The Bible: God's plan for the redemption of humankind? Or... ???

Gregory Thompson · Apr 9, 2021

Saint Steven said:
The ultimate statement of biblical context. Your view of the final judgment determines your definition of what the Bible actually is. What's yours?

Does the Bible reveal God's plan for the redemption of humankind, or is it a plan for the genocide/incineration of humanity? Depends on who you ask, I suppose.

Many may agree that the Bible reveals God's plan for the redemption of humankind, but then also claim that the vast majority of humanity will be consigned to eternal conscious torment, or incineration. (the genocide of humanity) Which is obviously not the redemption of humankind. Not even close.

Your view of the final judgment determines your definition of what the Bible actually is. This is the ultimate statement of biblical context. The thrust of the entire book. What's yours?
1) Damnationism = The plan for the genocide of the majority of humankind
2) Annihilationism = The plan to incinerate the majority of humankind
3) Ultimate Redemption (UR) = God's plan for the redemption of all humankind

1 Timothy 2:1-6
I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time.

Romans 3:24 NIV
and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

The biblie teaches all of those doctrines, your choice is a judgment of who God is, and declaration of the type of king you'd actually follow.

The biblie is a test, it teaches many things.

Ceallaigh · Apr 9, 2021

Michael Collum said:
The biblie teaches all of those doctrines, your choice is a judgment of who God is, and declaration of the type of king you'd actually follow.

The biblie is a test, it teaches many things.

Personally none of the three doctrines affects my relationship with God. It's a side issue. When we trust that God is righteous, we trust that he will deal with matters appropriately.

sawdust · Apr 9, 2021

Saint Steven said:
Are you calling me a devil?

Saint Steven said:
More nasty remarks?

No I'm not calling you a devil and why you would think that only shows we are on completely different pages.

And it's not nasty remarks, it's simple reality. If it were different, we would not need to be told to humble ourselves.

Gregory Thompson · Apr 9, 2021

MMXX said:
Personally none of the three doctrines affects my relationship with God. It's a side issue. When we trust that God is righteous, we trust that he will deal with matters appropriately.

the biblie and how we look at it just reflects where we are at, the above post is no exception.

Ceallaigh · Apr 9, 2021

sawdust said:
I see, so you think of others first and then you think of the Lord. How noble of you. I'm sure the Lord is very grateful you give Him a second thought. lol

I'm going to answer this more constructively.

Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength and your neighbor as yourself - in that order - God comes first.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation puts God first. Those who subscribe to it do so because they believe it represents God better then the doctrine of eternal torment does.

The second concern of the doctrine of universal reconciliation is the fate of those who have not been blessed with knowing God and Jesus as their Lord and savior.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation has nothing to do with self-centeredness. It is about God first and others second. The self does not come into it.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation is not the same as humanist universalism.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation does not say there is no punishment from God.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation does not even say there is no hell.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation does not say God is lying or that the scriptures are lying, it's just saying that the scripters do not say that God is going to doom most everyone into an eternal torture chamber where they will suffer in writhing agony forever.

sawdust · Apr 10, 2021

MMXX said:
I'm going to answer this more constructively.

Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength and your neighbor as yourself - in that order - God comes first.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation puts God first. Those who subscribe to it do so because they believe it represents God better then the doctrine of eternal torment does.

The second concern of the doctrine of universal reconciliation is the fate of those who have not been blessed with knowing God and Jesus as their Lord and savior.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation has nothing to do with self-centeredness. It is about God first and others second. The self does not come into it.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation is not the same as humanist universalism.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation does not say there is no punishment from God.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation does not even say there is no hell.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation does not say God is lying or that the scriptures are lying, it's just saying that the scripters do not say that God is going to doom everyone into an eternal torture chamber where they will suffer in writhing agony forever.

You need to chill mate. I was making a joke because your phrasing was to think of others first then also the Lord. Seeing as you were arguing the scriptures are about mankind when I say they are about God, I saw the irony. Obviously you didn't.

And why are you going on about universal reconciliation? It's not what this thread was about nor have I said anything about universal reconciliation. If you think I have, then you have completely misunderstood.

