Universalists: How do you explain the "problem passages"?

[Der Alte]

Britannica is fake?
Fake news?

Do you have a subscription to Encyclopedia Britannica? You probably copied your quote from some anonymous website not the EB site.
Which do you think is correct? My quote from the 1911 EB and My Jewish life or your second had quote.

 

[RickReads]

Do you have a subscription to Encyclopedia Britannica? You probably copied your quote from some anonymous website, not the EB site.
Which do you think is correct? My quote from the 1911 EB and My Jewish life or your second had quoted.

I gave you the link. It`s the official web site of Encyclopedia Brittanica, in business since 1768.

But you are correct, I do not have a paid subscription.

To answer your question, your 1911 edition doesn`t address it so there is nothing to compare.

And I didn`t quote anything, I have posted 3 links, apparently, the first two links weren`t very good. I don`t know for sure, I didn`t read any of it. I just figured anything I put up would be as good as Talmud myths.

 

[Saint Steven]

It’s clear there’s a choice between everlasting life, and everlasting torment.

The ONLY one who has chosen everlasting torment is the god created by Damnationism.
The slanderous claim that our God has with malice and forethought predestined countless billions to suffer for all eternity with no hope of escape. Even those who have never so much as heard the name of Jesus.

 

[Saint Steven]

What’s the universalist gospel?

Jesus came to save you from a time-out in a corner?

What's the Damnationist gospel?
Jesus came to save you from God?

Brad Jersak is an author and teacher based in Abbotsford, BC, where he attends Fresh Wind Christian Fellowship and serves as Reader at All Saints of North America Monastery. His heart is to share the good news that God is Love and that God’s love was shown to us perfectly in Jesus of Nazareth. Through his books and seminars, Brad teaches that anyone can learn to hear God’s voice through the simple practice of ”listening prayer.” Those who practice listening prayer find that God’s love heals wounded hearts and empowers them to heal this broken world.

 

[Saint Steven]

The Catholics didn’t invent hell - they invented a place called purgatory, or purge-a-tory where the redeemed have to go to be fully purged of sins, before they go to heaven - so they could make money selling get-out-of-purgatory tickets, called indulgences.

What if they were right? Except for the indulgences part.
What happens to the wood, hay and stubble?
What are those things really? Will you be purged of them before heaven?

Mark 9:49
Everyone will be salted with fire.

Malachi 3:2
But who can endure the day of his coming? Who can stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner’s fire or a launderer’s soap.

 

[Saint Steven]

Therefore if the lake of fire is temporary, then heaven is only temporary.

Each age has a beginning and an end.

How long is forever? Is anything longer?
Then how long is forever and ever? Longer than forever?

 

[hedrick]

There are some things you should think about with purgatory:

• Indulgences were just one implication of the broader idea that people on earth (and the saints) could affect how much punishment you got by prayer and intercession.
• It was portrayed as a sentence that could last for years or centuries. Some of this may have been pop theology rather than doctrine.
• While it is commonly described today as cleansing, the original theory seemed to be that it was punishment. In particular, while your sins might be forgiven by God, you still owed punishment.
• Of course it has no effect on hell. That was still present. It just applied to people who are saved.

As such I don't think it's quite equivalent to 1 Cor 3:12. What it does accomplish is avoid the biggest problem with heaven and hell: that you only need to do enough to squeak through. Without something like purgatory, there appears to be no consequence for sin as long as you meet the criteria for salvation. They solved the other half of this problem by assuming that hell had various levels of suffering. But it still had the issue of figuring out how to define the bright line between those who get in and those who don't.

 

[Der Alte]

I gave you the link. It`s the official web site of Encyclopedia Brittanica, in business since 1768.
But you are correct, I do not have a paid subscription.
To answer your question, your 1911 edition doesn`t address it so there is nothing to compare.
And I didn`t quote anything, I have posted 3 links, apparently, the first two links weren`t very good. I don`t know for sure, I didn`t read any of it. I just figured anything I put up would be as good as Talmud myths.

