What Does Universal Salvation Mean?

[SaintNick]

You make an assumption that it is the Lord sending messages IMO. Every 'died and went to hell' testimony I ever heard, never lined up with the story of the guy before or after. It's almost like the hell they all experienced had more to do with their particular 'state of mind', than it did some literal place which, logic would expect one believe, should have looked/felt sorta the same. I notice the same things about all the 'went to heaven' stories too. Fun to listen too, but always a different tale???

Well perhaps that is where discernment comes in.

 

[ClementofA]

You make an assumption that it is the Lord sending messages IMO. Every 'died and went to hell' testimony I ever heard, never lined up with the story of the guy before or after. It's almost like the hell they all experienced had more to do with their particular 'state of mind', than it did some literal place which, logic would expect one believe, should have looked/felt sorta the same. I notice the same things about all the 'went to heaven' stories too. Fun to listen too, but always a different tale???

I wonder how many of the hell tales via NDE's are demonicly inspired.

 

[Hillsage]

I wonder how many of the hell tales via NDE's are demonicly inspired.

Well, being a CHARISMATIC I'd be the 'first one' to say that's where true discernment comes in.....wait a minute....NO!, I'd be the 'second one' to say 'that'.

 

[AlexDTX]

I think the living God has gone by many names, and naturally every religion is going to think their name(s) for Him are the only Correct One(s)™. That's just more religion; i.e., nothing to see here.

Your statement seems misleading. What matters is the name that God wants us to call Him, not what each religion wants. It is true that during different periods of human history He has revealed Himself through different names: e.g., Elohim (Gods), El Shaddai (the Almighty, though it is really the Nurturer), Yahweh (I Am or Existence); but in this time it is only Jesus or other language variations. He will change his name in the future, which He states in the book of Revelations. This is the only name by which a man can be saved, so it is not "just more religion."

If knowing God through Jesus is going to differentiate Christianity from other religions, then universal redemption would almost have to be a primary element of that, to give it the glow that puts it over and above business-as-usual in the realm of religious thought.

Again, this seems non sequiter. Christianity is not a religion, although men have made it a religion. It is the relationship that God provides for us by which there is no other way to the Father. I agree that it is a universal redemption for all mankind, but I do not agree that it is automatic. I don't see how the doctrine of universal salvation "gives it a glow that puts it over and above business as usual in the realm of religions thought." When one has the new birth that comes from believing the Gospel one's life is transformed by God Himself.

As it stands now for many denominations who speak of the importance of knowing God through Jesus, in practice they're just like any other religion, complete with hell-fire consequences for not playing by their rules, consequences that could only exist if Jesus hadn't done what he is said to have done for mankind. The result is that with Christianity—at least, Partialist Christianity—there's nothing really special to show for knowing God through Jesus.

On this point I agree. But that is because denominations are business franchises intent on making money so a staff can live full time off believers. That business element makes them no different than any other religion, and I think the sheep are being fleeced by other sheep. But your final statement "there's nothing really special to show for knowing God through Jesus" is wrong. Religious systems may take advantage of believers, but born again believers have God doing wonderful things in their lives.

It sounds like to me, Chaela, that you are trying to make Christianity seem shinier to yourself with the doctrine of universal salvation as a reaction against organized religion. I understand such a reaction, because I have little to do with the Sunday meeting system, either. But I don't throw the baby out with the bath water. All who give their lives to Christ are His children and servants. I trust God to know how to take care of what is His own and what has been entrusted to Him.

 

[AlexDTX]

I understand, but I don't see how the lord couldn't send messages through those who died and specifically saw their mission was to come back and tell of their vision.

If the Lord had done so. You take it for granted that God has done these things. I am not saying that God has not done those things, only that I don't know if He did. But I do know that the Bible is the most trust worthy document of God's communication to us in general. I am conservative in my faith and trust what I know for sure.

 

[Rajni]

Your statement seems misleading. What matters is the name that God wants us to call Him, not what each religion wants.