Ceallaigh · Apr 10, 2021

sawdust said:
You need to chill mate. I was making a joke because your phrasing was to think of others first then also the Lord.

I think that's just the way you choose to interpret it, and it looked like mockery to me rather than humor. Maybe if we get to know each other better, I'll understand your sense of humor.

sawdust said:
Seeing as you were arguing the scriptures are about mankind when I say they are about God, I saw the irony. Obviously you didn't.

The problem is that you've been misinterpreting what I've been saying. To be more clear again:

The scriptures are addressed to man, regarding God and man's relationship with God. They're about God and Adam, God and Noah, God and Abraham, God and Moses etc. They are about God's covenants with mankind.

sawdust said:
And why are you going on about universal reconciliation? It's not what this thread was about nor have I said anything about universal reconciliation. If you think I have, then you have completely misunderstood.

The OP and I have been talking about universal reconciliation, to which you made accusations of self-centeredness along with other remarks. Probably because you misunderstood what was being said.

Saint Steven · Apr 10, 2021

Michael Collum said:
the biblie and how we look at it just reflects where we are at, the above post is no exception.

Right. Whatever subtitle, or description, we might give the Bible, is the lens that we view it through.

Essentially, everyone sees the Bible through their own lens. Fortunately, we can change lens when we realize we have been viewing it wrongly. The aha moment.

Saint Steven · Apr 10, 2021

MMXX said:
... The second concern of the doctrine of universal reconciliation is the fate of those who have not been blessed with knowing God and Jesus as their Lord and savior.

The Christian doctrine of universal reconciliation has nothing to do with self-centeredness. It is about God first and others second. The self does not come into it. ...

Fantastic post. A real winner.
I wanted to add a comment to this part.

UR enables us to view humankind as one big together forever family, instead of a contentious "us and them" view of people. We see value in every human being. We know that if someone doesn't love Jesus, it's because they haven't met him yet.

We don't view "the lost" as worthless hell-bound individuals not worth our notice, but as eventual heaven-bound individuals heading straight for an amazing transformative experience with God.

Even before UR, I knew enough to correct my low estimation of people by reminding myself that if they were worth Christ giving his life for, then they were valuable in God's sight. All the more so now.

We understand that everyone is in their own place on this journey. Doctrinal differences don't matter so much. The church across the street, or across town, or across the world, is not our enemy.

Saint Steven · Apr 10, 2021

Saint Steven said:
After I went to work today I realized that I had not really addressed your question(s). This may require more than one post. But we can start here.

One of the biggest problems we face in defending UR using the Bible, is that the Bible is a Damnationist biased text. When the translation work was done, obviously those who worked on the project were reading the originals through their own doctrinal lens, so to speak.

The citation below shows that Universalism was actually a leading doctrine in the theology schools of the early church. However, it was the western/Latin church that assembled the NT canon, not the eastern orthodox church. Therefore the book has a bias. They cooked the books! - lol

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge"
by Schaff-Herzog, 1908, volume 12, page 96
German theologian- Philip Schaff writes :

"In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa, or Nisibis) were Universalist, one (Ephesus) accepted conditional immortality; one (Carthage or Rome) taught endless punishment of the wicked. Other theological schools are mentioned as founded by Universalists, but their actual doctrine on this subject is not known."

@2PhiloVoid Here's something else to add to our discussion. Translators who are aware of the issues brought on by the biased translation work of our Bible have responded with their own translations. Here's a list of fifteen. Below that, a comparison of the NIV and the Young's Literal Translation. The word "eternal" is translated as "age-during", which means for an age, not for eternity. The use of the terms an age, the age(s) to come, ages, and the age of ages, is another important aspect to consider. (Ephesians 2:7)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fifteen literally translated (not interpretively translated) Bibles that reveal what God will do with the sinners in Matthew 25:46

Concordant Literal, Young’s literal, Wilson’s Emphatic Diaglott, Rotherham’s Emphasized, Scarlett’s, J.W. Hanson’s New Covenant, Twentieth Century, Ferrar Fenton, The Western New Testament, Weymouth’s (unedited), Clementson’s, The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Anointed, The Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible, Bullinger’s Companion Bible margins, Jonathan Mitchell’s translation (2010).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Matthew 25:46 NIV
“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Matthew 25:46 Young's Literal Translation
And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.'

