Would you prefer it if “Christian universalism” were true?

[Fervent]

Are you going to answer my question? @Fervent. You keep telling me what the question is but that’s just you reframing the conversation.

I’ve already asked you my question twice now. Would you care to answer the question?

I feel like I have, which is why I'm trying to explain that I'm not talking about whether or not it actually happened. Yes, there are legitimate positions that do not believe that the Bible is historical in nature. When I say literal I am speaking to the idea that every inkstroke was guided by the hand of God.

 

[Fervent]

What's the point of having such a conversation if you want to confine the narrative to your chosen parameters? A debate about who God is should be open-ended. Otherwise we are just talking in an echo chamber and glad-handing each other. Tribal confirmation. I'm pretty sure we don't agree.

Saint Steven said: ↑
Where did you get the misguided idea that the Bible is the final word?

I didn't define the parameters, if we don't agree that God's self-revelation is confined to what is in Scripture we don't have a common ground to stand on. In fact, if we go beyond Scripture all we're doing is speculating.

 

[Hmm]

if we go beyond Scripture all we're doing is speculating

There's an awful lot of speculation when we stay within Scripture!

 

[Fervent]

There's an awful lot of speculation when we stay within Scripture too!

There can be, but its not naked speculation with no way of coming to an agreement. In principle, if we agree that the Bible is the final word for our theology at the very least we can engage with each others arguments and analyze their validity. If we allow any and all possibilities and entertain every single claim about who God is we're never going to get anywhere because there simply isn't a common authority we agree on.

 

[RickReads]

There can be, but its not naked speculation with no way of coming to an agreement. In principle, if we agree that the Bible is the final word for our theology at the very least we can engage with each others arguments and analyze their validity. If we allow any and all possibilities and entertain every single claim about who God is we're never going to get anywhere because there simply isn't a common authority we agree on.

Universalism doesn`t work unless we decertify the Bible and dismiss the blood that cries out to God.
The prophets, martyrs, innocents. All of these have promises of retributive justice from the Lord.

They must step aside so that heaven has room for Hitler and others like him.

 

[Hmm]

They must step aside so that heaven has room for Hitler and others like him.

It does though. God's grace and forgiveness is unreasonable to human eyes. Paul was a mass murderer of women and children wasn't he and yet God chose him to be an apostle. It is not for you to judge anyone a bigger sinner than you are.

 

[RickReads]

It does though. God's grace and forgiveness is unreasonable to human eyes. Paul was a mass murderer of women and children wasn't he and yet God chose him to be an apostle. It is not for you to judge anyone a bigger sinner than you are.

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."

 

[Hmm]

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."

Does that apply to you too? If you don't think so, why are you quoting it?

 

[RickReads]

It does though. God's grace and forgiveness is unreasonable to human eyes. Paul was a mass murderer of women and children wasn't he and yet God chose him to be an apostle. It is not for you to judge anyone a bigger sinner than you are.

Paul was guilty of having agreed to the persecutions. He didn`t participate in the punishments or the murders. You have much to learn.

 

[GallagherM]

Universalism is misunderstood. I believe…

The definition is a theological understanding that all will eventually be saved.

Now we all know to be saved to the kingdom of heaven one must accept Christ Jesus and receive the spirit of adoption. In where they call out inwardly or with mouth out to the Father in heaven praying and talking to him.

Believe that sin has been paid for mankind but not everyone has been saved to the kingdom of heaven.

Now comes to suggest of ARE ALL saved to the kingdom of heaven now in this life? If the answer is no. You are not part of universalism.

If the answer is yes; then I believe that would be Christian Universalism.

 

[RickReads]

Does that apply to you too? If you don't think so, why are you quoting it?

"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law."

 

[Hmm]

"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law."

Your point?

 

[Fervent]

Universalism doesn`t work unless we decertify the Bible and dismiss the blood that cries out to God.
The prophets, martyrs, innocents. All of these have promises of retributive justice from the Lord.

They must step aside so that heaven has room for Hitler and others like him.

I don't really have a dog in the fight as I default the whole issue to God, but there is "I will show mercy for whom I will show mercy" so if God sees fit to extend grace to Hitler, who are the martyrs, prophets, and innocents to complain?

