Is it okay to simply assume that God saves all?

[Hmm]

I've had someone tell me since God is Love, we should interpret the Bible through that Lens; I told him it would lead people to embrace Universalism.

You're right, it would.

Using the Point that God is Truth to interpret the Bible leaves me with the Belief that God does not Love everyone. The Bible teaches us that God is Truth; and his Word is Truth. Yes, let's use "God is Love" as a Hermeneutic; but let's never stop using "God is Truth" as an equal and undeniable Hermeneutic..

Love and Truth are not opposing qualities of God. If you feel they are and the only way you can maintain the two in equilibrium is to say that God doesn't Love everyone, I would say that's a limitation of your imagination, not a true statement about God.

 

[BNR32FAN]

To remove the “fear incentive” doesn’t result in only bad, it’s a matter of human psychology. The vast majority of unbelievers aren’t brought into the Christian community by threats, instead they are repulsed by Christians as a result of the seeming intimidation.

Employing the fear factor of eternal conscious torment isn’t some kind of universal good, not how many Christians believe, but rather it’s doing a lot of harm. Not to begin mentioning what the doctrine can do to the rare believer who enjoys ruminating on the notion of sinners being tormented, that’s far from Jesus’ heart on the matter.

Evidently God thought the fear incentive was beneficial. Sure some are motivated by other means but at the same time some are also motivated by fear, so it makes sense that He might utilize multiple forms of motivation.

 

[ReverendRV]

You're right, it would.



Love and Truth are not opposing qualities of God. If you feel they are and the only way you can maintain the two in equilibrium is to say that God doesn't Love everyone, I would say that's a limitation of your imagination, not a true statement about God.

I don't believe that friend, I believe they are Equals; neither can dispense of the other. They are like Conjoined Twins. You say "Look at my Friend Brother Love! He is so Lovely!" This is when his brother Truth speaks up to clear his throat; as Brother Love's Identical Twin...

Brother Truth tells you “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life”. Perhaps you would grab Brother Truth by the face and look in his eyes saying, "No Brother Truth!". Brother Love reaches and grasps your hands, pulling them off his brother; saying, "It is Unloving not to listen to my brother; hear him"... @Jesus is YHWH

 

[BNR32FAN]

We don't "just" end up in heaven. It takes a lot of work from God to achieve this. The point of being a believer isn't just to go to heaven anyway, it's to live a life with God here on Earth.

I don’t know what this has to do with my post

 

[Hmm]

Brother Truth tells you “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life”. Perhaps you would grab Brother Truth by the face and look in his eyes saying, "No Brother Truth!". Brother Love reaches and grasps your hands, pulling them off his brother; saying, "It is Unloving not to listen to my brother; hear him"...

No, I would look into Brother Truth's eyes without invading his body space and ask him solicitously if he had been thinking too much about things recently and had sprained his brain, and I'd then shake off Brother Love's grasp and say "It is even more unloving to send someone to eternal punishment. Listen to your heart." I'd then probably leave and just walk on and pretend I hadn't seen them if I pass any more Brothers.

 

[ReverendRV]

No, I would look into Brother Truth's eyes without invading his body space and ask him solicitously if he had been thinking too much about things recently and had sprained his brain, and I'd then shake off Brother Love's grasp and say "It is even more unloving to send someone to eternal punishment. Listen to your heart." I'd then probably leave and pretend I hadn't seen them if I pass any more Brothers.

Carry on then...

 

[Hmm]

Carry on then...

Aye.

 

[Cormack]

a lack of incentive for unbelievers to repent and come to Christ.

You don’t believe that the positive changes brought about in your life for believing in and following Jesus are incentive enough? @Hmm wrote an insightful point about that.

The point of being a believer isn't just to go to heaven anyway, it's to live a life with God here on Earth.

I’ve always told people while out evangelising that belief in Jesus isn’t about pie in the sky when you die, it’s about good things happening right here in the real world.

Of course that’s not the case for everyone in the church, many traditionalists believe in and emphasis taking up your cross daily, dying to self and being hated by the world. They most often use the fear factor of eternal torment to persuade listeners into joining in with the church.

To me, just to me, it’s this common brand of Christianity that lacks any meaningful incentive. Someday God will wipe away your tears, but until then, let’s get our crying in now before most of the world goes away to be tormented forever.

Would you remain a Christian without the intimidation factor of eternal conscious torment? I’ve heard churchgoing people say no.

Repentance isn't about mouthing certain statements. It means a sincere turning away from sin and you can't scare people into sincerity. God doesn't use fear because His love is perfect and "perfect love casts out fear".

That point about perfect love casting out fear was just too good not to repeat.

Sure some are motivated by other means but at the same time some are also motivated by fear, so OT makes sense that He might utilize multiple forms of motivation.