I’m not speaking of what each religion wants, it’s what each religion thinks God wants them to call Him, whether they wanted it that way or not.

Christianity is not a religion, although men have made it a religion.

Exactly, so for all intents and purposes, it’s basically a religion.

I agree that it is a universal redemption for all mankind, but I do not agree that it is automatic.

I have no reason to believe that our being made alive in Christ is any less automatic than our having died in Adam was. However, I think that this varies among universalists, with some believing it's already a done deal for everyone, and others believing that the salvation of all will cover everyone eventually rather than all at once ("each in his own turn").

I don't see how the doctrine of universal salvation "gives it a glow that puts it over and above business as usual in the realm of religions thought."

Because it’s the only framework (at least, that I know of) in which God loves mankind enough to be the savior of all of it. Unconditional Love. Other god-concepts aren’t nearly as accommodating.

On this point I agree. But that is because denominations are business franchises intent on making money so a staff can live full time off believers. That business element makes them no different than any other religion, and I think the sheep are being fleeced by other sheep.

And the hell-concept is a big part of that. Persuading people that they’ll fry forever if they don’t buy what a particular religion is selling is a huge money-maker.

But your final statement "there's nothing really special to show for knowing God through Jesus" is wrong. Religious systems may take advantage of believers, but born again believers have God doing wonderful things in their lives.

God does wonderful things in the lives of believers and nonbelievers alike. I also believe He will do wonderful things in everyone's lives beyond the grave as well.

It sounds like to me, Chaela, that you are trying to make Christianity seem shinier to yourself with the doctrine of universal salvation as a reaction against organized religion.

No one should have to make Christianity look “shinier”. It should shine all on its own. And universal redemption is key to that. If Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross is to have any real meaning, it would be to impact mankind just as fully as Adam’s transgression did, lest Adam look like the more influential force in the whole deal.

This isn’t a reaction on my part, but a transformation. God really is the Savior of the world.

But I don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

I don’t either, which is why I still consider myself Christian (even if the title, in its modern manifestation, makes me gag at times... I prefer Catholic Universalist... ).

All who give their lives to Christ are His children and servants. I trust God to know how to take care of what is His own and what has been entrusted to Him.

I trust God to take care of everyone.

 

[Christian Counseling Help]

I like to believe in it (I'm not saying I necessarily do) because it seems unjust that even the world's worst person and evil sinner should spend eternity in hell because of all the things they did during a limited lifetime. Perhaps completely ignore the fact how they were brought up. There is a passage in the bible that says "we shall all pass through the fire and our iniquities burned". This for me would make more sense. The burning hell can be like the sulfur [our sinful acts] poured back on our own heads, whereas someone who finds salvation and forgiveness in Christ would be spared this. When talking about judgement the bible says that the dead will be judged according to what they had done in life while the believers and children of light will be judged according to the book of life. But they will still be judged and i think this section can be open to a lot of interpretation. When it says "God is love", how could a God so full of or equating with love accept burning suffering forever because x% of the population simply didn't cut it and fell short of the goody goody two shoes or whatever line is drawn in the sand? Or all the Muslims and Hindus who are devoted to God and behave like better Christians fail the test simply because they did not utter those famous words Christians so heavily rely on? It does not feel right to me. Not that I believe the same thing, but Jim Morrison said "cancel my subscription to the resurrection, I have friends down there". I'm sure I have many friends who would not pass the test that so many Christians feel confident they know, and they might openly speak against God, but they still have good hearts and I cannot subscribe to the notion that they would burn forever in hell.

When the pharisees etc tried constantly to catch Jesus, such as when he was saving on the Sabbath, when he should have not been working, he often replied with simple common sense. I think we should do the same and not always stick so strictly with the general perception of scripture, but think with our hearts too. After all, it has the most nerves in the body after the brain and some say it is our second brain. Perhaps that is where EQ (Emotional Intelligence) originates from.

