Universalism: pros and cons

[Floatingaxe]

Ha ha

Yipe! That looked demonic. How godly was that?

 

[Floatingaxe]

Alright I will start the ball rolling.... I hear this term Universalism used, It is a label, I have never said I was comfortable with having labels put on me....but lets forget about me and look at what is Labeled as a Universalist.

We believe in the Soveriegn power and will of God, and that is not just somthing we say to others and do not really believe ourselves.

We recognise that with out God first acting....there is only God by himself in a void where nothing exists except for God, and where nothing happens at all.

We cannot even begin to imagine the highness of his ways, we only just barely cope putting on the mind of Christ, and even then we only get glimpses of what he has in store for us.

I have had a good life, but at times I can hardly wait to die, I hate this life.......but it is not my call.

I had no say about being here, I have no real say in when I am taken from here...... Free Will.... ever noticed how limited our alledged Free Will is ?

Anybody want to have a go at guessing the Boundries of the Limits of our alledged Free Will...?

You know, with Jesus the Saviour in one's life, life is exciting and full! We have the glory of God in us--and we have access to the Father always! I see His presence everywhere around me. I have His glory to spread to others!

We don't hate life. We thank God for it! We walk in the abundance of His blessing! My will is God's will! That's pretty free to me! Limitless freedom, power, health and abundance! Praise Jesus!

 

[Nadiine]

PROS: NonChristians will be very happy and comforted in believing that they can lead a Godless, worldly life yet make it into heaven no matter how they live or refuse Salvation in Christ Jesus.

CONS: NonChristians who are very happy & comforted in believing that they have eternal security will be sorely horrified when they find out that God rejects those who refused to repent & accept His gift of Salvation.




Universalism 101:
*Jesus: the cosmic carpet

 

[Im_A]

The other thread is closed.

If you're not sick of the topic, have at it here.

I'm still interested in discussing the benefits or drawbacks of Universalism especially as relates to evangelistic efforts.

Feel free to range a bit off-topic also.

when i used to believe in universalism, the evangelistic efforts seemed more real and powerful. meaning, you are offering someone something for this life, not some fairytale world that only exists because you have faith.

plus it gives you a new perspective of the life. even tho, i was never a preaching universalist type, because in the end, i believed God was in control of that, but the reason to hope for such a great thing, gives you a new way to look at life. that God is in control of where i go, not my sinful free-will. the Jesus's death actually accomplishes something for the world, not some minority train of thought. that it actually conquers death and sin, instead of the battle taking the lives and souls of those who were created by a supposed "perfect creator".

then it gave new insight on how to live. i saw that life was to be lived in the here and now, and that heaven and hell were here and now...especially since the afterlife is always set by God and not by me. it never gave me more reason to sin. in affect, i could argue, it gave me more of a reason to not sin. what more reason would there be to serve an all-powerful being that cleanses us all, maybe even having to wait for complete cleansing in the afterlife, instead of serving the tyrant God who destroys who don't agree with me, or who destroys people who are "holy" but who's mental thoughts aren't on "cue"? the freedom from the worries of the afterlife.

the cons i see in it: that some could use it to sin it up if you will. meaning, people thinking, well since i believe i'll be in heaven and the sinner next to me will be i can just sin it up. thing is, people do that while believeing in Jesus and believeing that others will go to hell so this con is really irrelevant as a whole, but for the individual, if one uses this idea wrong, they can really lead to a wrong path.

another one i see is, if one relies on believeing something because the Bible literally states something, this is a hard one to come by. only a few that i could even see possible to lead one to a literal statement. the verse that states, "God's Will is that all shall be saved". the problem we have here, in my opinion, is one has to interpretate things metaphorically, which will always be based in their opinion/method of understanding/world outlook no matter how they interpretate it. people believe this verse is real while believeing that people will burn in hell, or be annihalated. so literal statements like prooftexting scripture to believe in something is really hard. but in a way it works both ways. merely because, there are people who believe in universalism, and have their reasoning why this and that is metaphorical or the historical contexts of Sheol, Hades, Gehenna and things that were going on historically at the time. the problems that i see happening for UR is the same problems that i see happening with those who believe in eternal torture, or annihalationism. the problem of interpretating with a human mind, and no one interpretates the scripture outside of a human mind which is controlled by desire, emotions, outlook of the world around us...basically its a biased machine trying to understand, only making circles and going no where because its so biased.

those are some of my thoughts on the matter.