Once again your link to an EB article does not have a bibliography. No historical references are cited for the author's opinions. As it stands the article is no more compelling than graffiti scribbled on a wall. When I was working on my graduate degree I quoted from an encyclopedia in a paper. The PA scribbled across my paper with a red pen, "Do you consider this a scholarly source?" I said to myself "Not anymore I don't." You have not provided any credible, verifiable, historical evidence that the Talmud is mythological. Just one guy's unsupported opinion. refuted by two sources I quoted.
From your link.

Ancient mythology seems to have been well known and liked by the Jewish masses. Again, in order to fight its influence, the rabbis reworked its content in their own spirit. They retained the mythological suspense—the sea tries to drown the earth—but there is no mythological struggle between equal powers; angels try to prevent the creation of man, but they do not possess titanic power. All are subdued by the command of God. Thus, the rabbis transformed the ancient myths into dramatic evidence against polytheism. (See also Jewish myth and legend.)​

 

[RickReads]

Once again your link to an EB article does not have a bibliography. No historical references are cited for the author's opinions. As it stands the article is no more compelling than graffiti scribbled on a wall. When I was working on my graduate degree I quoted from an encyclopedia in a paper. The PA scribbled across my paper with a red pen, "Do you consider this a scholarly source?" I said to myself "Not anymore I don't." You have not provided any credible, verifiable, historical evidence that the Talmud is mythological. Just one guy's unsupported opinion. refuted by two sources I quoted.
From your link.

Ancient mythology seems to have been well known and liked by the Jewish masses. Again, in order to fight its influence, the rabbis reworked its content in their own spirit. They retained the mythological suspense—the sea tries to drown the earth—but there is no mythological struggle between equal powers; angels try to prevent the creation of man, but they do not possess titanic power. All are subdued by the command of God. Thus, the rabbis transformed the ancient myths into dramatic evidence against polytheism. (See also Jewish myth and legend.)​

That`s strange, I found the references quite easily.

Talmud and Midrash: Additional Information

Can I go back to studying this discussion now?

 

[chad kincham]

The ONLY one who has chosen everlasting torment is the god created by Damnationism.
The slanderous claim that our God has with malice and forethought predestined countless billions to suffer for all eternity with no hope of escape. Even those who have never so much as heard the name of Jesus.

Anyone in hell had a chance to escape, and they got there by literally going over Jesus’ dead body, and rejecting Him as their savior.

Paul clearly wrote that those who never heard of Jesus are judged by how they obeyed Gods laws written on their heart, aka the conscience - which will accuse or excuse them.

It’s in the Bible - you might try reading it sometime.

And just as there are levels of rewards in heaven, there are different levels of punishment in hell, with outer darkness being the least degree of punishment.

I’m sure that’s news to you, too.

That’s also in the Bible.

 

[chad kincham]

What's the Damnationist gospel?
Jesus came to save you from God?

Brad Jersak is an author and teacher based in Abbotsford, BC, where he attends Fresh Wind Christian Fellowship and serves as Reader at All Saints of North America Monastery. His heart is to share the good news that God is Love and that God’s love was shown to us perfectly in Jesus of Nazareth. Through his books and seminars, Brad teaches that anyone can learn to hear God’s voice through the simple practice of ”listening prayer.” Those who practice listening prayer find that God’s love heals wounded hearts and empowers them to heal this broken world.

Exactly. Jesus came to save us from the wrath of the Holy God on sin, by taking our sins on Himself, in our place.

Congrats, you got something right.

Your gospel is: come to Jesus and get saved from a time-out in the corner - even though you end up in heaven eventually, no matter what - so if you want to live in sin and debauchery now, you can do that and still enter paradise.

Maybe you should switch to once saved always saved - that way you can teach, come to Jesus and still live exactly like you want to live, and party and get drunk and do drugs have sex, and you still go right to heaven, without a time-out in the corner, first.

Yeah, that’s the ticket!

 

[chad kincham]

What if they were right? Except for the indulgences part.
What happens to the wood, hay and stubble?
What are those things really? Will you be purged of them before heaven?

Mark 9:49
Everyone will be salted with fire.

Malachi 3:2
But who can endure the day of his coming? Who can stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner’s fire or a launderer’s soap.