 

[AlexDTX]

Welcome to the discussion!

I like to believe in it (I'm not saying I necessarily do) because it seems unjust that even the world's worst person and evil sinner should spend eternity in hell because of all the things they did during a limited lifetime. Perhaps completely ignore the fact how they were brought up.

I see this often. This blending of works with justification. No one goes to Hell for what they did, they go for who they are. All mankind is destined for Hell because of the change that occurred in Adam and Eve that they caused and we all inherit. God is perfect and He made a perfect world with two perfect people in it in the beginning. But He wanted life, not machines that could only do what they were programmed to do, so He gave all creatures a will that is free to choose. Knowing the possible outcome He had predetermined to send His Son to die for our sins that would transform mankind to a new perfection. We may ask then, Why didn't He just do it that way in the first place? I can not answer that. However, my guess is that He wants those who want to be in Christ, which has to do with our choice. This is the main reason I do not believe in universal salvation. God wants a voluntary relationship. Saving everyone regardless of whether they want to be saved or not would be to force the relationship, and that is not His way.

The burning hell can be like the sulfur [our sinful acts] poured back on our own heads, whereas someone who finds salvation and forgiveness in Christ would be spared this.

Hell and the Lake of Fire are not the same thing. Hell will be cast into the Lake of Fire. You are confusing the two, although from a practical point of view Hell leads to the Lake of Fire which is why they have become synonyms. In my opinion, and I said this elsewhere in this thread, the Lake of Fire is merely the continuation of the same death we all already have. We are born dead in trespasses and sins. Aging is the slow decomposition of our already dead bodies. This living death we have apart from Christ is the choice of those who reject the gift of life. Thus the Lake of Fire is the choice of those who reject Christ, not a punishment from God. That is why it is called the Second Death. The Lake of Fire from God's point of view is merely the containment of those living dead.

When it says "God is love", how could a God so full of or equating with love accept burning suffering forever because x% of the population simply didn't cut it and fell short of the goody goody two shoes or whatever line is drawn in the sand?

You judge God through a simplistic definition. First, we are fools to judge God. Shall the clay say to the potter what the potter should make? God is more than just Love. He is Righteousness, He is Wisdom, He is Omnipotent, He is Holy, He is Perfection, and so much more.

Second, as stated above, you look at salvation through the lens of works. No one is saved because of their "goody goody two shoes line in the sand" they are saved because they want the Truth and believe the Truth when it is presented to them.

I'm sure I have many friends who would not pass the test that so many Christians feel confident they know, and they might openly speak against God, but they still have good hearts and I cannot subscribe to the notion that they would burn forever in hell.

Still looking at it from a works attitude. Their speaking against God demonstrates they don't want God. They want a world according to their own idea of what a world should be, and believe me, if they did, chaos would result.

 

[AlexDTX]

A disciple is a follower of Christ. I find that if a person "comes to Christ" because of my interpretation of what I've read in the bible....They would then be followers/believers of my doctrine and not students of Christ. I feel that the best witness would be for me to live the life God wants me to live.........That men may see my good works and glorify the father which is in heaven. Any other way would help produce the feeling of "I lead people to Christ," When this is not possible.

When you are shown the truth, you know it....just like you know your name.......we dont think about saying i believe my name is.....we say this is my name. We are free to share this with full assurance that we arent leading anyone astray.......But if you feel that you will be met with positivity and gratefulness after revealing this truth.....you are mistaken....You will be treated just like Jesus was after he revealed it to the pharisees. And you will feel no joy in this persecution.....

Raymond,

I did not answer earlier because I am still trying to understand where the lines are for our part of teaching or discipling others and God's part.

My relationship with God is my plumbline in my understanding of Christianity. I use the Bible as my main reference source, of course, and I think about what others say, but the bottom line is my own walk with Christ.

In that regard I have come to the conclusion that God is my ultimate mentor and the responsibility of my discipleship is shared between my pressing into Him and His orchestration of my life. I have had "mentors" but they all fall short and are used by the Lord in a temporary season of my walk with Him.

