Christian Universalism. What's not to like?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I've heard that one too. Although it's sometimes phrased as "Jesus never used a proper name in a parable". Although I don't see as how a proper name being used automatically completely rules out any chance of it being a parable.

Now there's things that can be considered, beyond that standard blanket rule. One is both Luke 16:1 and Luke 16:19 start out the same way; "There was a certain rich man". Did you ever notice that before?

There's a lot more stuff in examining all of Luke 16:19-31. But let's think about the main thing that sticks out, which is the proper name of Lazerus.

The question is, was that the actual name of an actual person? Or was it symbolic? Did you know that like Jesus is the Greek version of Joshua or more properly Yeshua, Lazerus is the Greek version of Eleazar? So in this story there's Eleazar and Abraham. Now what stands out in that is, before the birth of Issac, a man named Eleazar was Abraham's heir. He was going inherit everything Abraham had. Furthermore it's possible that Eleazar of Damascus was a gentle proselyte.

And if that's the case. Then the rich man dressed in purple and fine linen could be symbolic of the Pharisees (remember that what Jesus said in Luke:16:19-31 was directed at the Pharisees), and Eleazar (Lazerus) was symbolic of the gentiles. For example there's the part about how Eleazar (Lazarus) ate crumbs that fell from the rich man's table, which is reminiscent of Matthew 15:27 where the gentile woman says, "Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table".

That and several other things could be a clear indication of Luke 16:19-31 being a parable of what was going to happen as far as gentiles receiving what only Abraham's heirs through Issac had.

MAXX........Thank you for the post. May I say to you that First, the story is never called a parable. Many other of Jesus’ stories are designated as parables, such as the sower and the seed (Luke 8:4); the prosperous farmer (Luke 12:16); the barren fig tree (Luke 13:6); and the wedding feast (Luke 14:7).

Second, the story of the rich man and Lazarus uses the actual name of a person. Such specificity would set it apart from ordinary parables, in which the characters are not named.

If Jesus, when saying, “I am tormented in this flame,” meant something other than literal suffering in a literal fire, why did He not define that expression in literal terms for us? The same could be said of “Lazarus,” “rich man,” “Abraham,” “great gulf fixed,” and all the other elements in the passage. Jesus left them undefined. Why? The only logical conclusion is that those words were to be taken at face value. He gave no alternative meaning for them because there was no alternative meaning for them. Our Lord Jesus said exactly what He meant about the rich man and Lazarus, and He meant exactly what He said about the rich man and Lazarus. If we disagree with Him, we need to just come out and say that we do not believe the Bible.

The important thing is that whether the story is a true incident or a parable, the teaching behind it remains the same. Even if it is not a "real" story, it is realistic. Parable or not, Jesus plainly used this story to teach that after death the unrighteous are eternally separated from God, that they remember their rejection of the Gospel, that they are in torment, and that their condition cannot be remedied. In Luke 16:19-31, whether parable or literal account, Jesus clearly taught the existence of heaven and hell as well as the deceitfulness of riches to those who trust in material wealth.
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Once saved always saved would be the primary example. Also Predestination. And T.U.L.I.P. in part or in whole. I'm sure you know what examples there are as well as I do. And you have probably argued most if not all of them.

An interesting thing is a couple of main arguments against universalism are about the same as a couple of main arguments against Calvinism.

One is predestination. Lots of Christians argue that predestination goes against free will. Likewise it's argued that all will be redeemed goes against free will.

Also an argument against both is, if certain people were predestined to go to heaven from the foundation of creation, then what was the point in Jesus dying on the cross? Likewise, if all will eventually be saved what was the point of Jesus dying on the cross? (I already know the answers to that).

And then the argument against once saved always saved, is it teaches Christians that they can be backslidden and "live like the devil" and still make it into heaven, although as through flames not having any heavenly rewards. Likewise the argument against universal redemption is that it teaches people can "live like the devil" and still make it into heaven.

We all sin MAXX. You and me and everyone else. The key is .......do we confess and repent.

Allow me to ask you this. When the prodical son left home...was he his father's son?

When he was in the pig pin, was he still his fathers son?