Gods ancient actions are far from Christian commands to be carried out in our day to day lives. God poisoned people by snakes, burned others with fire and closed up wombs. That’s God.

Now for you to throw snakes at people, burn them with fire and hinder their fertility, that’s not cricket. God does what He does with foreknowledge and an eternal beings wisdom in mind.

Poison and fire are no different than fear, it’s His property, like how “vengeance” belongs to Him, not to the church.

 

[Hmm]

@ReverendRV

No, I would look into Brother Truth's eyes without invading his body space and ask him solicitously if he had been thinking too much about things recently and had sprained his brain

I feel a bit remorseful and that I owe an explanation to Brother Truth so I'd try to find him again when Brother Love's not around and tell him that he would find it helpful to realise that the Bible does not say "eternal punishment" in the original Greek. Jesus said "kolasis aionios", or at least this was the earliest Greek translation of what He said in, presumably, Aramaic, and it means something like "corrective punishment lasting for an age", an age being a possibly long but always limited time duration. Our word 'eon' comes from aionios. I'd then suggest that he goes and sees Brother Linguist if he needs further details.

 

[ReverendRV]

@ReverendRV



I feel a bit remorseful and that I owe an explanation to Brother Truth so I'd try to find him again when Brother Love's not around and tell him that he would find it helpful to realise that the Bible does not say "eternal punishment" in the original Greek. Jesus said "kolasis aionios", or at least this was the earliest Greek translation of what He said in, presumably, Aramaic, and it means something like "corrective punishment lasting for an age", an age being a possibly long but always limited time duration. Our word 'eon' comes from aionios. I'd then suggest that he goes and sees Brother Linguist if he needs further details.

I'm glad you feel remorse about the way you spoke to Brother Truth. After you say this to him, he will tell you that the age of punishment that the person would have to endure is an eternal Age, compared to the eternal life another person receives...

You will grab Brother Truth by the Face again and say, "No Brother Truth, your Word doesn't say Punishment is eternal!". This is when his other twin, Brother Light pulls your hands off his brother and says, "It is walking in the 'Darkness of Dissonance' to not equate Age-enduring Punishment with Age-enduring Life"...

 

[Hmm]

I'm glad you feel remorse about the way you spoke to Brother Truth.

Well, as I said I feel remorse that I didn't give him an explanation, not because what I told him wasn't true.

After you say that to him, he will tell you that the age of punishment that the person would have to endure is eternal, compared to the eternal life another person receives...

To which I would say "Can you tell me your name again? I thought I was speaking to Brother Truth but it appears I must be mistaken."

You will grab Brother Truth by the Face again

I made it clear that I fully respected Brother Truth's personal space in our last encounter and did not grab his face. I don't tend to grab people's faces when I talk to them, in fact the idea hardly ever occurs to me.

This is when his other twin, Brother Light grasps your hands and says, "It is walking in the dark to not equate Age-enduring Punishment with Age-enduring Life"...

I don't know what it is with all these Brothers grasping you hands whenever they speak to you but they're making themselves liable for a charge.

I would tell Brother Light to try to go with Brother Truth when he meets Brother Linguist. They will tell him that the aionios is a very complex word its meaning is determined by context and usage. For an example, look at Rom 16:25-26:

25 Now to God who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages 26 but is now disclosed and through the prophetic writings is made known to all the gentiles, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith—​

Here, Paul speaks of the "mystery that was kept secret for long ages (aionis) but is now disclosed" which clearly refers to a span of time that has ended; and then in the very next verse he speaks of the aioníou theou, the eternal God.

So, Brother Light needs to consider that when he says "It is walking in the dark to not equate Age-enduring Punishment with Age-enduring Life", the two instances of "Age-enduring" may not mean the same thing at all.

The fact that the age to come is everlasting does not mean that the punishment of the age to come lasts for the duration of that age, simply that it occurs during that age. But Brother Linguist, or even Brother Google, will do a far better job of explaining it than me.

 

[ReverendRV]

Well, as I said I feel remorse that I didn't give him an explanation, not because what I told him wasn't true.



To which I would say "Can you tell me your name again? I thought I was speaking to Brother Truth but it appears I must be mistaken."



I made it clear that I fully respected Brother Truth's personal space in our last encounter and did not grab his face. I don't tend to grab people's faces when I talk to them, in fact the idea hardly ever occurs to me.



I don't know what it is with all these Brothers grasping you hands whenever they speak to you but they're making themselves liable for a charge.

I would tell Brother Light to try to go with Brother Truth when he meets Brother Linguist. They will tell him that the aionios is a very complex word its meaning is determined by context and usage. For an example, look at Rom 16:25-26:

25 Now to God who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages 26 but is now disclosed and through the prophetic writings is made known to all the gentiles, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith—​

Here, Paul speaks of the "mystery that was kept secret for long ages (aionis) but is now disclosed" which clearly refers to a span of time that has ended; and then in the very next verse he speaks of the aioníou theou, the eternal God.