 

[RickReads]

I don't really have a dog in the fight as I default the whole issue to God, but there is "I will show mercy for whom I will show mercy" so if God sees fit to extend grace to Hitler, who are the martyrs, prophets, and innocents to complain?

I`ve quoted that partial verse many times. It places Universal salvation within the range of possibilities.
However, you left out the rest of your passage which is what Universalism typically must do to become viable.

You look at any of the Bible verses that address the blood of those who have been murdered, if it says that blood is calling out to God it`s bad news for somebody.

 

[Fervent]

I`ve quoted that partial verse many times. It places Universal salvation within the range of possibilities.
However, you left out the rest of your passage which is what Universalism typically must do to become viable.

You look at any of the Bible verses that address the blood of those who have been murdered, if it says that blood is calling out to God it`s bad news for somebody.

I'm not sure it is necessary to leave out either passage that quote comes from to view it in a universalist bent, but I'm not so much trying to defend universalism as I am simply trying to point to our need to deal humbly with other Christians who don't agree with us. I agree universalism is a very weak position, but it is not entirely excluded and if God's plan is to entirely redeem creation without a single piece being reborn then we should celebrate and declare His glory. Imagine the accomplishment if Hitler was made a new creation after the image of Christ. Either in judgment or mercy, God will be glorified.

 

[Cormack]

Now comes to suggest of ARE ALL saved to the kingdom of heaven now in this life? If the answer is no. You are not part of universalism.

Thanks for sharing, @GallagherM.

How would you describe the views of someone who believed in such a large amount of post mortem conversions that everyone will eventually be saved? Like a version of the Harrowing of hell. I’d call that person a universalist, what would you call them?

 

[RickReads]

I'm not sure it is necessary to leave out either passage that quote comes from to view it in a universalist bent, but I'm not so much trying to defend universalism as I am simply trying to point to our need to deal humbly with other Christians who don't agree with us. I agree universalism is a very weak position, but it is not entirely excluded and if God's plan is to entirely redeem creation without a single piece being reborn then we should celebrate and declare His glory. Imagine the accomplishment if Hitler was made a new creation after the image of Christ. Either in judgment or mercy, God will be glorified.

All that sounds really nice but I find the view that heaven wants to rehabilitate Hitler a question mark at best.

 

[Fervent]

All that sounds really nice but I find the view that heaven wants to rehabilitate Hitler a question mark at best.

Agreed, but I won't close the door on it. Let's not forget where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more.

 

[Cormack]

The prophets, martyrs, innocents. All of these have promises of retributive justice from the Lord.

Do you feel it’s within the Lords power or amidst His prerogatives to relent from the threat of retribution? Reading from Jonah.

When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.​

But to Jonah this seemed very wrong, and he became angry. He prayed to the Lord, “Isn’t this what I said, Lord, when I was still at home? That is what I tried to forestall by fleeing to Tarshish. I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity. Now, Lord, take away my life, for it is better for me to die than to live.”​

But the Lord replied, “Is it right for you to be angry?”
​

Perhaps modern Jonah could accuse God of having itchy ears or that the Lord is being beguiled by the serpents garden temptation.

Jokes aside don’t you also believe that God isn’t held hostage to His wrath, and although men might demand He act out on their behalf for vengeance sake, our wishes aren’t going to capsize His will.

I’m sure you’d agree with me that lots of people would be offended if they knew that their childhood bully or rude ex wife were going into heaven (despite the hurt they caused,) they’d want “justice” too.

 

[Cormack]

Perhaps modern Jonah could accuse God of having itchy ears or that the Lord is being beguiled by the serpents garden temptation.

Just imagine a Calvinist speaking from his doctrines on judgment day “But Lord! You must make a full display of your attribute of wrath by damning someone!” It just strikes me as being very silly, as if the Lord wouldn’t be their lord at all, they’d have to relearn how to properly submit themselves to Him, since they are so wrapped up in their own ideas about what God needs to do to qualify himself to them as God.

In the same way expecting retributive justice from God wouldn’t merely be an unsafe assumption, but it also wouldn’t include the length, nature or purpose of the punishment.

If the Lord displayed retributive justice on His enemies for a season would that undo the scriptures or your thoughts about future judgment? I don’t imagine that would.