In my early years of walking with Christ I was a zealous evangelist. It always mystified me how excuses were made that one should not share the Gospel unless one is prepared to follow up with discipleship. I always wondered, Do they really believe that they are leading people to Christ, then? Is God real to them? If they are being led to Christ, isn't Christ able to take care of those who are being brought to Him?

Paul told the Corinthians that one waters, another plants, but it is Christ who brings the increase (paraphrasing on my part). No one has the ultimate responsibility to teach us about God but God Himself.

But as I said, discipleship is a two way street. I must press into Him, too. This is the biggest reason why I think universal salvation is wrong. It removes our responsibility to press into Him. God wants voluntary relationships. In our mortal existence no one wants friendship with people who reject us. Why should we not believe the same about God? His salvation is for whosoever will, not everyone regardless of their interest in God or not.

The gift of life in Christ is beyond our comprehension. It is the pearl of great price, indeed. We are invited into the community of the eternal Godhead. He is not bringing people who prefer Satan over Him into that community. That would be like injecting Himself with cancer cells. Only those who truly want to be in Christ will be in Christ. Love is reciprocal. Even in our mortal lives we do not stay in relationships where one person has no love for the other. It goes against the grain of God's character who does not violate anyone's wills. He woos, He calls, He showers his good rain on all seeking those who will respond to Him. But He will not make anyone love Him, nor bring into His community those who reject Him. It is utter nonsense to believe that He will.

When I began this thread, I genuinely sought to understand why people believe in universal salvation, but no answer has been given that convinces me otherwise. I know that very thoughtful and diligent study has been made by some. But any study we do will produce what we want to see. Such studies become rationalizations to support what we want instead of being an honest search for Truth.

The very first requirement for becoming a Christian is to acknowledge the truth of our sin and need for salvation. That is absent in the universal salvation doctrine. As Paul Simon wrote in his song, The Boxer:

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

 

[Rajni]

Such studies become rationalizations to support what we want instead of being an honest search for Truth.

I hope I’m reading this wrong but are you suggesting that those who believe in universal redemption are not honestly searching for Truth?

The very first requirement for becoming a Christian is to acknowledge the truth of our sin and need for salvation. That is absent in the universal salvation doctrine.

If that’s one's conclusion regarding universal salvation, then "a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest” could definitely be said of them.

 

[Hillsage]

He is not bringing people who prefer Satan over Him into that community.

I am of the opinion He does. 'Who' was Jesus talking to below? Peter, or Satan...or both? I say both, because Peter was the willing spokesperson for Satan.

MAT 16:23 But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men."

That would be like injecting Himself with cancer cells. Only those who truly want to be in Christ will be in Christ.

While I agree with what you've posted, I disagree with your conclusion that it means 'eternally limited solely', based upon US.
What do you do with all those scriptures that disagree with our nominal definition of 'free will'? I'm referring specifically to all the scriptures speaking of HIS WILL to "drawn, called, chosen, predestined" and last but not least;

ACT 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of God; and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Are all of the "ordained to believe , drawn, called, chosen, predestined" verses, 'up to you' or 'up to God'....as all the other scriptures refer to also.

Love is reciprocal. Even in our mortal lives we do not stay in relationships where one person has no love for the other.

But, we "do not stay" because that's what God would do. We do so because we have not the AGAPE love he manifests to us, and has displayed for us through the prophet
Habbakuk. A man whom God had marry and stay married to in spite of her loveless adulteries....just like Israel? I've known several who've stayed in rotten relationships with the only love in them, being that of sacrificial AGAPE from 'the one'. I do agree your statment is certainly not a 'character' trait of most of the church....but I say that to the churches dismay IMA.

It goes against the grain of God's character who does not violate anyone's wills. He woos, He calls, He showers his good rain on all seeking those who will respond to Him.

What does Jesus say?
MAT 5:45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends (good) rain on the just and on the unjust.