 

[Im_A]

The other thread is closed.

If you're not sick of the topic, have at it here.

I'm still interested in discussing the benefits or drawbacks of Universalism especially as relates to evangelistic efforts.

Feel free to range a bit off-topic also.

PROS: NonChristians will be very happy and comforted in believing that they can lead a Godless, worldly life yet make it into heaven no matter how they live or refuse Salvation in Christ Jesus.

CONS: NonChristians who are very happy & comforted in believing that they have eternal security will be sorely horrified when they find out that God rejects those who refused to repent & accept His gift of Salvation.




Universalism 101:
*Jesus: the cosmic carpet

this is odd here to me. i see the Christian happy and comforted that they are godless sinner but yet they are accepted by God because of His grace given to them because of what they believe in about a Jew all the time. it seems no different to me, there your pro.

the con side, i have nothing to really say on. i don't believe a human can give a accurate depiction of the afterlife, and i don't believe any book can do that either, so you have fun with your thoughts.

but on the Universalism 101, that's another interesting comment. the only thing i can respond to in likeness is:

Religion 101
the human mind: the cosmic red carpet

 

[Im_A]

Alright I will start the ball rolling.... I hear this term Universalism used, It is a label, I have never said I was comfortable with having labels put on me....but lets forget about me and look at what is Labeled as a Universalist.

We believe in the Soveriegn power and will of God, and that is not just somthing we say to others and do not really believe ourselves.

We recognise that with out God first acting....there is only God by himself in a void where nothing exists except for God, and where nothing happens at all.

We cannot even begin to imagine the highness of his ways, we only just barely cope putting on the mind of Christ, and even then we only get glimpses of what he has in store for us.

I have had a good life, but at times I can hardly wait to die, I hate this life.......but it is not my call.

I had no say about being here, I have no real say in when I am taken from here...... Free Will.... ever noticed how limited our alledged Free Will is ?

Anybody want to have a go at guessing the Boundries of the Limits of our alledged Free Will...?

in a way, you explained why i believed in universalism for several years.

the boundaries of our free-will, because of our finite nature, would have to be limited on to the ability of saving our souls. that we can't save our souls, so it would have to be in the complete control of a surpreme being. nothing i would choose to believe in, would save me, because i could still believe in that stuff, and still commit actions that are deemed unworthy to be in the prescence of that being.

so to conclude from this would have to have a debate on how to view God. is God all powerful/sovereign/loving when God would allow people to damn themselves to where the only reaction would be for a "Holy" being to do is to excommunicate themselves because of His "gift of free-will"(which btw, we saw how good that gift was in the garden of eden...if one takes that story literally that is mixed with all the free-will theory) from His prescence in the afterlife? something seems severely wrong with that picture in my opinion.

 

[SpiritDriven]

You know, with Jesus the Saviour in one's life, life is exciting and full! We have the glory of God in us--and we have access to the Father always! I see His presence everywhere around me. I have His glory to spread to others!

We don't hate life. We thank God for it! We walk in the abundance of His blessing! My will is God's will! That's pretty free to me! Limitless freedom, power, health and abundance! Praise Jesus!

The momentary Lightness of our affliction, produces for us a transcendantly transcendant burden of eonion glory.2 Cor. 4:17

Did you notice how Paul ran out of adequate words to desribe such, he had no better word to use so he used trancendantly transcendant....it means over cast, but not in the sense of a weather report, but as in higher than the highest thing...over cast over all....note burden....

That is an interesting word burden.....something that is carried : load b: duty responsibility

Some people want to taste Glory to the dregs...Jesus knows who they are, but they will taste suffering to the dregs to produce that burden of eonion Glory.