So, Brother Light needs to consider that when he says "It is walking in the dark to not equate Age-enduring Punishment with Age-enduring Life", the two instances of "Age-enduring" may not mean the same thing at all.

The fact that the age to come is everlasting does not mean that the punishment of the age to come lasts for the duration of that age, simply that it occurs during that age. But Brother Linguist, or even Brother Google, will do a far better job of explaining it than me.

Brother Light will tell you there is no Brother Linguist in the Bible. He will tell you that Brother Truth said “And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous will go into eternal life.” Brother Light will again tell you that both of the 'Age-Enduring' instances in the Verse must be of equal scope. He will say there is no Modifier in the Verse which says they are of differing lengths of time...

He will remind you that if you disagree with Brother Truth on the matter, you are walking in the Darkness of Dissonance...

 

[BNR32FAN]

You don’t believe that the positive changes brought about in your life for believing in and following Jesus are incentive enough? @Hmm wrote an insightful point about that.

That doesn’t take place until after someone repents. We’re talking about the motivation that brings people to repentance not what takes place after they repent. In the portion you quoted it says “unbelievers.”

 

[Hmm]

Brother Light will tell you there is no Brother Linguist in the Bible.

Neither is there a Brother Light. But there is a Brother Phōs as Brother GoogleTranslate reminds me.

He will tell you that Brother Truth said “And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous will go into eternal life.”

Br. Strawman has also told me this, repeatedly.

Brother Light will again tell you that both of the 'Age-Enduring' instances in the Verse must be of equal scope. He will say there is no Modifier in the Verse which says they are of differing lengths of time...

I thought you said Br. Linguist is not in the Bible?

He will remind you that if you disagree with Brother Truth on the matter, you are walking in the Darkness of Dissonance...

I would remind Br. Truth that his English Bible does not equate to scripture. It's a book written by Br. Linguist or his colleagues, some of whom are better translators than others.

 

[Cormack]

That doesn’t take place until after someone repents. We’re talking about the motivation that brings people to repentance not what takes place after they repent. In the portion you quoted it says “unbelievers.”

What we’ve been discussing (amidst other things) is whether or not there’s an incentive for the unbeliever in joining the Christian faith, an incentive outside of threatening these people with eternal conscious torment.

You pointed out that the universalist perspective is lacking in regards to incentives because we can’t threaten, fan the flames of fear or otherwise intimidate people with the idea of burning in hell.

My point is that so long as there are amazing things about coming to the Christian faith right here in the now, then that intimidation incentive deflates.

So, my question to you stands. Haven’t you experienced good things and gone through positive, new life affirming experiences thanks to believing in and following Jesus Christ?

If yes then isn’t that part of how you could incentivise others. That’s the point.

 

[BNR32FAN]

There's heaps of evidence. Here's some from the Eastern Orthodox priest Fr Aiden Kimel

He’s not an Eastern Orthodox priest he’s an Eclictic Orthodox priest. Eclectic Orthodoxy is a denomination he started himself in 2010 a few months after his son committed suicide.

 

[BNR32FAN]

What we’ve been discussing (amidst other things) is whether or not there’s an incentive for the unbeliever in joining the Christian faith, an incentive outside of threatening these people with eternal conscious torment.

No that’s not what we’ve been discussing your replies have been to my post where I brought up the whole conversation about motivation and incentive where I stated that universalism removes the fear motivational aspect that brings about repentance. I specifically said that different people require different motivation. Some are inspired by love and some by fear. I never said that universalism give no motivation for repentance I simply said it removes the fear incentive and that God has obviously chosen to use both fear and love as motivation to repent. So we were not talking about whether or not there was “an incentive.”

 

[BNR32FAN]

But God doesn't prepare the worst possible outcome for us. You may think He does but why try to burden others with it?

I answered this question and you even quoted my answer in this very post.

So if I’m going to be wrong on this subject when I stand before God I would much rather say to Him that my efforts were calculated by the evidence and information I had at the time and I felt it was necessary to warn people of the potential danger rather than giving them a false sense of security allowing them to remain disobedient resulting in their condemnation.

You quoted this very sentence in this same post that your asking me why I’m trying to burden other people with it. I explained in detail why I think it’s imperative that we teach the importance of repentance in this life.

