The fatal flaw of Universalism

[Oldmantook]

Almost all of those verses, often quite poetic, are sweeping generalizations or descriptions about the scope of God's love, authority, forgiveness, or etc. They do not clearly show that every last human will be saved, period.

On the other hand, there are about a half-dozen verses in the New Testament which do at least hint at universal salvation. The problem is, however, that there are many, many more which speak of being lost eternally, and any case that is made for universal salvation has to contend with these.

Naturally, advocates of universalism rarely take them on, but they nevertheless stand as evidence that universal salvation is not on solid ground when it comes to Scripture.

Instead of generalizing, what do you suppose might by the strongest verse against Universalism? Go ahead and offer it and I'll take a crack at it.

 

[RaymondG]

Instead of generalizing, what do you suppose might by the strongest verse against Universalism? Go ahead and offer it and I'll take a crack at it.

Matthew 25:40-42
"41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:"

 

[Hillsage]

Straw man as I never wrote that there's only one more age to come. However, grace does indeed save us in this age with the exception of blasphemy against the Spirit which the text clearly states. It is not forgiven in the next age either which is the Millennium because Jesus will rule with a "rod of iron" per Rev 2:27. No grace there. Eph 2:7 states that in the coming ages (except the Millennium) God will show immeasurable grace.

Sorry, I misread you. It is BNR32FAN who is in error.

 

[Oldmantook]

Matthew 25:40-42
"41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:"

Thanks for your response but you need to examine the context of this passage. It has nothing at all to do with eternity or "everlasting." The context is Jesus is speaking when he returns to the earth at his second coming (v.31). He then judges those peoples/nations that are still alive at his return. He commends the sheep and invites them to enter into his millennial kingdom (v.34). These are the peoples/nations who populate the kingdom while Jesus reigns on the earth for 1,000 years. On the other hand he condemns the goats and commands them to depart to the lake of fire (v.41). Jesus summarizes his judgment of these two groups of people stating: And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life” (v.46). Eternal cannot mean "forever" in these two clauses because the righteous (sheep) enter into the Millennium for 1,000 years - not forever. By the same token because of the parallelism in this verse the unrighteous (goats) depart to the lake of fire for the same duration of time - 1,000 years - not everlasting.

 

[Saint Steven]

I do not dismiss the Idea that all will be saved......Just think that using the human justice system, is an unwise way to promote it.

Thanks for the supportive statement toward the greater hope.

Perhaps the strongest point to be made in terms of a comparison with human justice is that God comes out looking like the worst tyrant in the universe. It seems that even Adolf Hitler pales in comparison with someone that would keep their enemies alive and conscious while burning them forever with no hope of escape. There is no crime that fits that level of punishment. I think that is what @Shrewd Manager was trying to say.

The God that told us he could not forgive us unless we forgive others would certainly hold himself to the same standard. IMHO

 

[Albion]

Perhaps the strongest point to be made in terms of a comparison with human justice is that God comes out looking like the worst tyrant in the universe.

Again, that kind of observation makes God subservient to his own creation's ideas on justice, etc. See below for more in that vein.

The God that told us he could not forgive us unless we forgive others would certainly hold himself to the same standard. IMHO

As you say...it's "IMHO." But that is not what determines God's decisions.

 

[Der Alte]

Good question. Let me add some more:
-What does all mean to God?
"John 12:32
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me."

I call your Jn 12:32 and raise you a Matt 7:22-23. Note there is that word "never" again. But I can't find a verse where Jesus abrogates this verse and welcomes even the workers of lawlessness.

Matthew 7:22-23
(22) On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?'
(23) And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'​

"1 Timothy 4:10
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men...."

-What does every mean to God?

Good question. Now show me one verse, 2 or more would be better, where God, Himself, or Jesus, Himself says that they will save "all men" even the unrighteous, after death. While doing that consider this passage.

Revelation 21:4-8
(4) He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away."
(5) And he who was seated on the throne said, "Behold, I am making all things new." Also he said, "Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true."
(6) And he said to me, "It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life without payment.
(7) The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son.
(8) But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death."​

Vs. 4 no more death
Vs. 5 all things new.
Vs. 8 Eight groups of people are thrown into the lake of fire which is the second death.

Romans 14:11
"For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God."

Another out-of-context proof text.
The NT twice says that God will make Jesus' enemies His footstool. Luke 20:43, Acts of the apostles 2:35. Do you know what that means? But I cannot find a verse which states that those enemy footstools become faithful followers.