But He will not make anyone love Him, nor bring into His community those who reject Him. It is utter nonsense to believe that He will.

You mean like 'community rejecting/killing' Paul, loved him and came willingly to Him?

1 John 4:19 We love him, because he first loved us.
And it was God's manifestation of love for Paul, on the road to Dammascus that drew/dragged (Greek) him to believe.

When I began this thread, I genuinely sought to understand why people believe in universal salvation, but no answer has been given that convinces me otherwise.

I hope you can see from just this one post that your position has neither convinced me, that you are thinking like I think. And you are making statements that I am quoting scriptural disagreement to.

I know that very thoughtful and diligent study has been made by some. But any study we do will produce what we want to see.

I think my study and my answers to you here, is a prime example of the comment you've made above, for both of us.

The very first requirement for becoming a Christian is to acknowledge the truth of our sin and need for salvation. That is absent in the universal salvation doctrine. As Paul Simon wrote in his song, The Boxer:

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

I agree 100% with this post too....with the exception of ; Name one place where we have ever stated there's no need to "acknowledge the truth of our sin and need for salvation?" That statement reveals a crystal clear 'hearing what you want to hear and disregarding the rest' IMO. Please back up this opinion you've posted. I do not see it being presented by us, but only assumed by you. But I would welcome the opportunity to dialogue concerning any proof you believe supports your statement.

 

[AlexDTX]

I hope I’m reading this wrong but are you suggesting that those who believe in universal redemption are not honestly searching for Truth?

If that’s one's conclusion regarding universal salvation, then "a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest” could definitely be said of them.

Of course not. From what I have read, the majority are thoughtful, intelligent people. However, as a fellow thoughtful intelligent person, I know that our hearts are much more complicated than we understand and we have bias that we are often unaware of. Exposing that bias to us is the work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts.

That being said, yes, all of us naturally hear what we want to hear and disregard the rest. Maturing in Christ is an ever growing transparency with God and our selves where God helps us to see our selves as He sees us. Recognizing that I am a sinner that needed salvation was the first step in this transparency. Jesus said that all who love the Truth will come to the light, but those who love lies (paraphrasing) remain in the darkness so their deeds can remain hidden.

God is Truth and invites us to live in His Truth. I do not see His accepting darkness into his light if that darkness wants to remain dark.

 

[AlexDTX]

I am of the opinion He does. 'Who' was Jesus talking to below? Peter, or Satan...or both? I say both, because Peter was the willing spokesperson for Satan.

MAT 16:23 But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men."

Peter was unregenerate. He still thought with his natural mind. To say that Peter was a "willing spokesperson for Satan" suggests that Peter was consciously speaking on behalf of Satan. That is not true. We could then say that Caiaphas consciously spoke on behalf of the Holy Spirit when he said:

Joh 11:49 ...Ye know nothing at all,
Joh 11:50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.
Joh 11:51 And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;

Yet the text clearly states that he spoke not of himself. This applies to Peter in the same way.

While I agree with what you've posted, I disagree with your conclusion that it means 'eternally limited solely', based upon US.
What do you do with all those scriptures that disagree with our nominal definition of 'free will'? I'm referring specifically to all the scriptures speaking of HIS WILL to "drawn, called, chosen, predestined" and last but not least;

ACT 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of God; and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Are all of the "ordained to believe , drawn, called, chosen, predestined" verses, 'up to you' or 'up to God'....as all the other scriptures refer to also.

I don't understand your answer. I have repeatedly said that salvation is a two way street. God calls us but we must respond. What I think you are addressing is Calvinism. I do not believe that God chooses some for life and some for death. He wants all to live, but he gives us freedom to choose. The flip side, however, is His omniscience. He knows those who will reject Christ and those who will accept. Nonetheless there is a factor of reality that has to occur. When Adam was created with a free will that meant He knew Adam would fall and already had the plan of salvation prepared. However, knowing he would fall and his falling in reality are two different things. There is something I do not understand about reality and God's omniscience, but I am aware of it.

