Universalism...why not?

[surrender1]

Yet you must ACCEPT that act for it to apply to you.

Which Christian Universalism also believes.

 

[The Scientist of the Eternal Pinecone]

First of all, your twisted logic has no bearing on who God is or his nature. God is God whether you like it or not. What God can do is not the same as what God will do. God set up a system for salvation and those who obey the Gospel will find that salvation, and those who want to live their life the way they want without God, will find Damnation.

Perhaps our [Christian Universalism] theology says more about our own heart than God's.

Read it like this ^.

Yes it does.

Which Christian Universalism also believes.

2 Timothy 4:3-4
For the time will come when men will not tolerate sound doctrine, but with itching ears they will gather around themselves teachers to suit their own desires. So they will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

 

[surrender1]

Such an interpretation completely ignores the very words of Jesus that Godms wrath would abide on those who disobeyed him.

That wrath was regarding national judgment that took place in AD 70

 

[surrender1]

The tread is about universal salvation, not the fact that God would have all to be saved.

Ha ha! I know what the thread is about...I started it. :-D
If God wants all to be saved AND he can save all, then he WILL save all.

 

[surrender1]

Paul isn't explaining universal salvation, he is explaining universal opportunity. It is AVAILABLE, but "MANY" don't take advantage of the offer.
Matt 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

This is most specifically a warning to the nation of Israel to go the narrow way of peace (Jesus' way) rather than violence. Those who wanted to go the way of violence ended up in war and the Romans came in and like a flood swept away those who did not heed Jesus' words to flee when they were surrounded by armies.

 

[Tree of Life]

If my child became a wayward soul, as any loving parent I would do everything I could to woo him back to a healthy and restorative place. I would never give up on him. I would put no time limits on my love and patience towards him.

God feels the same way about all of his children. Not all people, however, are children of God in this paternalistic-love-and-commitment sense.

If our Father desires all men to be saved, why can't he continue to work on their souls postmortem? If he wanted to, couldn't he do it? Can't God do what he wants to do? I think he can do what he wants to do.

He certainly is able to save all men. But in God's mysterious sovereignty this is not what he has seen fit to do. In an important sense he does not want all individuals to be saved.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

That wrath was regarding national judgment that took place in AD 70

John 3:36 is God's eternal wrath

 

[surrender1]

Conflation of God's prescriptive will and decreative will

So God's prescriptive will and decretive will are at odds.

God feels the same way about all of his children. Not all people, however, are children of God in this paternalistic-love-and-commitment sense.



He certainly is able to save all men. But in God's mysterious sovereignty this is not what he has seen fit to do. In an important sense he does not want all individuals to be saved.

It's refreshing to hear someone be honest that they believe God does not want all people to be saved. I notice that many did not vote in the poll and I think it's because they can't bring themselves to admit that the logical end to their theology is that God doesn't want all people to be saved (since God can do what he wants even without violating free will, given enough time). The reason it's so difficult to bring ourselves to admit such a thing is because our god-given gut level instinct tells us that it's wrong to snuff out, or worse yet eternally torment, image-bearing human beings.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

So God's prescriptive will and decretive will are at odds.

It's refreshing to hear someone be honest that they believe God does not want all people to be saved. I notice that many did not vote in the poll and I think it's because they can't bring themselves to admit that the logical end to their theology is that God doesn't want all people to be saved (since God can do what he wants even without violating free will, given enough time). The reason it's so difficult to bring ourselves to admit such a thing is because our god-given gut level instinct tells us that it's wrong to snuff out, or worse yet eternally torment, image-bearing human beings.

No the poll is rather open ended and meant to trap people in their reply...

It is always a good play to assume motives behind people's actions though

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

So, if God's love and patience run out on a soul upon death, either God doesn't want all men to be saved or God can't do what he wants to do. Which is it?

Well, I'll give you credit for one thing. You've got a well-structured rationality. You've correctly identified logical contradictions in popular theology which most Christians try to ignore. What it comes down to is three assumptions, as follows:

1) God loves everyone.
2) God's love lasts forever.
3) God can do anything.

Of the above three assertions, only two can be true, and the third must be false. Most Christians try to reconcile all three at the same time. Let's look at the breakdown of how people generally approach the matter, though.

1) That God doesn't love everyone.
People who believe that God loved the world, but that doesn't necessarily mean he loved every single person, fall almost entirely into the Calvinist/Reformed camp. They believe that God's love lasts forever and that God can do anything. Therefore, once we go to Heaven we are there forever and will not someday fall like the angels did (over the course of eternity we might all eventually be doomed, otherwise). The sticking point is that God made people he never loved, who were always destined for Hell.
Free will advocates who say that God chooses not to violate our will unwittingly suggest that God doesn't love everyone. In fact, they imply that God doesn't love anyone quite so much as he loves the idea of free will. That's a pretty mild love in the face of eternal torment. The love of God becomes universally indifferent.