When he came home to his father...was he still his fathers son?

He was ALWAYS his fathers son wasn't he?????

The argument against Universalism is that it is NOT BIBLICAL!
 
Upvote 0

Ceallaigh

May God be with you and bless you.
Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
19,167
9,958
.
✟607,074.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
We all sin MAXX. You and me and everyone else. The key is .......do we confess and repent.

Allow me to ask you this. When the prodical son left home...was he his father's son?

When he was in the pig pin, was he still his fathers son?
When he came home to his father...was he still his fathers son?

He was ALWAYS his fathers son wasn't he?????

Actually those who don't believe in OSAS, cite that the father said his son was dead. As in spiritually dead.

The argument against Universalism is that it is NOT BIBLICAL!

By another remarkable coincidence, many say the argument against Calvinism is that it is "NOT BIBLICAL!".
 
Upvote 0

Ceallaigh

May God be with you and bless you.
Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
19,167
9,958
.
✟607,074.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
MAXX........Thank you for the post. May I say to you that First, the story is never called a parable. Many other of Jesus’ stories are designated as parables, such as the sower and the seed (Luke 8:4); the prosperous farmer (Luke 12:16); the barren fig tree (Luke 13:6); and the wedding feast (Luke 14:7).

Ah but Mark 4:34 tells us "He did not say anything to them without using a parable".

Second, the story of the rich man and Lazarus uses the actual name of a person. Such specificity would set it apart from ordinary parables, in which the characters are not named.

Did you decide to act as though I didn't already say quite a lot about that?

If Jesus, when saying, “I am tormented in this flame,” meant something other than literal suffering in a literal fire, why did He not define that expression in literal terms for us?
I'm not sure if you worded that the way you wanted to.
The same could be said of “Lazarus,” “rich man,” “Abraham,” “great gulf fixed,” and all the other elements in the passage. Jesus left them undefined. Why? The only logical conclusion is that those words were to be taken at face value. He gave no alternative meaning for them because there was no alternative meaning for them. Our Lord Jesus said exactly what He meant about the rich man and Lazarus, and He meant exactly what He said about the rich man and Lazarus. If we disagree with Him, we need to just come out and say that we do not believe the Bible.

Would you say that "And if your eye is causing you to sin, tear it out and throw it away from you." (Matthew 18:9) is to be taken literally since Jesus left that undefined? No one, not even those folks who dance with venomous snakes because of Mark 16:18, will go as far as to say that we must pluck out our eyes and cut off our hands and feet, because that's what Jesus said to do, and if we don't we need to just come out and say that we do not believe the Bible. Did Jesus mean that the Pharisees literally swallowed camels? (Matthew 23:24). You know as well as I do that the Bible is full of non-literal sayings along with figurative, symbolic and hyperbolic language.

The important thing is that whether the story is a true incident or a parable, the teaching behind it remains the same. Even if it is not a "real" story, it is realistic. Parable or not, Jesus plainly used this story to teach that after death the unrighteous are eternally separated from God, that they remember their rejection of the Gospel, that they are in torment, and that their condition cannot be remedied. In Luke 16:19-31, whether parable or literal account, Jesus clearly taught the existence of heaven and hell as well as the deceitfulness of riches to those who trust in material wealth.

Where does Jesus say the rich man is eternally separated from God? How could the rich man have rejected the gospel since it didn't yet exist at the time Jesus told the story?

As for the great gulf that couldn't be crossed:

