limited because limited election rests on the notion that there is nothing that humans can do in their Earthly lives to earn salvation which does not seem to be the message within the parable of sheep and goats.

4. When will we get there? (Immediate and final judgement) The parable suggests that there will be a final judgement where all people will be judged at once.