Is not suffering somthing that has to be graciously granted ?
Philippians 2:29: "For to you it is graciously granted, for Christ’s sake, not only to be believing on Him, but to be suffering for His sake also."
"(We are) joint enjoyers of Christ’s allotment, if so be that we are suffering together, that we should be glorified together also" (Rom. 8:17).

Will we wish we had not suffered more in preperation when that time comes ?

Note that the trials are called "light," while the glory is a "burden." Paul had a healthy perspective here.
We often suppose that these trials are weighty and that the glory could never eclipse the pain.

This is so wrong.

Our bodies need to be changed. Why? Because we can’t carry so much glory in these frames. Without new bodies, we couldn’t bear the glory ahead. It would be like asking a light bulb filament to channel a nuclear explosion......

 

[Nadiine]

this is odd here to me. i see the Christian happy and comforted that they are godless sinner but yet they are accepted by God because of His grace given to them because of what they believe in about a Jew all the time. it seems no different to me, there your pro.

To teach something as a warning turns a Christian into "loving the consequence" or wanting them to stay a "godless sinner"???
If so, then you can consider EVERY parent that uses threats or warnings for a child's own good as something negative & evil.
Maybe I don't understand your statement? If so, please clarify?

the con side, i have nothing to really say on. i don't believe a human can give a accurate depiction of the afterlife, and i don't believe any book can do that either, so you have fun with your thoughts.

yet you stated this in your previous post:

the cons i see in it: that some could use it to sin it up if you will. meaning, people thinking, well since i believe i'll be in heaven and the sinner next to me will be i can just sin it up. thing is, people do that while believeing in Jesus and believeing that others will go to hell so this con is really irrelevant as a whole, but for the individual, if one uses this idea wrong, they can really lead to a wrong path.

You actually just affirmed the con I gave from my post.
confusing.

but on the Universalism 101, that's another interesting comment. the only thing i can respond to in likeness is:

Religion 101
the human mind: the cosmic red carpet

Well, since you claim to be agnostic, I can see why you'de post this.
A Christian in the Christian worldview doesn't focus on the human mind, but what the Creator who KNOWS and made the human mind teaches for a solid spiritual foundation.

Universalism is taking Sovereignty away from God and making Him a cosmic carpet for anyone to trample on when they all assume they're eternally secure.

2 Corinthians 13:5
Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified.

 

[Im_A]

To teach something as a warning turns a Christian into "loving the consequence" or wanting them to stay a "godless sinner"???
If so, then you can consider EVERY parent that uses threats or warnings for a child's own good as something negative & evil.
Maybe I don't understand your statement? If so, please clarify?

i have a hard time seeing the example of a parent punishing their child as compared God to punish infinitely. the punishment from a parent to a child is not infinite. it is temporary.

my point earlier was this:
going with the idea that a Christian believes in eternal torture.

here the believer believes that Christ accepts them in their state of sinfulness because they have accepted his gift, which is to believe in the cross correct? it doesn't take too much to abuse such an idea as to the affect of sin in one's life. even tho the believer believes in hell and that people who don't believe will burn in hell, the idea of sin gets less and less...why? because they are born-dead to their sin...even tho because of what they believe, they believe they are born again. they still sin, but becauise of god's grace on them, through Jesus Christ, the sin isn't that big of a deal...just as the universalist who uses that idea to sin it up. i'm saved. sin isn't a huge ordeal for me. its taken cared of by God, through Jesus Christ. nothing can seperate me from the love of God correct?

yet you stated this in your previous post:

You actually just affirmed the con I gave from my post.
confusing.

i wasn't affirming anything. it's just realistic facts. people can use any idea in any manner they want to. they can use a holy idea for sinful purposes. or they can use a holy idea for a holy purpose. i stated both pros and cons i see because i see it as the realistic fact. when i believe in UR, it made sin that much more of a problem than it ever did when i believed in eternal torture of the non-believer.

but lets face the facts...people will choose an idea they believe in, for any purpoose they want.

Well, since you claim to be agnostic, I can see why you'de post this.
A Christian in the Christian worldview doesn't focus on the human mind, but what the Creator who KNOWS and made the human mind teaches for a solid spiritual foundation.