the-cross-bridges-the-gap.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,802
4,309
-
✟681,411.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ceallaigh
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,185.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Are UR and Annihilation-ism ever supported by any direct words from the Father, Himself, or Jesus, Himself? I don't mean something an OT prophets says unless directly quoting the Father or what a NT disciple says unless directly quoting Jesus?
But I won't hold my breath because I have read the entire Bible more than once.
Are you serious?
Jesus taught e.g.,
• “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:” Matthew 25:41
• "these shall go away into eternal punishment, Matthew 25:46"
• "the fire of hell [Γέεννα/gehenna] where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, 3 times Mark 9:43-48"
• "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Matthew 13:42, Matthew 13:50
• “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” Matthew 18:6
• “And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” Matthew 7:23
• “woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born. ” Matthew 26:24
• “But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable in that day for Sodom, than for that city.” Luke 10:12​
…..These teachings tacitly reaffirmed and sanctioned a then existing significant Jewish view of eternal hell, outlined above.
In Matt. 18:6, 26:24 and Luk 10:12, see above, Jesus teaches that there is a punishment worse than death or nonexistence.
…..A punishment worse than death without mercy is also mentioned in Hebrews 10:28-31.
Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
…..how much sorer punishment,””Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord,””It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” these certainly do not sound like everyone will be saved, no matter what.
…..Jesus is quoted as using the word death 17 times in the gospels, if He intended to say eternal death, in Matt 25:46, that is what He would have said but He didn’t, He said “eternal punishment.
….The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, see Acts of the apostles 23:8. They knew that everybody died; rich, poor, young, old, good, bad, men, women, children, infants and knew that it was permanent and often it did not involve punishment.
When Jesus taught “eternal punishment” the Sadducees would not have understood it as simply death, it would have meant something worse to them.
…..Re: Matt 25:46 concerning “punishment” one early church father wrote,
“Then these reap no advantage from their punishment, as it seems: moreover, I would say that they are not punished unless they are conscious of the punishment.” Justin Martyr [A.D. 110-165.] Dialogue with Trypho Chapter 4​
…..Jesus undoubtedly knew what the Jews, believed about hell. If that Jewish teaching was wrong, why wouldn’t Jesus tell them there was no hell, no eternal punishment etc? Why would Jesus teach “eternal punishment,” etc. to Jews who believed, "The Lord, the Almighty, will punish them on the Day of Judgment by putting fire and worms into their flesh, so that they cry out with pain unto all eternity," which would only encourage and reinforce their beliefs in “hell”?
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,185.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
MAXX........Thank you for the post. May I say to you that First, the story is never called a parable. Many other of Jesus’ stories are designated as parables, such as the sower and the seed (Luke 8:4); the prosperous farmer (Luke 12:16); the barren fig tree (Luke 13:6); and the wedding feast (Luke 14:7).
Second, the story of the rich man and Lazarus uses the actual name of a person. Such specificity would set it apart from ordinary parables, in which the characters are not named.
If Jesus, when saying, “I am tormented in this flame,” meant something other than literal suffering in a literal fire, why did He not define that expression in literal terms for us? The same could be said of “Lazarus,” “rich man,” “Abraham,” “great gulf fixed,” and all the other elements in the passage. Jesus left them undefined. Why? The only logical conclusion is that those words were to be taken at face value. He gave no alternative meaning for them because there was no alternative meaning for them. Our Lord Jesus said exactly what He meant about the rich man and Lazarus, and He meant exactly what He said about the rich man and Lazarus. If we disagree with Him, we need to just come out and say that we do not believe the Bible.
The important thing is that whether the story is a true incident or a parable, the teaching behind it remains the same. Even if it is not a "real" story, it is realistic. Parable or not, Jesus plainly used this story to teach that after death the unrighteous are eternally separated from God, that they remember their rejection of the Gospel, that they are in torment, and that their condition cannot be remedied. In Luke 16:19-31, whether parable or literal account, Jesus clearly taught the existence of heaven and hell as well as the deceitfulness of riches to those who trust in material wealth.
All of the ECF who quoted/referred to the story of Lazarus and the rich man considered it factual.
Irenaeus Against Heresies Book II Chapter XXXIV.-Souls Can Be Recognised in the Separate State, and are Immortal Although They Once Had a Beginning.
Ireneaeus, 120-202 AD, was a student of Polycarp, who was a student of John.
