The True Church? I'm Disillusioned.

[GodsGrace101]

except the Bible doesn't define Church the way that you do.

I believe that the bible does explain Church (capital C) as the other member did...it is the Body of Christ.

It is the church that may not be what Jesus had in mind.

What do you believe He had in mind?

I believe He had in mind a change in humanity...
a fellowship of believers...
a remembrance of Him...
Disciples....

 

[ArmyMatt]

It makes perfect sense:




In Mt.18:6 is the lame warning of a punishment which is compared to mere drowning, which is nothing compared to being kept alive for the sole purpose of being tortured for all the "endless" ages of eternity that have "no end" & "never" cease. Jesus says it is "better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea". OTOH, if He had been a believer in endless punishment, He could have expressed that by saying it is better for them to have never lived, never been conceived, or that their parents had never known (had sex with) one another. Compare this anti-biblical Jewish view that the Lord Jesus Christ, Love Omnipotent, rejected:

"To every individual is apportioned two shares, one in hell and one in paradise. At death, however, the righteous man's portion in hell is exchanged, so that he has two in heaven, while the reverse is true in the case of sinners (Ḥag. 15a). Hence it would have been better for the latter not to have lived at all (Yeb. 63b)." GEHENNA - JewishEncyclopedia.com



Better not to have been born. Not to have never existed.

Jesus said it would have been better if Judas had not been born. He did not say it would have been better if Judas had never been conceived or existed. The latter opposes universalism, the former does not necessarily do so. One who dies in the womb without being born has existed. To not be born & die before being born means that one existed.

It would be better to be (1) concieved (& therefore to exist) & not be born than (2) to be born & live a wicked life (e.g. Judas Iscariot), because the former is in better standing with God than the latter (compare, for example, Lk.12:47-48). Judas will suffer the wrath of God of which the child in utero, who was never born, is not deserving. Therefore, for Judas, it would have been better if he had never been born, but died in his mother's womb. But, though he will suffer the wrath of God, this does not rule out the possibility of his ultimate salvation. Therefore Mt.26:24 fails as a proof text against him being saved.




None of those verses refer to a "fate worse than...nonexistence". And a "fate worse than death" need not be endless tortures & is nowhere near being similar to endless tortures. Compare:

Heb.10:28 A man that hath set at nought Moses' law dieth without compassion on the word of two or three witnesses: 29 of how much sorer punishment, think ye, shall he be judged worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

Stoning to death is not a very sore or long lasting punishment. People suffered far worse deaths via the torture methods of the eternal hell believing Medieval Inquisitionists and the German Nazis under Hitler.

Therefore, if the writer of Hebrews believed that wicked, rebellious, Christ rejectors would be punished with something so monstrous as being endlessly annihilated or tormented, he would not have chosen to compare their punishment to something so lame as being stoned to death. Clearly he did not believe Love Omnipotent is an unfeeling terminator machine or sadist who abandons forever the beings He created in His own image & likeness so easily.


***********************************************



I destroyed all your "proof texts" against universalism showing they failed as such "proof texts". That's why your quoted verses are so lame. If Scripture actually taught the endless tortures or endless annihilation doctrine, why isn't it being shouted in the most clear language repeatedly from Genesis to Revelation. Such doctrines are a joke.

Yet another lame, feeble, failing attempt to support your theology. Nothing there states there are no more chances after the second coming. Nothing there states the Love of Love Crucified the Omnipotent has expired like a carton of milk & the Almighty is powerless to save. Nothing states Love unending will hold grudges, bitterness and hate against anyone for all eternity, as your theology would have us believe.

Unique Proof For Christian, Biblical Universalism

75 UR verses + 100 proofs + 150 reasons etc:
Web Online Help

213 Questions Without Answers:
Questions Without Answers

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

If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

"You are fully, completely, and thoroughly adored by God."
"You are fully, completely, and thoroughly adored by God."

May the Lord keep, bless & heal you.

no, all you did was present your own rationale as fact. you did what JWs do to affirm annihilation.