Universalism is taking Sovereignty away from God and making Him a cosmic carpet for anyone to trample on when they all assume they're eternally secure.

so how does the Christian get to that worldview prior to conversion? the act of a God on behalf of the worthless sinner the Christian is? it takes the human mind...not the mind of the creator.

how so? your views of eternal torture or annihaltionism(whichever one you believe) that your eternally secure has the same capability of taking the Sovereignty of God away, and to give the ability to trample on it. the letters in the Epistles that Paul was addressing the problems of the church is mere proof of this. and how much of sin is a problem for your life, when you believe your secured? you sin, pray, repent, try hard, but knowing your a "saved sinner", your peace is in the hands of a "loving" God correct? that's just as much as a trample as the sinner who believes in UR to sin it up. both sides not taking extreme seriousness of the problems of sin to the most fullest extreme way and just believeing in mind numbing beliefs.

2 Corinthians 13:5
Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified.

this verse is irrelevant to me. both sides of the camps do the same thing here.

 

[SpiritDriven]

in a way, you explained why i believed in universalism for several years.

the boundaries of our free-will, because of our finite nature, would have to be limited on to the ability of saving our souls. that we can't save our souls, so it would have to be in the complete control of a surpreme being. nothing i would choose to believe in, would save me, because i could still believe in that stuff, and still commit actions that are deemed unworthy to be in the prescence of that being.

so to conclude from this would have to have a debate on how to view God. is God all powerful/sovereign/loving when God would allow people to damn themselves to where the only reaction would be for a "Holy" being to do is to excommunicate themselves because of His "gift of free-will"(which btw, we saw how good that gift was in the garden of eden...if one takes that story literally that is mixed with all the free-will theory) from His prescence in the afterlife? something seems severely wrong with that picture in my opinion.

Have you ever noticed how Scripture describes the tree as being placed in the midst of the Garden ?

Who was responsible for placing that tree right where Adam and Eve had to conciously avoid it ?

The creator of our Human Nature...God...even went to the trouble of actualy pointing the tree out to Adam, and said....do not eat of it.

From whom did the serpent recieve the power to decieve the Woman ?

Who placed the serpent in the Garden with the Man and the Woman ?

Finaly who is it that Shuts up all men in disobedience!

The Lord of hosts has sworn saying, "Surely, just as I have intended so it has happened, and just as I have planned so it will stand (Isaiah 14:24).

Free Will ? we dont know the true meaning.....

 

[Nadiine]

i have a hard time seeing the example of a parent punishing their child as compared God to punish infinitely. the punishment from a parent to a child is not infinite. it is temporary.

K. You should have a hard time, but I never used that example. I NEVER compare a parent punishing a child to eternal condemnation becuz it's not even close to the same; by degree or by offense. Biblically, a person going to eternal torment isn't one of God's children either.

My example was specifically about warning of impending danger/harm, not the actual consequence.

A parent uses threats or warnings of danger in order to get their child to respond and learn - ultimately it is something the parent is doing for the child's best interest.
A parent NOT warning a child of what can harm them is negligent and not doing their job.
So if Hell and Gehenna are both facts of reality (and biblically they are), then why is it so hateful and mean to relay the message?
Jesus used it as well; unless we want to say Jesus was witnessing or preaching incorrectly...

my point earlier was this:
going with the idea that a Christian believes in eternal torture.

here the believer believes that Christ accepts them in their state of sinfulness because they have accepted his gift, which is to believe in the cross correct? it doesn't take too much to abuse such an idea as to the affect of sin in one's life. even tho the believer believes in hell and that people who don't believe will burn in hell, the idea of sin gets less and less...why? because they are born-dead to their sin...even tho because of what they believe, they believe they are born again. they still sin, but becauise of god's grace on them, through Jesus Christ, the sin isn't that big of a deal...just as the universalist who uses that idea to sin it up. i'm saved. sin isn't a huge ordeal for me. its taken cared of by God, through Jesus Christ. nothing can seperate me from the love of God correct?