Another believer in universal salvation incoherently spoke of what God must be doing in the multiverse. Multiverse? This is in the Bible? There is a multiverse in the mind of God, in my opinion, in the sense that God knows all possible outcomes from all possible choices, yet will still accomplish His purpose in the end. We are not the ones who can say what that ultimate purpose is, including the salvation of all people. Jesus said that the path to destruction is wide and broad, but the path to life is straight and narrow.

But, we "do not stay" because that's what God would do. We do so because we have not the AGAPE love he manifests to us, and has displayed for us through the prophet
Habbakuk. A man whom God had marry and stay married to in spite of her loveless adulteries....just like Israel? I've known several who've stayed in rotten relationships with the only love in them, being that of sacrificial AGAPE from 'the one'. I do agree your statment is certainly not a 'character' trait of most of the church....but I say that to the churches dismay IMA.

I understand your point, and kudos to those who stay in rotten marriages. I think Habakkuk is a poor example, however, since he was a prophet who did what God commanded to make a point to Israel of His own broken relationship with Israel and the Mosaic covenant. However, God is creating a perfect body for himself, which is only found in Jesus. Those who do not accept Jesus are not wearing the proper wedding garments and will be cast out.

What does Jesus say?
MAT 5:45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends (good) rain on the just and on the unjust.

What I mean is that those who respond to Him will understand the good rain that is falling. Jesus simply meant that God is good and His goodness is given to all whether they know it or not.

You mean like 'community rejecting/killing' Paul, loved him and came willingly to Him?

1 John 4:19 We love him, because he first loved us.
And it was God's manifestation of love for Paul, on the road to Dammascus that drew/dragged (Greek) him to believe.

Paul had a zeal without knowledge. He genuinely sought to serve the Lord and was doing so as he understood through the Mosaic system. When Jesus revealed himself to Paul, his knowledge was corrected.

I hope you can see from just this one post that your position has neither convinced me, that you are thinking like I think. And you are making statements that I am quoting scriptural disagreement to.

I made it clear from the beginning of this thread that I was not seeking to convince anyone to believe one way or another , but I would, nonetheless state what I agreed or disagreed with. My purpose was to understand the position, but, honestly, no supporter of universal salvation has convinced me to support the doctrine. I have also stated that many adherents to the doctrine are clearly genuine Christians who know Christ and still see the need to share the Gospel to others. As Paul said to the Philippians, either way Christ is preached and therein do I rejoice.

I think my study and my answers to you here, is a prime example of the comment you've made above, for both of us.

Yes, I agree. Bias comes into our hearts without our realizing it many times. I originally believed, for example, that there is only one coming back of Jesus. But years of repeatedly hearing in churches that there was a "secret" rapture for the church before the tribulation caused me to start accepting that position. But when I married my wife she stood steadfast on her view that there is only one return of Christ and that all the world will see it. That made me aware of how a bias came into my mind that I did not consciously choose.

I agree 100% with this post too....with the exception of ; Name one place where we have ever stated there's no need to "acknowledge the truth of our sin and need for salvation?" That statement reveals a crystal clear 'hearing what you want to hear and disregarding the rest' IMO. Please back up this opinion you've posted. I do not see it being presented by us, but only assumed by you. But I would welcome the opportunity to dialogue concerning any proof you believe supports your statement.

If you are referring to the use of the traditional sinner's prayer, I do not mean that. That is a recent invention of DL Moody. However, Romans 6 makes it clear that we are all sinners and Romans 10 tells us that if we believe in our hearts Christ is Lord and confess it with our mouth we will be saved. In my case, I knew I was a sinner, but did not see the need for a Savior until I realized that there really are demons who want me destroyed. Then I realized I needed a Savior. Of course, I also did not believe that a man became God, but when I understood that God became a man, salvation came to me.