 

[ArmyMatt]

The Greek word aionion, from which we get the English word aeonian (=eonian) means of or pertaining to an eon/s or age/s. It does not have to mean lasting throughout an eon or age. It could refer to a part of the eon or age. Secondly many scripture passages speak of multiple future eons (Eph.2:7; Lk.1:33; Rev.11:15; etc), not just one future age. Even after the judgement in Revelation 21 it speaks of multiple future ages, not just one (Rev.22:5):

Young's Literal Translation
and night shall not be there, and they have no need of a lamp and light of a sun, because the Lord God doth give them light, and they shall reign -- to the ages of the ages.

But perhaps some church traditions differ from what the Scriptures say, eh.




Eternal torments. How lovely.

If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

1 Cor.15:25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.

How many will be "under His feet"? Just enemies or all:

1 Cor.15:27 For “He has put in subjection all under His feet.” But when it may be said that all has been put in subjection, it is evident that the One having put in subjection all to Him is excepted.

So there is only one exception to "all" to be "put...under his feet". Then God will be "in" "all", hence universal salvation:

1 Cor.15:28 And when all shall be subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all under him, that God may be all in all.

Fortunately no "eternal death" ever appears in the Sacred Scriptures (66 books of the Bible). To the contrary, death will be abolished (1 Cor.15:26).

"Just as surely as the abolition of slavery entails freedom for those formerly enslaved, the abolition of death entails life for those formerly dead."

1 Cor.15:26 does not speak of abolishing a "penalty" of death, but abolishing death. That God may become all "IN ALL" (v.26), even all who were "in Adam (v.22) & shall be "in Christ" (v.22).

1 Cor.15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

The phrase "in Christ" (1 Cor.15:22) means salvation in Scripture.

again, a lot of you and no substance to back it up.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Rev.21:25 Its gates will never be closed during the day (and there will be no night there).

https://www.amazon.com/Her-Gates-Will-Never-Shut/dp/1606088823

By Bradley Jersak, EO author

https://www.amazon.com/Patristic-Universalism-Alternative-Traditional-Judgment/dp/1517547113

what's your point? that doesn't contradict eternity of hell at all.

and neither of those guys are saints, so I really don't care about their conclusions.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I believe that the bible does explain Church (capital C) as the other member did...it is the Body of Christ.

It is the church that may not be what Jesus had in mind.

What do you believe He had in mind?

I believe He had in mind a change in humanity...
a fellowship of believers...
a remembrance of Him...
Disciples....

did you read his post? the Church is an actual, single, historical Body.

 

[GodsGrace101]

did you read his post? the Church is an actual, single, historical Body.

Yes...I said the Body of Christ.

But YOU said the church was not how the other member understood it.

I was wondering how YOU understand the church to be.
I mean the bricks and mortar...the institution.
I think we all agree on the Church as the Body of Christ.

If you've lost track of the conversation...no problem...because I have!

 

[rusmeister]

Yes...I said the Body of Christ.

But YOU said the church was not how the other member understood it.

I was wondering how YOU understand the church to be.
I mean the bricks and mortar...the institution.
I think we all agree on the Church as the Body of Christ.

If you've lost track of the conversation...no problem...because I have!

The essential problem is that we don’t understand the same thing by “the Body of Christ”. As long as you think it is obvious what it is, then we have a communication gap.

 

[GodsGrace101]

The essential problem is that we don’t understand the same thing by “the Body of Christ”. As long as you think it is obvious what it is, then we have a communication gap.

What do you believe the Body of Christ is?

 

[hedrick]

For a detailed discussion of the 5th Council and universalism, see this: Did the Fifth Ecumenical Council Condemn Universal Salvation?. It's not clear that the 15 anathema were adopted by the council. That a later council said that the 5th condemned Origen doesn't mean that they issued those specific anathemas. Surely not everything that Origen ever taught was condemned.

Furthermore, even if the anathemas were actually adopted, they don't condemn all universalism, but specific propositions that modern universalists probably don't believe.