I'd first start to say, no we don't believe 'in the cross'... we believe in Jesus Christ as Lord & Saviour WHO DIED for our sin & by faith we accept His sacrifice in our place and love Him deeply for who He is/what He's done/His love for us.

As far as the 'abuse of the idea' (I'd make note that there are also 2 doctrinal diffrences, many Christians don't believe in "once saved always saved" -OSAS- so many don't think they're eternally secure just becuz they're born again; if they fall away, they haven't endured to the end, thus, they can be LOST).
But the Bible clearly warns us about our spiritual condition. I also posted this verse earlier:

2 Corinthians 13:5
Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified.

God gives us no free ride. And I'd venture to say that the "christians" who think they can continue living like they did before salvation (and who don't experience inner conviction over it) are showing signs that they never actually had Salvation to begin with.

When you have a real intimate relationship with the Lord, your LOVE for Him is what keeps you in obedience & we obey out of admiration of Him and respect to those around us - we gain a love for other people which is thru God's power. No, we don't always display that - we fail & lose tempers, etc.
But the love deepens for both God & others. Living the Christian life becomes a JOY not a burden when our will is in line with God's will. THAT is the abundant life in Him. (NONCHRISTIANS WON'T EXPERIENCE THAT LEVEL OF JOY IN OBEDIENCE & INTIMACY BECUZ THEY'RE IN CARNALITY which is enmity with God. They're at odds.

i wasn't affirming anything. it's just realistic facts.

I know you didn't literally affirm it - I was saying that you offered the same con I did. (but your later post said you had no cons) - thus I said it was an affirmation.
nm.

when i believe in UR, it made sin that much more of a problem than it ever did when i believed in eternal torture of the non-believer.

I have the exact opposite approach - and mine is based on fear of eternal condemnation which caused me to initially accept God. I didn't respond to His Love at all. In fact, I found His love rather wimpy and weak and it made me sick to be honest.
But warn me about being tossed in a place far away from God and love... judged & banished forever - YOU HAVE NOW GOT MY FULL ATTENTION.

Once I did come to salvation, over time I was able to embrace and appreciate & see how powerful & beautiful His deep love actually is. THEN it all clicked for me.
& no wonder, this verse became true!
1 John 4:18
There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love.

If there were no hell/Gehenna, I would still be living for myself & enjoying my sin and I'm fully convinced of that.
Eternal security for me is a get out of jail free card - party time.

but lets face the facts...people will choose an idea they believe in, for any purpoose they want.

YEP... (until God get's a hold of them anyways)

so how does the Christian get to that worldview prior to conversion? the act of a God on behalf of the worthless sinner the Christian is? it takes the human mind...not the mind of the creator.

I don't think you understood my statement.
I was saying that Christians don't focus on the human mind - as in the base philosophies the world lives by.
We conform to God's teachings instead.
Colossians 2:8
Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.

how so? your views of eternal torture or annihaltionism(whichever one you believe) that your eternally secure has the same capability of taking the Sovereignty of God away, and to give the ability to trample on it.

No it isn't the same. Once you ARE His, you are conforming to Him and HIS will for us. This is about the LOST - living in carnality who are supposed to convert to living a life in opposition to their actual [sin] nature & who have no interest in God.

Once you are His, HIS POWER is what is working in your life & keeping you in Him; it's not a life of your own will & strength anymore. His SPirit is within us so that we don't live the old way. We give God our life to mold & shape in HIS image. Too many people ignore the work of God's Spirit that He gives us to help us lead our new life in Him.
(I also believe that those who do leave God didn't have His Spirit within them enabling them to continue and stay in His will).

this verse is irrelevant to me. both sides of the camps do the same thing here.

Whether it's relevant to you or not, or misused by others isn't the issue. It's still an important verse in admonishing us to make sure that we're right with God & firm in our faith - and it's very relevant to me in keeping me in check as to where I'm at.

I don't know if you claim you were Christian & turned to agnosticism, but I'd wonder if that verse were more relevant to you at that point, if it mite have had some influence on that change?

 

[CaDan]

God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican!

 

[Nadiine]

God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican!

If you're EVEN saying that about ME, you either can't understand the post, or you have "issues".