Being tested by fire for rewards earned is so obviously symbolic - our works are symbolically put over a fire, like gold and silver are, so the impurities are melted out and what’s left is what we get rewarded for, but some believers works are all impurities so nothing is left, and they enter heaven with no rewards at all.

That happens in one day, the day of Judgment, when Jesus judges believers rewards.

It’s not talking about the hell fire the damned are in, at all.

 

[chad kincham]

There are some things you should think about with purgatory:

• Indulgences were just one implication of the broader idea that people on earth (and the saints) could affect how much punishment you got by prayer and intercession.
• It was portrayed as a sentence that could last for years or centuries. Some of this may have been pop theology rather than doctrine.
• While it is commonly described today as cleansing, the original theory seemed to be that it was punishment. In particular, while your sins might be forgiven by God, you still owed punishment.
• Of course it has no effect on hell. That was still present. It just applied to people who are saved.

As such I don't think it's quite equivalent to 1 Cor 3:12. What it does accomplish is avoid the biggest problem with heaven and hell: that you only need to do enough to squeak through. Without something like purgatory, there appears to be no consequence for sin as long as you meet the criteria for salvation. They solved the other half of this problem by assuming that hell had various levels of suffering. But it still had the issue of figuring out how to define the bright line between those who get in and those who don't.

Since it’s okay to just invent purgatory, let’s invent squeakatory, for those just barely squeaking into heaven.

Or drunkatory for alcoholics to enter into heaven.

Yeah, that’s the ticket!

 

[Saint Steven]

It’s in the Bible - you might try reading it sometime.
...
I’m sure that’s news to you, too.

That’s also in the Bible.

LOL
Just because I have a different understanding of things doesn't mean I didn't READ the Bible. That's ridiculous.

Where does this irrational hatred of Universalism come from? Why can't UR be discussed like any other doctrine? Bible thumpers come completely unhinged. I have actually been shunned by other Christians over this. Even you talk to me as if I am stupid. Can't we have a calm discussion?

The over-reaction seems to indicate that UR is more likely true than not. Again... Where does this irrational hatred of Universalism come from? Damnationists will fight tooth and nail to keep their forever-burning hell. Any rational person would be happy to be rid of it.

 

[Saint Steven]

Anyone in hell had a chance to escape, and they got there by literally going over Jesus’ dead body, and rejecting Him as their savior.

Paul clearly wrote that those who never heard of Jesus are judged by how they obeyed Gods laws written on their heart, aka the conscience - which will accuse or excuse them.

It’s in the Bible - you might try reading it sometime.

And just as there are levels of rewards in heaven, there are different levels of punishment in hell, with outer darkness being the least degree of punishment.

I’m sure that’s news to you, too.

That’s also in the Bible.

There are conflicting statements in your post.

First you say:
"Anyone in hell... got there by literally going over Jesus’ dead body...rejecting Him as their savior."

Then you say:
"Paul clearly wrote that those who never heard of Jesus are judged by how they obeyed Gods laws..."

How did "those who never heard of Jesus" go to hell "over Jesus’ dead body...rejecting Him as their savior" ?

 

[Saint Steven]

Exactly. Jesus came to save us from the wrath of the Holy God on sin, by taking our sins on Himself, in our place.

Congrats, you got something right.

Your gospel is: come to Jesus and get saved from a time-out in the corner - even though you end up in heaven eventually, no matter what - so if you want to live in sin and debauchery now, you can do that and still enter paradise.

Maybe you should switch to once saved always saved - that way you can teach, come to Jesus and still live exactly like you want to live, and party and get drunk and do drugs have sex, and you still go right to heaven, without a time-out in the corner, first.

Yeah, that’s the ticket!

This indicates a complete ignorance about UR. I would like you to at least try to understand what you claim to disagree with. If you watched the video, that might help. The channel from which the video comes is a whole seminar on UR. Several top-notch speakers share their perspective on the subject. Very helpful.

I think most Christians would be afraid to watch something like this though. They fear that they might be convinced that it is true. Then they couldn't live with themselves. - lol

 

[Saint Steven]

Being tested by fire for rewards earned is so obviously symbolic - our works are symbolically put over a fire, like gold and silver are, so the impurities are melted out and what’s left is what we get rewarded for, but some believers works are all impurities so nothing is left, and they enter heaven with no rewards at all.