1. The Lord has taught with very great fulness, that souls not only continue to exist, not by passing from body to body, but that they preserve the same form [in their separate state] as the body had to which they were adapted, and that they remember the deeds which they did in this state of existence, and from which they have now ceased,-in that narrative which is recorded respecting the rich man and that Lazarus who found repose in the bosom of Abraham. In this account He states that Dives [=Latin for rich] knew Lazarus after death, and Abraham in like manner, and that each one of these persons continued in his own proper position, and that [Dives] requested Lazarus to be sent to relieve him-[Lazarus], on whom he did not [formerly] bestow even the crumbs [which fell] from his table. [He tells us] also of the answer given by Abraham, who was acquainted not only with what respected himself, but Dives also, and who enjoined those who did not wish to come into that place of torment to believe Moses and the prophets, and to receive the preaching of Him who was to rise again from the dead. By these things, then, it is plainly declared that souls continue to exist that they do not pass from body to body, that they possess the form of a man, so that they may be recognised, and retain the memory of things in this world; moreover, that the gift of prophecy was possessed by Abraham, and that each class of souls] receives a habitation such as it has deserved, even before the judgment.
ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Clement of Alexandria [A.D. 153-193-217] The Instructor [Paedagogus] Book 1
On the Resurrection. But he figuratively designates the vulgar rabble, attached to ephemeral pleasure, flourishing for a little, loving ornament, loving praise, and being everything but truth-loving, good for nothing but to be burned with fire. “There was a certain man,” said the Lord, narrating, “very rich, who was clothed in purple and scarlet, enjoying himself splendidly every day.” This was the day. “And a certain poor man named Lazarus was laid at the rich man’s gate, full of sores, desiring to be filled with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table.” This is the grass. Well, the rich man was punished in Hades, being made partaker of the fire; while the other flourished again in the Father’s bosom.
Tertullian A Treatise On The Soul [A.D. 145-220.]
In hell the soul of a certain man is in torment, punished in flames, suffering excruciating thirst, and imploring from the finger of a happier soul, for his tongue, the solace of a drop of water. Do you suppose that this end of the blessed poor man and the miserable rich man is only imaginary? Then why the name of Lazarus in this narrative, if the circumstance is not in (the category of) a real occurrence? But even if it is to be regarded as imaginary, it will still be a testimony to truth and reality. For unless the soul possessed corporeality, the image of a soul could not possibly contain a finger of a bodily substance; nor would the Scripture feign a statement about the limbs of a body, if these had no existence.
The Epistles Of Cyprian (A.D. 200-258) Epistle 54 To Cornelius, Concerning Fortunatus And Felicissimus, Or Against The Heretics
A good man out of the good treasure bringeth forth good things; and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.”Whence also that rich sinner who implores help from Lazarus, then laid in Abraham’s bosom, and established in a place of comfort, while he, writhing in torments, is consumed by the heats of burning flame, suffers most punishment of all parts of his body in his mouth and his tongue, because doubtless in his mouth and his tongue he had most sinned.
Methodius Fragments On The History Of Jonah (A.D. 260-312)
But souls, being rational bodies, are arranged by the Maker and Father of all things into members which are visible to reason, having received this impression. Whence, also, in Hades, as in the case of Lazarus and the rich man, they are spoken of as having a tongue, and a finger, and the other members; not as though they had with them another invisible body, but that the souls themselves, naturally, when entirely stripped of their covering, are such according to their essence.
.....Reasons why Lazarus and the rich man is not a parable.
…..A parable is a specific literary device. The account of Lazarus and the rich man could be some other type of literary device but it is not a parable. The word “parable” is from the Greek word παραβολή/parabolé which means “to lay beside.” A parable explains or clarifies something unknown by comparison with something known. All unquestioned parables include this comparison e.g. “Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field… Matthew 13:24
Jesus introduces five of His parables as such Matthew 21:33, Matthew 24:32, Mark 4:13, Mark 13:28 and Luke 8:11. Others identifies 21 of Jesus’ parables as such.
…..The story of Lazarus is not introduced or identified as a parable and Jesus did not explain it later to His disciples.
The story of Lazarus does not have the structure of a parable. There is no comparison between something unknown/misunderstood about the kingdom of heaven and some earthly event.
All unquestioned parables refer to real type events, something which could have or has happened in this life, not fables, something fictitious, unreasonable or impossible. Other than Lazarus and the rich man living and dying, which happens to everybody, there is nothing about the story which is or can be compared to anything in this life.
All unquestioned parables refer to anonymous people, a certain shepherd, a certain widow etc. For example, at some time in history a shepherd searched for and found a lost sheep. At some time in history a widow searched for and found a lost coin.
The story of Lazarus names two specific people, Lazarus, otherwise unknown, and Abraham, an actual historic person. If Abraham was never in the place Jesus mentioned and did not say the words Jesus quoted, then Jesus was lying.
 