2) That God's love doesn't last forever.
People who believe in free will sometimes come to the conclusion that God loves us only up to the grave, and then his love expires if we are unsaved. This should be a desperately frightful position, because it means that over the course of eternity in Heaven there is no guarantee of God's eternal love. We could still end up in Hell eventually. It also implies that God has a changeable nature.

3) That God can't do anything.
Without meaning to, free will advocates deny the omnipotence of God by saying that he can't violate our free will (those who don't say that God simply chooses not to). If he can't do that, then he can't change the course of history, and prophecy has a way of going down the drain, among other things. Most importantly, it negates his omnipotence, which pretty much shatters our confidence in just about everything, because nothing can be assured if God can't do absolutely everything.
Unwittingly, though, the universalists (you) fall into this camp. In attempting to embrace all three attributes, they seem to think that God can't always save a person without toasting them in Hell. It's not loving to toast a person in Hell for any period of time, eternal or otherwise. You wouldn't roast your child on a spit for any length of time. So you think you've solved the dilemma, but you've actually exacerbated it by redefining love to a horrible new low, making the love of God even worse than the unfaithfulness of the sinner.

Some things to consider:

Whom does the Bible say God calls his children? (1 John 3:1)

Simply adding more time does not necessarily make all things inevitable. If human nature is like a hyperbolic curve, then more time only makes a sinner harder and a saint more faithful. Likewise, if only time were needed to bring the Hell-dwellers to faith, then that same time could also bring the Heaven dwellers to destruction, as a matter of inevitability.

The Bible is clear about the existence of Hell, and it implies very strongly that Hell is a place that never ends.

 

[surrender1]

No the poll is rather open ended and meant to trap people in their reply...

It is always a good play to assume motives behind people's actions though

Oh really? Pray tell, then. Exactly what option did I leave out?

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Oh really? Pray tell, then. Exactly what option did I leave out?

You presented the options as you see them. Like a great denominationslist should do, give a slanted view to fit your view of who God is.

Your view, but an incorrect one

 

[faroukfarouk]

If my child became a wayward soul, as any loving parent I would do everything I could to woo him back to a healthy and restorative place. I would never give up on him. I would put no time limits on my love and patience towards him.

If our Father desires all men to be saved, why can't he continue to work on their souls postmortem? If he wanted to, couldn't he do it? Can't God do what he wants to do? I think he can do what he wants to do.

So, if God desires all men to be saved and if God can do what he wants to do, he wouldn't put a time limit (i.e. upon death) on his love and patience towards us.

So, if God's love and patience run out on a soul upon death, either God doesn't want all men to be saved or God can't do what he wants to do. Which is it?

What about your sins?

Nothing that defiles can enter His presence. He is not going to set aside His character so that you and I can somehow be exceptions. It is by the Cross of Christ that the truly repentant believer is reconciled to a holy God (Colossians 1.20).

 

[GillDouglas]

Explain to me how the seed of the serpent (the children of wrath [unbelievers]) are to be reconciled with God, having absolutely no desire for Him and care not for His people? And I refer to those who remain in their sinful state, never coming to Christ. Jesus said of these, "Ye are of your father, the Devil; and the lusts of your father it is your will to do." (John 8:44) The devil and the fallen angels are to be left outside, and we can say with an almost certainty that the seed will too.

 

[Tree of Life]

It's refreshing to hear someone be honest that they believe God does not want all people to be saved. I notice that many did not vote in the poll and I think it's because they can't bring themselves to admit that the logical end to their theology is that God doesn't want all people to be saved (since God can do what he wants even without violating free will, given enough time). The reason it's so difficult to bring ourselves to admit such a thing is because our god-given gut level instinct tells us that it's wrong to snuff out, or worse yet eternally torment, image-bearing human beings.

Whatever our gut instincts might tell us I would rather trust the plain words of Scripture when they are at odds with my gut.

 

[surrender1]

What about your sins?

Nothing that defiles can enter His presence. He is not going to set aside His character so that you and I can somehow be exceptions. It is by the Cross of Christ that the truly repentant believer is reconciled to a holy God (Colossians 1.20).

God can work on souls in this life and in the next, if he wants to in order that they eventually profess Christ.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Leave it to a Universalist to unite the Baptist/Methodist/Charismatic in an umbrella of agreement on something!

 

[surrender1]

You presented the options as you see them. Like a great denominationslist should do, give a slanted view to fit your view of who God is.

Your view, but an incorrect one

Your accusation that my options are limited in order to trap others is unfounded unless you can tell me which options I left out.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Universalism is mans attempt to rationalize a Just and Holy God. The very definition of "creating a god in your own image."

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Your accusation that my options are limited in order to trap others is unfounded unless you can tell me which options I left out.

They are listed go look at them it is not hard...

You have the options of
God doesn't want all to be saved (unbiblical)
God can't do what he wants to do (unbiblical)
C-(way unbiblical)
D-presumptuous