In regards to my point in my last response, however, my point is that Truth will not let Lie abide in Him. Our discipleship is that process of coming to grips with the truth about ourselves and understanding who Truth really is. As someone once said, God is not the best possible us that we could be. He is greater and much more different.

Again, Hillsage, I really don't care if you believe in universal salvation or not. I only wanted to understand why people like yourselves do so.

The only possible harm I see in the doctrine is the lack of effort to tell the lost about Christ's gift of life. But that is not the case. Many universal salvation adherents say they still tell people about Jesus. And, frankly, there are still thousands of pew sitters that believe otherwise who are too cowardly to share the Gospel with others.

 

[AlexDTX]

I understand, but I don't see how the lord couldn't send messages through those who died and specifically saw their mission was to come back and tell of their vision.

I am trying to read every post, so if I already answered this, please forgive me. It contradicts what Jesus said in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. He wanted someone to come back from the dead and warn them of the torment, but Abraham said that they had Moses and the Prophets. If they won't believe them neither would they believe someone coming back from the dead.

 

[ClementofA]

I am trying to read every post, so if I already answered this, please forgive me. It contradicts what Jesus said in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. He wanted someone to come back from the dead and warn them of the torment, but Abraham said that they had Moses and the Prophets. If they won't believe them neither would they believe someone coming back from the dead.

Some people would question if he had actually died. OTOH if it were the resurrected Jesus, and they could stick their hands into His side, or see Him suddenly appear in a room with closed doors, as doubting Thomas did, then they might believe:

John 20:24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. 27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. 28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. 29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Compare also:

Matthew 11:21 Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.

Luke 10:13 Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works had been done in Tyre and Sidon, which have been done in you, they had a great while ago repented, sitting in sackcloth and ashes.

Will Tyre & Sidon be damned forever because they didn't get a chance to see what would have brought about their repentance?

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

 

[Hillsage]

I don't understand your answer. I have repeatedly said that salvation is a two way street. God calls us but we must respond.

It is the 'CALLING of God' which allows us to respond, after we hear it. And that's by His will, not yours.

JOH 1:12 But as many as received him,.... that believe on his name:
13 Which were born (again),...nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

All I see is predestination for now, as well for the ages to come, concerning God's plan for ALL.

ISA 55:11 so shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

ROM 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word/rhema of God.

If God doesn't call with the present tense 'word/rhema' which proceedeth out his mouth, you aren't going to have life, from the faith to believe.

EPH 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God.

MAT 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word/rhema that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

What I think you are addressing is Calvinism. I do not believe that God chooses some for life and some for death. He wants all to live, but he gives us freedom to choose.

God chose for all to die, in Adam. And He chose for all to live 'in Christ'. Some become His 'born again', here, but most will be later in the age of His coming.

1CO 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

The flip side, however, is His omniscience. He knows those who will reject Christ and those who will accept.

Foreknowledge/Omniscience is not the same word biblically/Greek as predestine...not even an argument there scripturally. But if what you say is correct, He would be the most hideous despot ever, to bring them into a world where he knows ahead He is going to throw them into to eternal hopeless torture.

Paul had a zeal without knowledge. He genuinely sought to serve the Lord and was doing so as he understood through the Mosaic system. When Jesus revealed himself to Paul, his knowledge was corrected.

IOW after being blown off his a_ _/donkey, and hearing audibly the voice of Jesus, Paul with an act of his 'free will' accepted Jesus. Is that what you're saying? Well, guess what? I agree. But you want to know why I agree?

PHI 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

I do not ascribe to any of the typical 'free will' beliefs, when it comes to accepting Jesus as our savior. I was addressing a bunch of that but 'deleted' just to shorten this post. It's not relevant to thread and UR.

If you are referring to the use of the traditional sinner's prayer, I do not mean that. That is a recent invention of DL Moody. However, Romans 6 makes it clear that we are all sinners and Romans 10 tells us that if we believe in our hearts Christ is Lord and confess it with our mouth we will be saved.