Upvote 0

Hmm

Hey, I'm just this guy, you know
Sep 27, 2019
4,866
5,027
34
Shropshire
✟186,379.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Are you serious?

Deadly. All you have provided hangs on your definition of "aionios" as "an infinite time duration" being correct. If it's wrong then your case comes crashes to the ground like a felled noble oak tree. And as we have seen, "aionios" is a complex word and there is not one instance of it having this meaning in Scripture even though you won't agree.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,185.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Deadly. All you have provided hangs on your definition of "aionios" as "an infinite time duration" being correct. If it's wrong then your case crashes to the ground like a felled noble oak tree. As we have seen, "aionios" is a complex word and there is not one instance of it having this meaning in Scripture even though you don't agree with this.
How many times have I posted a list of 24 NT verses where Jesus and NT writers define/describe "aionios" as eternal? Never refuted! Want another opinion check out the Eastern Greek Orthodox Bible. Greek has been the language of the Eastern Greek Orthodox church for at least 2000+ years who better than the native Greek speaking scholars who translated the EOB know the correct translation of every word in the EOB? The EOB is available online, free. Like the poker player said, "Read 'em and weep." I have provided the link. You're welcome. I have also provided a link to the 1917 Jewish Publication Society OT translation. If you want to argue with them about the correct translation of "olam" and other words.

http://fortsmithorthodox.org/NEW TESTAMENT.pdf

Breslov References & Citations - Genesis 1:1-31
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hmm

Hey, I'm just this guy, you know
Sep 27, 2019
4,866
5,027
34
Shropshire
✟186,379.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Whence also that rich sinner who implores help from Lazarus, then laid in Abraham’s bosom, and established in a place of comfort, while he, writhing in torments, is consumed by the heats of burning flame, suffers most punishment of all parts of his body in his mouth and his tongue,

Thank you for the verse which supports the universalist view of hell as a temporary place of correction (kolasis). There is no mention of the rich man being in hell for an eternity. You have read this into the text which only says that while he is undergoing corrective punishment, which of course is painful - it's not easy to give up all our delusions - he cannot communicate with Lazarus. Just like you can't call your friends up when you're in prison whenever you want.

It's funny anyhow how the main point of the story, that of Jesus' condemnation of the selfish use of wealth, always gets overlooked. I wonder why that is?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0

Hmm

Hey, I'm just this guy, you know
Sep 27, 2019
4,866
5,027
34
Shropshire
✟186,379.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
I have also provided a link to the 1917 Jewish Publication Society OT translation. If you want to argue with them about the correct translation of "olam" and other words

Okay, I will do thanks, just as soon as I have invented a time machine to take me back to 1917.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Ceallaigh
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Ah but Mark 4:34 tells us "He did not say anything to them without using a parable".



Did you decide to act as though I didn't already say quite a lot about that?



Would you say that "And if your eye is causing you to sin, tear it out and throw it away from you." (Matthew 18:9) is to be taken literally since Jesus left that undefined? No one, not even those folks who dance with venomous snakes because of Mark 16:18, will go as far as to say that we must pluck out our eyes and cut off our hands and feet, because that's what Jesus said to do, and if we don't we need to just come out and say that we do not believe the Bible. Did Jesus mean that the Pharisees literally swallowed camels? (Matthew 23:24). You know as well as I do that the Bible is full of non-literal sayings along with figurative, symbolic and hyperbolic language.



Where does Jesus say the rich man is eternally separated from God? How could the rich man have rejected the gospel since it didn't yet exist at the time Jesus told the story?

As for the great gulf that couldn't be crossed:

the-cross-bridges-the-gap.jpg

I am amazed that I am having to explain such things to someone smart enough to use a complex computer.

But.......
My mother, with somewhat of a twinkle in her eye, used to say, “Son, if you do that again, I’m gonna skin you alive.” I knew she was speaking figuratively; nonetheless, I got the point!