Saint Steven · Apr 10, 2021

renniks said:
What you said doesn't even match what the verse says.
Christ is the first fruits. Those who belong to him are believers.

That is what verse 20 says (Christ is the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep), but not verse 23. There is a comma after "Christ". Here's the whole idea here.

"... in Christ all will be made alive. But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him." Where we may disagree is on who is included in "those who belong to him". Verse 22 makes it clear; "... all will be made alive." (But each in turn... - vs 23)

1 Corinthians 15:22-24 NIV
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.

Saint Steven · Apr 10, 2021

sawdust said:
God is Love. It has nothing to do with you or I at all. He would be love no matter what we are or what we do, or for that matter, whether we even existed.

Please explain how eternal conscious torment with no hope of escape is the love of God. Thanks.

- eternal = it will never end (unjust, cruel and unusual by human standards)
- conscious = God supposedly designed it so that even though the fire is enough to kill, the tormented will be unable to die. (feel the love)
- torment = torture with no purpose - to what end? (no end, it's supposedly eternal)

In reality, ten seconds in what we understand as "hell" would be sufficient correction for anyone. Would you likely sin again after such an experience?

Most Christians can't imagine being in that situation. Though they are happy to consign the majority of humankind to it, claiming it is their own fault. Thus blaming the victims.

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 · Apr 10, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
I, too, recognize that the New Testament writers share with us Jesus' amazing love, but I will admit that I get thrown by all of the verses that seem (to me) to imply that there are strings attached and caveats to any universal application of God's amazing love. But.....it would be grand if my present understanding is simply incorrect and everyone is transformed for Eternal Life in Christ at some point in the future.

You may have heard me say this before, my response to the "strings attached and caveats" is to ask: "How are such things measured?" There is no assurance of salvation is such things. Are we saved, or aren't we? "Conditional salvation" is a mess.

Did I do enough be to saved? (who knows?)
Could I have done more? (sure)
Was it enough? (who knows?)
Where does that leave you? (???)
How are such things measured? (no one knows for sure)

If we measure salvation according to what God, through Christ has done, it's a done deal. When Jesus said, "It is finished!", he meant it. That is easily measurable. Christ's work on our behalf was MORE than sufficient.

And not just for us, for EVERYONE. No "if"s, "and"s, or "but"s. (obviously, the naysayers will quote the Bible to disprove such) Let them live in the legalistic fear and uncertainty of their own making. (the high-wire act) While I encourage them to give it up. (my feet planted firmly on the rock) All other ground is sinking sand.

1 John 2:2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Saint Steven · Apr 10, 2021

Jake Arsenal said:
If you believe the purpose of the Bible is to reveal God's plan for the redemption of humankind, please share some scriptures that express that intent. Your unwillingness to defend the foundational premise of the doctrine you teach only further displays your error.

You are free to have your own opinions, but apparently you feel that I am not. You come on the topic with guns-a-blazing. - lol

... We know that “We all possess knowledge.” But knowledge puffs up while love builds up. - 1 Corinthians 8:1 NIV

If the Bible is about knowledge, what are you doing with yours? Puffery, or love?

Somewhere in my religious upbringing I remember reading, or being told, that the Bible reveals God's plan for the redemption of humankind. (my words)

It occurred to me recently that this does not fit the majority beliefs about the final judgment. (Damnationism and Annihilationism) It seems that according to that, people must believe that the Bible is God's plan for planetary genocide. The broad way that leads to destruction in the afterlife.

Romans 3:24 NIV
and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

2PhiloVoid · Apr 10, 2021

Clare73 said:
Indeed, it was (Romans 5:18).
He came to save those, who would believe in his person and work for the remission of their sin and right standing with God's justice, from that condemnation.

The rest are left in it.

Yeah.............that's kind of how I've understood it, too, to an extent.

Saint Steven · Apr 10, 2021

2PhiloVoid said:
Yeah.............that's kind of how I've understood it, too, to an extent.

