Not always; no.
But if there are a billion Christians in the world, several million read Scripture in the same way with regard to salvation and the nature of God, and only a few thousand say otherwise, it's more likely to be the several million who are correct - especially when Jesus and the early church taught the same thing.
The Early Church had five separate theological schools that taught three different eschatological ideas: eternal torment (1 school) annilihation (1 school) and universal salvation (3 schools). The schools teaching universal salvation continued until Emperor Justinian shut them down because he hated the idea.
Justinian was a politician first and foremost. He inherited a fractured empire in which warring factions of Christians were rioting in Jerusalem over the Council of Chalcedon and pagan tribes had taken over parts of the Empire because of weakness in the outlying parts. His desire was to united all the factions, take the lost lands back from the pagans, and restore Rome as a glorious world leader among empires.
It is interesting to note that in the 500 years prior to Justinian, not a single council was convened because universal salvation was considered to possibly be a heresy. Most heresies in the Church were dealt with in a far quicker fashion than that. Major saints in the Church openly taught Apokatastasis: St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Isaac the Syrian, and others. Your information is simply wrong.
What information?
I was simply speculating that if 95% of the church teaches a doctrine from Scripture and another much smaller group comes along and teaches something else, it is
more likely to be the 95% that is correct.
And specifically, on this forum and in the churches, universalism is not orthodox belief.
So if someone dies in their sins, without repenting and accepting Jesus, that have to go through the Lake of fire? Why? So that they'll either be completely destroyed, or come out saying "I surrender! Please, no more; I believe in Jesus"?
First of all, the "Lake of Fire" is a metaphor. I find it bizarre how people will read the Book of Revelation, accept that there is highly symbolic language in it (aka "apocalyptic language") and read the book as such, but when they get to certain points, they insist upon a literal reading, believing that there is a literal lake with physical fire in it. That is lazy scholarship at best.
I was not discussing the lake of fire - I simply quoted another forummer who mentioned it.
As I haven't studied Revelation I don't have a position on the lake of fire, so I would not attempt to teach it.
I hope the answer to that is 'no'. The idea that God tortures people after death until they are forced to submit and believe, is even worse."
It is not about being forced to submit. It is about the soul being changed so that it willingly turns to God and away from its self-preoccupation, just as a flower turns to the sun.
So are you saying that unbelievers who die in their sins meet with the Lord, realise he exists then then go through a period of cleansing in the lake of fire, which will also mean they die to self etc, and THEN they will be saved and able to be with God?
If so, the only advantage of repenting and following Jesus voluntarily know is to avoid having it thrust upon you after death.
I see no Scriptures which say "accept God now or be forced to after death.
Again, Jesus said that unless people repent of their sins they will perish, Luke 13:3. Perish; not cleansed after they die.
Your view shows that you are locked into the Western view of God as torturer. Try thinking instead of healing.
There is no way that I would ever say, or think, that God is a torturer.
You clearly haven't read any other posts of mine.
Love respects people's choices, and God does not force anyone.
Horsefeathers! Love never respects a choice that leads to self-destruction or harm.
If someone has heard the Gospel, repeatedly been told that if they do not repent and accept Jesus they will perish and consistently says "rubbish; I'm not going to do it", they have made that statement knowing the consequences.
What is God to do? Say "well you were warned, but I'm going to let you off and go against what I said I would do?"
That's like saying that a father, seeing his small daughter walk out towards a busy highway with cars flying by would say "I must respect her choice." Do you see how utterly stupid this idea is?
Only if you are saying that mature adults with minds and will of their own and the ability to understand, are like 4 year olds.
That wasn't what I asked.
I said "why preach repentance at all if everyone is going to be saved in the end?"
I answered this a few posts back. We are commanded to. (Matthew 28) We do so out of love so that people can be freed from being enslaved to the passions which are killing them. We do so to announce that Jesus Christ is Lord of all and all must respond to Him. We do so to keep people from experiencing the severe pains of God's chastizement before they enter into union with Him. The more you repent down here, the more you cooperate with God and change in your very being, the better it will be for you in the next life. There are many reasons.
Some of which don't appear to be Scriptural.
"Repent now so that you will have an easy life in heaven; if you don't want to, you will be made to go through a tough cleansing period in heaven - but you will still be there and eventually be saved"?
There might well be people who would think "well if that's the case, it doesn't matter what I do down here on earth. I can live for me and be as selfish as I want - I'm still going to heaven."
Two seconds into the chastening fires of God's scourging love and they will deeply regret ever thinking that way!!
Interesting idea; not Scriptural.