In the context of Mark 9:43ff, Christ was emphasizing the supreme value of pursuing the kingdom of God above all else. To illustrate this principle, he chose, for illustration purposes, items that are very precious to us (e.g., eye, hand, or foot).

Again....Have you actually read Luke 16 where it clearly says........
26 "And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence."
 
Upvote 0

Major1

Well-Known Member
Sep 17, 2016
10,551
2,837
Deland, Florida
✟203,785.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Actually those who don't believe in OSAS, cite that the father said his son was dead. As in spiritually dead.



By another remarkable coincidence, many say the argument against Calvinism is that it is "NOT BIBLICAL!".

Now how silly is that.

If his son was dead......how was it that the father ran to and kissed????

So-called “four-point Calvinists” accept
Total Depravity,
Unconditional Election,
Irresistible Grace, and
Perseverance of the Saints as biblical doctrines.

You see, Man is definitely sinful and incapable of believing in God on his own. God elects people based on His will alone – election is not based on any merit in the person chosen. All those whom God has chosen will come to faith. All those who are truly born-again will persevere in their faith. As for Limited Atonement, however, four-point Calvinists believe that atonement is unlimited, arguing that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world, not just for the sins of the elect.

“And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2). Other verses in opposition to limited atonement are John 1:29; 3:16; 1 Timothy 2:6; and 2 Peter 2:1.

5 Point Calvinist theology, if taken to its logical limits says that because God chooses and He knows who will be saved, then a baby who dies at 1 day old can in fact go to hell because hw did not choose Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,185.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Thank you for the verse which supports the universalist view of hell as a temporary place of correction (kolasis). There is no mention of the rich man being in hell for an eternity. You have read this into the text which only says that while he is undergoing corrective punishment, which of course is painful - it's not easy to give up all our delusions - he cannot communicate with Lazarus. Just like you can't call your friends up when you're in prison whenever you want.
It's funny anyhow how the main point of the story, that of Jesus' condemnation of the selfish use of wealth, always gets overlooked. I wonder why that is?
Thank you for more opportunity to show you don't know that you are talking about. Where does the Lazarus/rich man story say anything about misuse of wealth? You should try reading the Bible cover to cover rather than only the handful of out-of-context proof texts you post. The rich man violated a specific commandment in the OT.
Does this support UR?
Luke 16:25-26
25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
The specific commandment the rich man violated.
Deuteronomy 15:7-8
7 If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of thy gates in thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother:
8 But thou shalt open thine hand wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need, in that which he wanteth.

 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ceallaigh

May God be with you and bless you.
Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
19,167
9,958
.
✟607,074.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Now how silly is that.

If his son was dead......how was it that the father ran to and kissed????

According to ant-OSAS he was dead during the time he separated himself from the father and living in sin. "But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found." Luke 15:32


So-called “four-point Calvinists” accept
Total Depravity,
Unconditional Election,
Irresistible Grace, and
Perseverance of the Saints as biblical doctrines.

You see, Man is definitely sinful and incapable of believing in God on his own. God elects people based on His will alone – election is not based on any merit in the person chosen. All those whom God has chosen will come to faith. All those who are truly born-again will persevere in their faith. As for Limited Atonement, however, four-point Calvinists believe that atonement is unlimited, arguing that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world, not just for the sins of the elect.

“And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2). Other verses in opposition to limited atonement are John 1:29; 3:16; 1 Timothy 2:6; and 2 Peter 2:1.

5 Point Calvinist theology, if taken to its logical limits says that because God chooses and He knows who will be saved, then a baby who dies at 1 day old can in fact go to hell because hw did not choose Christ.