But there’s a very strong downside to the universal teaching as well that as Christians we must do everything we can to avoid which is giving a potentially false hope of salvation regardless of whether or not a person repents in this life. I think it’s absolutely imperative that we prepare for the worst possible outcome and not ignore the scriptural evidence, evidence from the early church writers, and the teachings of the apostolic churches when it comes to this particular subject because the consequences could be irreversible and absolute. I see universal reconciliation as potentially dangerous as what the serpent said to Eve in the Garden of Eden, “surely you will not die”. So in light of all the evidence I find it irresponsible to teach universal salvation based on personal feelings about what we feel that God should do rather than what He said He would do, what the earliest writers of the church said that the apostles taught, and what the church has also said has always been taught. Yes Origen taught universal reconciliation but he was also refuted by the 5th ecumenical council where it was labeled as heresy. Some refuse to accept that claiming that those canons were later added but there’s no evidence to support that claim and the evidence of the early church writers prior to the 5th council confirm it as a heretical teaching. So if I’m going to be wrong on this subject when I stand before God I would much rather say to Him that my efforts were calculated by the evidence and information I had at the time and I felt it was necessary to warn people of the potential danger rather than giving them a false sense of security allowing them to remain disobedient resulting in their condemnation. It’s evident to me that God has chosen to use both fear and love to motivate people to repent and universalism diminishes that fear incentive. I just don’t want to be responsible for giving people false hope in salvation that allows them to continue in disobedience resulting in the ultimate consequence. I think that’s a very important aspect that we must consider.

 

[AVB 2]

I have a different slant on that verse. Yes, God chose us in Him [Christ] before the foundation of the world, the same way He chose the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah.
Note this passage from Jeremiah. God said “I have caused to cleave” That word is הדבקתי/ha’dabaq’thi. It is in the perfect or completed sense. God’s express will, clearly stated, for the whole house of Israel and Judah, to cling to God as a belt clings to a man’s waist.
It was done, finished, completed, in God’s sight, and, according to some arguments, nothing man can do will cause God’s will to not be done. But they, Israel and Judah, would not hear and obey, their will, vs. God’s will, So God destroyed them, vs. 14.
…..This passage very much speaks to God’s sovereign will, and man’s free will and agency. God stated very clearly what His will was, in terms that cannot be misunderstood. But, because the Israelites and Judeans would not hear, and obey, God destroyed them, instead of them being unto God, “for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory, vs. 10.”

Jer 13:1 Thus saith the LORD unto me, Go and get thee a linen girdle, and put it upon thy loins, and put it not in water.
2 So I got a girdle according to the word of the LORD, and put it on my loins.
3 And the word of the LORD came unto me the second time, saying,
4 Take the girdle that thou hast got, which is upon thy loins, and arise, go to Euphrates, and hide it there in a hole of the rock.
5 So I went, and hid it by Euphrates, as the LORD commanded me.
6 And it came to pass after many days, that the LORD said unto me, Arise, go to Euphrates, and take the girdle from thence, which I commanded thee to hide there.
7 Then I went to Euphrates, and digged, and took the girdle from the place where I had hid it: and, behold, the girdle was marred, it was profitable for nothing.
8 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
9 Thus saith the LORD, After this manner will I mar the pride of Judah, and the great pride of Jerusalem.
10 This evil people, which refuse to hear my words, which walk in the imagination of their heart, and walk after other gods, to serve them, and to worship them, shall even be as this girdle, which is good for nothing.
11 For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave [הדבקתי/ha’dabaq’thi] unto me the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah, saith the LORD; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory: but they would not hear.
· · ·
14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.​

Note, verse 14, God said “I will NOT have pity, will NOT spare, and will NOT have mercy but destroy them.”
Being chosen does not appear to be an iron clad, irrevocable ticket to heaven.

Quoting Old Testament passages to prove New Testament truths is shaky at best. The Old Testament is obsolete and is ready to vanish. Hebrews 8:13 "In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away." God chose the nation of Israel but not all Hebrews were chosen by God. Romans 9:6 thru 8 "But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called. That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed."

Just because someone is a Jew does not mean they are one of God's chosen. Both Jacob and Esau were children of Issac, verse 13 "As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated." These two men had the exact same mother and father yet God only chose the child of the promise, Jacob. (I have oft wondered how God could love Jacob being the scoundrel he was!) Hebrews 13:5b “I will never leave you nor forsake you.” God "chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world..." (Eph 1:4) and He will not "un-choose" us and satan can't either. If he could that means he is more powerful than is Christ, an impossibility.

 

[Hmm]

He’s not an Eastern Orthodox priest he’s an Eclictic Orthodox priest. Eclectic Orthodoxy is a denomination he started himself in 2010 a few months after his son committed suicide.

Ah, I see where you went wrong. Eastern Orthodox is his church and Eclectic Orthodoxy is his (obviously tongue in cheek named) website. Eclictic Orthodox is your typo.

It's irrelevant anyway because he was quoting the church historian Norman P. Tanner.

Why did you bringing up his son's suicide btw? How is that relevant to Kimel's credentials?