That happens in one day, the day of Judgment, when Jesus judges believers rewards.

It’s not talking about the hell fire the damned are in, at all.

So, why can't the hell fire of judgment be symbolic as well? And what does Jesus mean when he says this? Is this symbolic, or literal?

Mark 9:49
Everyone will be salted with fire.

 

[Saint Steven]

I am open about universalism, I just don't know how you guys get past some verses. If you have an explanation for them I will hear you out. For example, all of the verses that say the wicked will perish, everlasting destruction, the second death, etc.? How do you explain those verses about perishing and the wicked getting destroyed?

On the so-called "problem passages", it comes down to definitions of words in the original language of the manuscripts.

The Bible is a Damnationist text. Those who gave us our English translation chose the definitions that fit their doctrinal stance. So we ended up with a biased Bible in regards to the final judgment.

St. Jerome wrote: "They write down not what they find but what they think is the meaning; and while they attempt to rectify the errors of others, they merely expose their own" (Jerome, Epist. lxxi.5).

In fact, Annihilationists are faced with the same problems. How do they get past the "problem passages"? Typically they claim they are right and everyone else is wrong. Which explains nothing. But no one is too concerned about Annihilationists. It's really just a more humane version of Damnationism. That should tell us something. More humane to put the dog down than let it suffer. WWJD?

 

[RickReads]

So, why can't the hell fire of judgment be symbolic as well? And what does Jesus mean when he says this? Is this symbolic, or literal?

Mark 9:49
Everyone will be salted with fire.

The fire is God`s chastisement, the salting indicates that it purifies. It`s symbolic but like all Biblical symbolism, it has a literal application.

 

[Saint Steven]

Bibles that do NOT contain the word "Hell".

Wesley's New Testament (1755)
Scarlett's N.T. (1798)
The New Testament in Greek and English (Kneeland, 1823)
Young's Literal Translation (1891)
Twentieth Century New Testament (1900)
Rotherham's Emphasized Bible (reprinted, 1902)
Fenton's Holy Bible in Modern English (1903)
Weymouth's New Testament in Modern Speech (1903)
The New Testament, James Moffat, (1917)
Jewish Publication Society Bible Old Testament (1917)
Panin's Numeric English New Testament (1914)
The New Testament, Charles B. Williams, 1937
The People's New Covenant (Overbury, 1925)
Hanson's New Covenant (1884)
Western N.T. (1926)
NT of our Lord and Savior Anointed (Tomanek, 1958)
Concordant Literal NT (1983)
The N.T., A Translation (Clementson, 1938)
Emphatic Diaglott, Greek/English Interlinear (Wilson, 1942)
New American Bible (1970)
Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible (1976)
Tanakh, The Holy Scriptures, Old Testament (1985)
The New Testament, A New Translation (Greber, 1980)
Christian Bible (1991)
World English Bible (in progress)
Orthodox Jewish Brit Chadasha [NT Only]
Original Bible Project (Dr. James Tabor, still in translation)
Zondervan Parallel N.T. in Greek and English (1975)**
Int. NASB-NIV Parallel N.T. in Greek and English (1993)**
A Critical Paraphrase of the N.T. by Vincent T. Roth (1960)
New Testament, Recovery Version, Living Stream Ministry, 1991
New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE) Roman Catholic
Holy Bible In Its Original Order, Fred R. Coulter, 2007
Etymological N.T. (An Ultra Literal Translation, 2011, Michael Wine)
Aramaic Peshitta New Testament, 2006, Janet M. Magiera
MirrorWord N.T. (Francois du Toit) still in translation
Victorious Gospel of Jesus Christ, Electronic Ver. (Tentmaker Ministries)
The Source N.T. (Dr. Ann Nyland), 2004, 2007
Jonathan Mitchell N.T. (Jonathan Mitchell) 2009
Tree of Life Version, Baker Bookhouse, 2016******
The New Testament (David Bentley Hart) Yale University Press, 2017