And many Christians say that's not Biblical, full of eisegesis and so on. I'm not saying I agree with them. What I'm saying is that just as you say universal redemption is unbiblical, others say what you believe in is unbiblical. The fact is both are biblical, because they're based on scripture. What it comes down to is agreeing or disagreeing with the doctrinal conclusion that's based on scripture.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,185.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Okay, I will do thanks, just as soon as I have invented a time machine to take me back to 1917.
The 1917 JPS is an English translation. You appear to be able to read and comprehend English. But only if you are interested in the truth. Evidently you are not. The JPS has a 1985 edition but it is still in copyright
Here is an important passage from the JPS I think it is the '85 edition..
Exodus 3:14 And G-d said unto Moses: 'I AM THAT I AM'; and He said: 'Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: I AM hath sent me unto you.'
15 And G-d said moreover unto Moses: 'Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: HaShem, the G-d of your fathers, the G-d of Abraham, the G-d of Isaac, and the G-d of Jacob, hath sent me unto you; this is My name for ever, [ לעלם/l'olam] and this is My memorial unto all generations. 16 Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto them: HaShem, the G-d of your fathers, the G-d of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, hath appeared unto me, saying: I have surely remembered you, and seen that which is done to you in Egypt.​
 
Upvote 0

Ceallaigh

May God be with you and bless you.
Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
19,167
9,958
.
✟607,074.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I am amazed that I am having to explain such things to someone smart enough to use a complex computer.
But.......
My mother, with somewhat of a twinkle in her eye, used to say, “Son, if you do that again, I’m gonna skin you alive.” I knew she was speaking figuratively; nonetheless, I got the point!

In the context of Mark 9:43ff, Christ was emphasizing the supreme value of pursuing the kingdom of God above all else. To illustrate this principle, he chose, for illustration purposes, items that are very precious to us (e.g., eye, hand, or foot).

Yes I know, that was my point in reply to what you said about how we must take what Jesus says as literal or else "we need to just come out and say that we do not believe the Bible."

Again....Have you actually read Luke 16 where it clearly says........

26 "And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence."

Did you not understand the illustration I posted of the cross bridging the gulf? Should I say something like, "I am amazed that someone smart enough to use a complex computer, doesn't understand pictures"?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0