A previous synod adopted 9 anathemas that might be more general, but the author of that page argues that they, too, apply to a specific view attributed to Origen. However that's of less importance, since it wasn't an ecumenical council.

 

[hedrick]

It seems to me that closed communion is a major tenet of Orthodoxy, tied closely to its view of the Church, and that its approach to LGBT people is inherent in the traditional ethics that it teaches. If you disagree with both, I have to wonder whether you are Orthodox.

It's true that no church is perfect, and you may have issues with others. But there are communities that accept more diversity, and that do not consider themselves to be identical with the Church.

 

[ClementofA]

I would think if it was possible that universalism was evident then it would have been affirmed.

1 John 2:27 And you, the anointing that you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But just as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things and is true and is no lie, and just as it has taught you, you shall abide in Him.

Matt.23: 6They love the https://www.biblehub.com/nkjv/matthew/23.htm#footnotesbest places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, 7greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’ 8But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your [c]Teacher, [d]the Christ, and you are all brethren. 9Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. 11But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12And whoever exalts himself will be [e]humbled, and he who humbles himself will be [f]exalted.

 

[ClementofA]

so in regards to universalism, it was refuted before, during, and after the 5th Council in all kinds of ways.

For many centuries universalism was mainly "refuted" by ignorance, burnings at the stake, inquisitional tortures & the like. Today it's mostly a matter of ignorance, darkness & centuries of inertia. However the dogma of an endless inquisitional chamber of horrors is on the decline.

 

[ClementofA]

Whenever the teaching of the Church has been challenged, God has always raised up champions to defend the Church teaching against heresy. This has NOT happened with the teaching of universalism.
If it was the teaching of the Church, then where are those champions of the faith who would have withstood Justinian?

"...the evidence suggests they were prepared beforehand by the vicious and insidiously stupid Emperor Justinian, who liked to play theologian, who saw the Church as a pillar of imperial unity, and who took implacable umbrage at dissident theologies."

Saint Origen | David Bentley Hart

According to one source Augustine believed re the pains of endless hell that those "of children dying unbaptized will be 'most mild of all'; but for all the chastisement will be eternal" (Early Christian Doctrines, J.N.D. Kelly, p.485).

Full text of "103911481-J-N-D-Kelly-Early-Christian-Doctrines.pdf (PDFy mirror)"

Another source states:

"16. In countering Pelagius, Augustine was led to state that infants who die without Baptism are consigned to hell.[24] "

The Hope of Salvation for Infants Who Die Without Being Baptised


According to J.N.D. Kelly's book "Early Christian Doctrines":

"In Augustine's day a wide variety of opinions were in vogue, some holding that the pains of hell would be temporary for all men without distinction, others that the intercession of the saints would secure their salvation..." (p.484).

Augustine "is led by certain texts of Scripture (1 Cor. 3, 13-15; Matt. 12:32) to allow that certain sinners may attain pardon in the world to come" (p.485)

and further re Augustine's view:

"There are people who, although Christians at heart, have remained entangled in earthly loves, and it is natural that after this life they should undergo purification by 'purgatorial fire' " (p.485).

 

[ClementofA]

you did what JWs do to affirm annihilation.

How do you figure that?

no, all you did was present your own rationale as fact.

My post was to show that your reference to Judas fails miserably as a proof text vs scriptural universalism. As it did & you had nothing to counter it. Was that the best you have to offer scripturally to oppose universalism? Or do you just prefer to ignore scripture & simply appeal to councils of the dark ages. Is there no biblical argument vs universalism you can find among the leaders you follow. Or is it just a matter of blind faith in them without using your own brain & the teaching of the Holy Spirit to you personally?


*****************************************************************


I destroyed all your "proof texts" against universalism showing they failed as such "proof texts". That's why your quoted verses are so lame. If Scripture actually taught the endless tortures or endless annihilation doctrine, why isn't it being shouted in the most clear language repeatedly from Genesis to Revelation. Such doctrines are a joke.

Yet another lame, feeble, failing attempt to support your theology. Nothing there states there are no more chances after the second coming. Nothing there states the Love of Love Crucified the Omnipotent has expired like a carton of milk & the Almighty is powerless to save. Nothing states Love unending will hold grudges, bitterness and hate against anyone for all eternity, as your theology would have us believe.