And I resent such a sick insinuation.
and I might be inclined to add the infamous:

POT KETTLE BLACK....????

 

[CaDan]

If you're EVEN saying that about ME, you either can't understand the post, or you have "issues".

And I resent such a sick insinuation.
and I might be inclined to add the infamous:

POT KETTLE BLACK....????

What I am saying is that your advocacy tends to drift into that line of thinking. A certain asceticism that impresses God.

 

[Nadiine]

What I am saying is that your advocacy tends to drift into that line of thinking. A certain asceticism that impresses God.

If you're going to give remarks like that - insinuating piety and arrogance, you might want to take the time to be specific in what it's about.

I try to be thorough in a reply if I have time - and I do drift- but it's becuz there are alot of different aspects to any given issue. I'm not a person that just makes a few sterile statements of fact then moves onto the next topic. I'm speaking about my Lord & faith in Him, I don't take this like it's some book report that I just toss out information.

If someone wants to view me as religiously pious, then they don't know me at all or understand my posts.

 

[CaDan]

If you're going to give remarks like that - insinuating piety and arrogance, you might want to take the time to be specific in what it's about.

I try to be thorough in a reply if I have time - and I do drift- but it's becuz there are alot of different aspects to any given issue. I'm not a person that just makes a few sterile statements of fact then moves onto the next topic. I'm speaking about my Lord & faith in Him, I don't take this like it's some book report that I just toss out information.

If someone wants to view me as religiously pious, then they don't know me at all or understand my posts.

There are different degrees of Pietism. It is not necessarily Pelagianism.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Yipe! That looked demonic. How godly was that?

So did your cat.

 

[CaDan]

So did your cat.

Ceiling Cat loves it just the same.

 

[Crazy Liz]

in a way, you explained why i believed in universalism for several years.

the boundaries of our free-will, because of our finite nature, would have to be limited on to the ability of saving our souls. that we can't save our souls, so it would have to be in the complete control of a surpreme being. nothing i would choose to believe in, would save me, because i could still believe in that stuff, and still commit actions that are deemed unworthy to be in the prescence of that being.

so to conclude from this would have to have a debate on how to view God. is God all powerful/sovereign/loving when God would allow people to damn themselves to where the only reaction would be for a "Holy" being to do is to excommunicate themselves because of His "gift of free-will"(which btw, we saw how good that gift was in the garden of eden...if one takes that story literally that is mixed with all the free-will theory) from His prescence in the afterlife? something seems severely wrong with that picture in my opinion.

This post helps me give a better response to SD about shared responsibility. On the negative side, I used the dynamic of blame to show how we humans sometimes, even though we know there is more than one cause, attribute all the responsibility to one of them, and excuse the others. The problem with this is that we then change our narration and act as if the cause we blamed or assigned responsibility was the only cause, when in reality, what happened could not have happened but for quite a number of things happening or being in place at the same time. We call this the "but for" test of causation.

On the positive side, I think the New Testament's most predominant paradigm for narrative construction (and let's make no mistake - what we are engaged in is biblical theology, that is, constructing a narrative that is as consistent as possible with all of scripture) is love.

Human narratives about love are that it is supposed to be mutual and reciprocal. The loving act of one toward another ideally provokes a loving response that, in turn increases love again. OTOH, unrequited love is a tragedy, or causes something to go very wrong if it is not quickly extinguished when not returned. Think stalkers and other annoying admirers, as well as some of the other analogies we've seen in these threads, like kidnapping.

So love involves two persons, and can't work right unless both willingly participate.

The question we are exploring, then, is what options are available to God, who loves all humans, to deal with those who don't love God back. What endings can we put on such narratives, and are such endings consistent with scripture?

I think, as creatures, we certainly can take ultimate causation back to the First Cause, the creator. But love is not possible without at least two agents, so we cannot discount human agency, either. That is why I find simplistic narratives, like the Calvinist one and some universalist ones, that disregard human agency entirely. They are not consistent with scriptures that, for example, assign ethical responsibility to humans, and they are not consistent with love.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Ceiling Cat loves it just the same.

You are wiser than your years, young man.