And scripture tells us that will happen to all..."to the glory of God"....not to his shame, that He lost most of His beloved creation to an 'inferior to Him' devil/Satan/serpent which He omnisciently made, who then out smarted 'most' of the stupid humans God omnisciently made. I hope you understand I can say those things with no fear, because I serve a smarter God who has a better plan. One which isn't finished until the end of the ages TO COME.

PHI 2:9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I know the church says Jesus will be beating them into this confession glorifying God. I think that's because their heart knows not, what my heart knows.

Again, Hillsage, I really don't care if you believe in universal salvation or not. I only wanted to understand why people like yourselves do so.

I appreciate your demeanor Alex. It has spoken well of you throughout this thread, as well as many others. You're one of the few who act and treat us like we're still brothers in Christ, even though we're obviously not twins.

 

[Rajni]

JOH 1:12 But as many as received him,.... that believe on his name:
13 Which were born (again),...nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

This is key.

Jesus said we must be "born" again. Our birth isn’t something we do, it’s something that’s done to us. If personal effort of any kind was supposed to factor into that process, Jesus would’ve phrased it in a way that better conveyed that.

I do not ascribe to any of the typical 'free will' beliefs, when it comes to accepting Jesus as our savior. I was addressing a bunch of that but 'deleted' just to shorten this post. It's not relevant to thread and UR.

I’m not even sure how “free will” is supposed to factor into being “dead” in one’s transgressions and/or a “slave to sin”. We can’t have it both ways, now, can we?

 

[Christian Counseling Help]

This blending of works with justification. No one goes to Hell for what they did, they go for who they are. All mankind is destined for Hell because of the change that occurred in Adam and Eve that they caused and we all inherit. God is perfect and He made a perfect world with two perfect people in it in the beginning. But He wanted life, not machines that could only do what they were programmed to do, so He gave all creatures a will that is free to choose.

I think you are misinterpreting a lot of what I wrote. Anyway, never heard of the term universal salvation but I would not say that everyone gets saved but rather i do not believe that certain people will burn in hell forever, unless we consider hell the shame we must face once we get to the other side or whatever for the life we chose to live when we had that limited chance. perhaps that one third of humanity who refused to repent. but i think all this talk and speculation of remuneration or what not after death is a potential distraction. with great interest i have read many articles and theories about this concept from a quantum physics and other point of view, but the bottom line is we should focus on our present life and the moment and broadening our understanding and doing good works... Or maybe there is reincarnation and our souls and spirits go through a process of ascension. who knows what is going on, really. sometimes i think we really are in a matrix bathtub. we live in 3 dimensional space, the lowest common denominator. math has proven that at least 11 dimensions exist. who are we to say conscious life does not exist in any of the other dimensions? we are ameba in a petre dish and our perception of reality is largely dictated by our eyeballs with its closest connection to our brains. so only the very narrow band of the visible spectrum, while other animals can see in infrared. so all this speculation of "what happens afterwards" kinda just veers us off track a little bit and i believe the exercise is more around the heart and the moment, deeds as you say, a fine line. the hearts of wretched people can certainly be turned and saved, so who is this "we are judged based on who we are" you talk about? helping others towards salvation. in the end, i think Paul said it well when he said it is all about Love, Love, Love. If you don't have that, you have nothing. Focus on that and the rest should fall into place.

 

[AlexDTX]

OTOH if it were the resurrected Jesus, and they could stick their hands into His side, or see Him suddenly appear in a room with closed doors, as doubting Thomas did, then they might believe:

Even though he is called doubting Thomas, he was a believer in Messiah before the crucifixion. He, like the rest of the disciples, were biased by the doctrine that Messiah would deliver Israel from the Roman occupation.

Will Tyre & Sidon be damned forever because they didn't get a chance to see what would have brought about their repentance?

What's that to me? I must follow Jesus. The fate of others is His concern, not mine.

 

[Rajni]

The fate of others is His concern, not mine.

Oh dear.