Ceallaigh

May God be with you and bless you.
Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
19,167
9,958
.
✟607,074.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
All of the ECF who quoted/referred to the story of Lazarus and the rich man considered it factual.
Irenaeus Against Heresies Book II Chapter XXXIV.-Souls Can Be Recognised in the Separate State, and are Immortal Although They Once Had a Beginning.
Ireneaeus, 120-202 AD, was a student of Polycarp, who was a student of John.
1. The Lord has taught with very great fulness, that souls not only continue to exist, not by passing from body to body, but that they preserve the same form [in their separate state] as the body had to which they were adapted, and that they remember the deeds which they did in this state of existence, and from which they have now ceased,-in that narrative which is recorded respecting the rich man and that Lazarus who found repose in the bosom of Abraham. In this account He states that Dives [=Latin for rich] knew Lazarus after death, and Abraham in like manner, and that each one of these persons continued in his own proper position, and that [Dives] requested Lazarus to be sent to relieve him-[Lazarus], on whom he did not [formerly] bestow even the crumbs [which fell] from his table. [He tells us] also of the answer given by Abraham, who was acquainted not only with what respected himself, but Dives also, and who enjoined those who did not wish to come into that place of torment to believe Moses and the prophets, and to receive the preaching of Him who was to rise again from the dead. By these things, then, it is plainly declared that souls continue to exist that they do not pass from body to body, that they possess the form of a man, so that they may be recognised, and retain the memory of things in this world; moreover, that the gift of prophecy was possessed by Abraham, and that each class of souls] receives a habitation such as it has deserved, even before the judgment.
ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Clement of Alexandria [A.D. 153-193-217] The Instructor [Paedagogus] Book 1
On the Resurrection. But he figuratively designates the vulgar rabble, attached to ephemeral pleasure, flourishing for a little, loving ornament, loving praise, and being everything but truth-loving, good for nothing but to be burned with fire. “There was a certain man,” said the Lord, narrating, “very rich, who was clothed in purple and scarlet, enjoying himself splendidly every day.” This was the day. “And a certain poor man named Lazarus was laid at the rich man’s gate, full of sores, desiring to be filled with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table.” This is the grass. Well, the rich man was punished in Hades, being made partaker of the fire; while the other flourished again in the Father’s bosom.
Tertullian A Treatise On The Soul [A.D. 145-220.]
In hell the soul of a certain man is in torment, punished in flames, suffering excruciating thirst, and imploring from the finger of a happier soul, for his tongue, the solace of a drop of water. Do you suppose that this end of the blessed poor man and the miserable rich man is only imaginary? Then why the name of Lazarus in this narrative, if the circumstance is not in (the category of) a real occurrence? But even if it is to be regarded as imaginary, it will still be a testimony to truth and reality. For unless the soul possessed corporeality, the image of a soul could not possibly contain a finger of a bodily substance; nor would the Scripture feign a statement about the limbs of a body, if these had no existence.
The Epistles Of Cyprian (A.D. 200-258) Epistle 54 To Cornelius, Concerning Fortunatus And Felicissimus, Or Against The Heretics
A good man out of the good treasure bringeth forth good things; and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.”Whence also that rich sinner who implores help from Lazarus, then laid in Abraham’s bosom, and established in a place of comfort, while he, writhing in torments, is consumed by the heats of burning flame, suffers most punishment of all parts of his body in his mouth and his tongue, because doubtless in his mouth and his tongue he had most sinned.
Methodius Fragments On The History Of Jonah (A.D. 260-312)
But souls, being rational bodies, are arranged by the Maker and Father of all things into members which are visible to reason, having received this impression. Whence, also, in Hades, as in the case of Lazarus and the rich man, they are spoken of as having a tongue, and a finger, and the other members; not as though they had with them another invisible body, but that the souls themselves, naturally, when entirely stripped of their covering, are such according to their essence.
.....Reasons why Lazarus and the rich man is not a parable.
…..A parable is a specific literary device. The account of Lazarus and the rich man could be some other type of literary device but it is not a parable. The word “parable” is from the Greek word παραβολή/parabolé which means “to lay beside.” A parable explains or clarifies something unknown by comparison with something known. All unquestioned parables include this comparison e.g. “Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field… Matthew 13:24
Jesus introduces five of His parables as such Matthew 21:33, Matthew 24:32, Mark 4:13, Mark 13:28 and Luke 8:11. Others identifies 21 of Jesus’ parables as such.
…..The story of Lazarus is not introduced or identified as a parable and Jesus did not explain it later to His disciples.
The story of Lazarus does not have the structure of a parable. There is no comparison between something unknown/misunderstood about the kingdom of heaven and some earthly event.
All unquestioned parables refer to real type events, something which could have or has happened in this life, not fables, something fictitious, unreasonable or impossible. Other than Lazarus and the rich man living and dying, which happens to everybody, there is nothing about the story which is or can be compared to anything in this life.
All unquestioned parables refer to anonymous people, a certain shepherd, a certain widow etc. For example, at some time in history a shepherd searched for and found a lost sheep. At some time in history a widow searched for and found a lost coin.
The story of Lazarus names two specific people, Lazarus, otherwise unknown, and Abraham, an actual historic person. If Abraham was never in the place Jesus mentioned and did not say the words Jesus quoted, then Jesus was lying.

That's pretty hard to decipher since it's one big jagged paragraph.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ceallaigh

May God be with you and bless you.
Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
19,167
9,958
.
✟607,074.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The 1917 JPS is an English translation. You appear to be able to read and comprehend English. But only if you are interested in the truth. Evidently you are not. The JPS has a 1985 edition but it is still in copyright
Here is an important passage from the JPS I think it is the '85 edition..
Exodus 3:14 And G-d said unto Moses: 'I AM THAT I AM'; and He said: 'Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: I AM hath sent me unto you.'
15 And G-d said moreover unto Moses: 'Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: HaShem, the G-d of your fathers, the G-d of Abraham, the G-d of Isaac, and the G-d of Jacob, hath sent me unto you; this is My name for ever, [ לעלם/l'olam] and this is My memorial unto all generations. 16 Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto them: HaShem, the G-d of your fathers, the G-d of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, hath appeared unto me, saying: I have surely remembered you, and seen that which is done to you in Egypt.

What about when Jonah used לעלם/l'olam when describing being inside the great fish?

"To the roots of the mountains I sank down; the earth beneath barred me in forever. But you, Lord my God, brought my life up from the pit." Jonah 2:6

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lazarus Short
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.