Joshua 10:22-24
(22) Then Joshua said, "Open the mouth of the cave and bring those five kings out to me from the cave."
(23) And they did so, and brought those five kings out to him from the cave, the king of Jerusalem, the king of Hebron, the king of Jarmuth, the king of Lachish, and the king of Eglon.
(24) And when they brought those kings out to Joshua, Joshua summoned all the men of Israel and said to the chiefs of the men of war who had gone with him, "Come near; put your feet on the necks of these kings." Then they came near and put their feet on their necks.
Joshua 10:26
(26) And afterward Joshua struck them and put them to death, and he hanged them on five trees. And they hung on the trees until evening.​

 

[Jord Simcha]

Footstool doesn't sound negative to me. Something God stands on, or rests on? Seems positive to me.

 

[Saint Steven]

As you say...it's "IMHO." But that is not what determines God's decisions.

I would like to challenge the popular notion that God is free to do whatever he wants. He is not. Or better stated, he will not.

I believe God will not do anything that violates his character. Which means we can trust him. The Damnationist' view of God's character is just wrong. The God that requires us to forgive others if we want to be forgiven would never fail to live up to that same standard of godliness.

 

[martymonster]

Thanks for the supportive statement toward the greater hope.

Perhaps the strongest point to be made in terms of a comparison with human justice is that God comes out looking like the worst tyrant in the universe. It seems that even Adolf Hitler pales in comparison with someone that would keep their enemies alive and conscious while burning them forever with no hope of escape. There is no crime that fits that level of punishment. I think that is what @Shrewd Manager was trying to say.

The God that told us he could not forgive us unless we forgive others would certainly hold himself to the same standard. IMHO

Yep, a punishment that goes as far beyond the crime (understatement of the century) as eternal punishment does, is the complete opposite of justice.

 

[Jord Simcha]

As you say...it's "IMHO." But that is not what determines God's decisions.

What if he has the "mind of Christ"?

 

[martymonster]

Footstool doesn't sound negative to me. Something God stands on, or rests on? Seems positive to me.

Yes, Christ making his enemies a footstool under his feet, means he will finally have rest from the job that he has been given, which is to bring all humanity into the kingdom.

 

[Der Alte]

Yep, a punishment that goes as far beyond the crime (understatement of the century) as eternal punishment does, is the complete opposite of justice.

When did we get to tell God what is and is not just?
Do you think it was just when God destroyed millions of people in the flood, including children and infants?
Was it just when God destroyed thousands of people with fire, in Gomorrah and the other cities, including children and infants?
Was it just when God told Israel to go into Canaanite cities and destroying every living thing, including children and infants?
Don't these punishments go far beyond the crime? Children and infants committed no crimes?

 

[Saint Steven]

I’m not exactly sure to be honest. I’ve told you that before, but what is clear is that this sin will not be forgiven and if at any time this sin is forgiven then this statement in Luke 12:10 is incorrect.

Oh, I remember this discussion from earlier.
You are talking about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, the unpardonable sin. Yet...
- You have no idea what the sin is exactly.
- You don't know if you may have committed it.
- You believe you will burn forever if you have. (because it is unforgivable)

Am I missing anything here?

 

[Saint Steven]

Paul gives us an example of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

Heb. 6:4-6
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Only a saved person can commit this sin. This person will never seek to be forgiven, he is doomed. I can give you the complete story if you are interested. Involving exactly how and what these people were doing when they committed this sin.

That has nothing to do with blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
And the scripture you quoted is in conflict with many others on the same subject.
Like these.

Matthew 18:12-13
“What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? 13 And if he finds it, truly I tell you, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off.

Luke 15:7
I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent.

 

[Albion]

I would like to challenge the popular notion that God is free to do whatever he wants. He is not. Or better stated, he will not.

I believe God will not do anything that violates his character. Which means we can trust him.

Yes, but you are saying this BECAUSE you have a concept of what a god should be like. And that is a concept that you learned.

There is no essential or inherent reason why God, if there is a god, has to be of any certain style.

 

[martymonster]

Yes, but you are saying this BECAUSE you have a concept of what a god should be like. And that is a concept that you learned.

There is no essential or inherent reason why God, if there is a god, has to be of any certain style.

God himself tells us what he is like, by what telling us what he expects of us. He does not have double standards and is not a hypocrite.

 

[Albion]

God himself tells us what he is like, by what telling us what he expects of us. He does not have double standards and is not a hypocrite.

If we are Bible-believers, that is.

 

[martymonster]

If we are Bible-believers, that is.

Meaning what exactly?

 

[Saint Steven]

Yes, but you are saying this BECAUSE you have a concept of what a god should be like. And that is a concept that you learned.

There is no essential or inherent reason why God, if there is a god, has to be of any certain style.

If God is a liar, a cheat, a thief, a murderer, a swindler, a torturer, and worse; then he can't be trusted.
If he can't be trusted, why should he be good for your promise of salvation? Maybe it is an evil joke.
He'll laugh while he tosses you in hell. Because he can do whatever he wants, right?