Unique Proof For Christian, Biblical Universalism

75 UR verses + 100 proofs + 150 reasons etc:
Web Online Help

213 Questions Without Answers:
Questions Without Answers

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

If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

"You are fully, completely, and thoroughly adored by God."
"You are fully, completely, and thoroughly adored by God."

May the Lord keep, bless & heal you.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Yes...I said the Body of Christ.

But YOU said the church was not how the other member understood it.

I was wondering how YOU understand the church to be.
I mean the bricks and mortar...the institution.
I think we all agree on the Church as the Body of Christ.

If you've lost track of the conversation...no problem...because I have!

the Orthodox Church is the Body of Christ

 

[ArmyMatt]

For many centuries universalism was mainly "refuted" by ignorance, burnings at the stake, inquisitional tortures & the like. Today it's mostly a matter of ignorance, darkness & centuries of inertia. However the dogma of an endless inquisitional chamber of horrors is on the decline.

lots of saints refute it, even early ones like Sts Justin Martyr and Irenaeus of Lyons. plus the 5th Council.

 

[ArmyMatt]

How do you figure that?




My post was to show that your reference to Judas fails miserably as a proof text vs scriptural universalism. As it did & you had nothing to counter it. Was that the best you have to offer scripturally to oppose universalism? Or do you just prefer to ignore scripture & simply appeal to councils of the dark ages. Is there no biblical argument vs universalism you can find among the leaders you follow. Or is it just a matter of blind faith in them without using your own brain & the teaching of the Holy Spirit to you personally?


*****************************************************************


I destroyed all your "proof texts" against universalism showing they failed as such "proof texts". That's why your quoted verses are so lame. If Scripture actually taught the endless tortures or endless annihilation doctrine, why isn't it being shouted in the most clear language repeatedly from Genesis to Revelation. Such doctrines are a joke.

Yet another lame, feeble, failing attempt to support your theology. Nothing there states there are no more chances after the second coming. Nothing there states the Love of Love Crucified the Omnipotent has expired like a carton of milk & the Almighty is powerless to save. Nothing states Love unending will hold grudges, bitterness and hate against anyone for all eternity, as your theology would have us believe.

Unique Proof For Christian, Biblical Universalism

75 UR verses + 100 proofs + 150 reasons etc:
Web Online Help

213 Questions Without Answers:
Questions Without Answers

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

If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

"You are fully, completely, and thoroughly adored by God."
"You are fully, completely, and thoroughly adored by God."

May the Lord keep, bless & heal you.

well, no. the fact that you made a distinction between non-existence and existence before birth as if there is a distinction is the same as JWs and Mormons.

all you're doing is presenting your opinion as being valid because it makes sense to you. that's irrelevant to Orthodox Christianity.

 

[GodsGrace101]

the Orthodox Church is the Body of Christ

OK.

I thought you meant the institution.
I'm not going to debate this with you...
but if the above is true, then everyone else is going
to the hot place.

Not to mention that there's another church that claims to be the first and original church.

Uffa.
No response necessary.

 

[ArmyMatt]

OK.

I thought you meant the institution.
I'm not going to debate this with you...
but if the above is true, then everyone else is going
to the hot place.

Not to mention that there's another church that claims to be the first and original church.

Uffa.
No response necessary.

to your first point, no, that doesn't mean everyone else is going to the hot place.

and many claim to be the original Church, that just means lots of people are wrong.

 

[GodsGrace101]

to your first point, no, that doesn't mean everyone else is going to the hot place.

and many claim to be the original Church, that just means lots of people are wrong.

Only 2 churches could possibly be the first/original church. Quite frankly, I believe the Orthodox church has remained truer to the early church.

As to my other point...
if one is NOT in the Body of Christ,,,HOW are they not lost?

And I can say now that I'm not one of those that believes that only those that know Jesus are going to heaven.

Many do not know Jesus and are going to be with God.