Great. I was happy to confirm and articulate that for us. I guess that's settled. What's next? - lol

2PhiloVoid · Apr 10, 2021

Saint Steven said:
After I went to work today I realized that I had not really addressed your question(s). This may require more than one post. But we can start here.

One of the biggest problems we face in defending UR using the Bible, is that the Bible is a Damnationist biased text. When the translation work was done, obviously those who worked on the project were reading the originals through their own doctrinal lens, so to speak.

The citation below shows that Universalism was actually a leading doctrine in the theology schools of the early church. However, it was the western/Latin church that assembled the NT canon, not the eastern orthodox church. Therefore the book has a bias. They cooked the books! - lol

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge"
by Schaff-Herzog, 1908, volume 12, page 96
German theologian- Philip Schaff writes :

"In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa, or Nisibis) were Universalist, one (Ephesus) accepted conditional immortality; one (Carthage or Rome) taught endless punishment of the wicked. Other theological schools are mentioned as founded by Universalists, but their actual doctrine on this subject is not known."

I appreciate the scholarly citation, Steve. I'll have to look through my own library and see how much of what Schaff-Herzog says is backed up by other biblical scholars. Personally, I tend not to be convinced by, nor based my understandings of the bible, upon the scholarly insights of any one biblical scholar (although, like you, I do have my favorites, and I don't blame you if you've read something substantive that resonates deeply with you and, by all counts, seems to offer the best explanation).

So, I'll see what I can find on my side here to corroborate Schaff-Herzog's view.

2PhiloVoid · Apr 10, 2021

Saint Steven said:
@2PhiloVoid Here's something else to add to our discussion. Translators who are aware of the issues brought on by the biased translation work of our Bible have responded with their own translations. Here's a list of fifteen. Below that, a comparison of the NIV and the Young's Literal Translation. The word "eternal" is translated as "age-during", which means for an age, not for eternity. The use of the terms an age, the age(s) to come, ages, and the age of ages, is another important aspect to consider. (Ephesians 2:7)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fifteen literally translated (not interpretively translated) Bibles that reveal what God will do with the sinners in Matthew 25:46

Concordant Literal, Young’s literal, Wilson’s Emphatic Diaglott, Rotherham’s Emphasized, Scarlett’s, J.W. Hanson’s New Covenant, Twentieth Century, Ferrar Fenton, The Western New Testament, Weymouth’s (unedited), Clementson’s, The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Anointed, The Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible, Bullinger’s Companion Bible margins, Jonathan Mitchell’s translation (2010).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Matthew 25:46 NIV
“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Matthew 25:46 Young's Literal Translation
And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.'

Thanks, Steve. I'm well aware of these issues, too, and I'll keep them in mind as I review things I've, too, already read.

2PhiloVoid · Apr 10, 2021

Saint Steven said:
Great. I was happy to confirm and articulate that for us. I guess that's settled. What's next? - lol

Well..........not exactly. What Clare and I understand that to mean is that the world is (and still is) under judgement. And although I could be wrong in my interpretations (interpretations that have, for a long time, taken into consideration the Hebrew and Greek language of the earliest biblical manuscripts), my current understanding is that this means that at least some folks aren't going to make it into Eternal Life. Of course, I also don't necessarily believe that Hades is eternal, so it's a little give and take here.

renniks · Apr 10, 2021

Saint Steven said:
.. in Christ all will be made alive. But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him." Where we may disagree is on who is included in "those who belong to him". Verse 22 makes it clear; "... all will be made alive." (But each in turn... - vs 23)

Backwards. The " all" are those who belong to him through believing. Christ and those who belong to him are all that are mentioned. There's no mention of those who don't belong to him... until we get to his enemies. Who are put under his feet, not made alive.

The Bible: God's plan for the redemption of humankind? Or... ???

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

May God be with you and bless you.

Well-Known Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

May God be with you and bless you.

Well-Known Member

May God be with you and bless you.

You can call me Steve

You can call me Steve

You can call me Steve

You can call me Steve

You can call me Steve

You can call me Steve

You can call me Steve

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

You can call me Steve

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

Get my point, Web-Maker ???

Well-Known Member

Similar threads