BEWARE OF UNIVERSAL RECONCILIATION

[Shrewd Manager]

You are of course, free to trivialize what God says throughout His bible.

Thank you, but I'll politely decline.

It worked then, it is still working now---you will not die.

Jesus has the keys to death and Hades, and he is God's salvation, the Logos, the omega plan.

Again---fire is not a caring entity. It is a chemical reaction and it has no heart, no love, no forgiveness--it is not able to cleanse anyone from sin, Jesus alone can do that. Fire doesn't care about you, fire has no memory of your character, what you did, what you thought.

God's presence is represented by fire. Look at all the visionary descriptions of God in Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Revelation, look at the angels, the seraphim (the 'burning ones'), the cherubim. Look to the flaming sword guarding the way to the tree of life, Moses' burning bush, the pillar of smoke in the desert, look to Jesus the brazen serpent with feet of burnished bronze heated in a furnace. Look to God the consuming fire, the refiner's fire.

Divine fire is not earthly fire, though earthly flames lick heavenward, seeking their home.

It won't change what God said at all---not in the slightest and you can quote whatever man you want--it won't change what God has said. It won't make fire able to forgive sins or cleanse from sins or do anything else than to consume what is placed in it.

God's presence consumes the wood hay and stubble. The man is saved, but as through fire.

I suggest you need to accept that fire is equated with God - His burning love for all His creation, just as water is often used as a metaphor for people (eg many waters) and wind for the holy spirit. You do yourself a disservice by rejecting the allegorical and spiritual Bible interpretation.

 

[Hillsage]

You are of course, free to trivialize what God says throughout His bible.

I'd say he spiritualizes what you deem trivialized.

Again---fire is not a caring entity. It is a chemical reaction and it has no heart, no love, no forgiveness--it is not able to cleanse anyone from sin,

Well for sure the "fire" you guys minister "is not a caring entity."

PSA 104:4 Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire:

I'll take the words above as spiritually literal. But feel free to bring them down to what ever your doctrine demands. Just don't expect us to be influenced by it.

 

[mmksparbud]

What you fail to realize is that God's fire can not harm the saved---it is only destructive to the lost. Those who do not have the blood of Jesus. The fire can't tell the difference between the saved and the lost. It is the blood of Jesus that saves--period. Not the fire. You are not going to believe the truth of God until you are up close and personal with that fire yourself. And since you have all voiced your disdain for a God that would meet out what He deems justice to those who do not have any inclination to follow Him at all and have refused the blood of Jesus to protect them---you'll be joining them. And don't expect me to fall for the lies you have swallowed. Satan doesn't need to change what works, and "thou shalt not surely die"---is still working for him. Not that anyone has anything to worry about---according to you---we all can do wherever we want and God will save us anyway----Even Hitler, Idi Amin, Judas, the local child rapist and murderer will be saved, whether he want to be saved or not.

 

[FineLinen]

What you fail to realize is that God's fire can not harm the saved---it is only destructive to the lost.

Dear Lady: The Fire of the Glory ONE radiates with Theion & Pur. There simply is no way to avoid Him (thank You Father). He is the fnal destination of the all, the ta pante.

The Consuming Fire

Unspoken Sermons by George MacDonald: The Consuming Fire

 

[Saint Steven]

Ok, victims of the devil's deceptions via corrupt translations (Item 2). But also, willing victims, because when shown the inescapable logic that every eternally damned soul must correspondingly represent a failure of God's will and Jesus' mission, they refuse to repent. So pride and stubborn self-righteousness (Item 1)?

The victimization comes with a personal threat to them. Once you truly believe in hell, you also truly believe you could end up there if you don't do everything in your power to avoid it. And seemingly, one of those transgressions is NOT believing in hell. So, they see us as a personal threat that may send them to hell, and a public threat to those we may succeed to convince; who would then not take the "proper" precautions to avoid hell. Which then makes us responsible for their damnation. In other words, they feel the need to stop us immediately, for everyone's good. That's what we are up against from my perspective.

They are waiting for us to bring an authoritative biblical directive for them to acknowledge or reject. As we know, this doesn't work that way. We are reverse engineering from the outcome we see (UR) toward the beginning. The best we can do is present the scraps that the translation editors overlooked, or left for us.

Willing victims? What other choice do they think they have? You and I and our brothers know better, but do they? Seems not. They are certainly grappling with cognitive dissonance. What we are saying must resonate on a low level with them. But their VIEW of the Bible is screaming at them to ignore us. They always return to the mantra of God being both love and justice. Which they understand as the extremes in his character instead of the tight relationship we see. We understand that God's love is just and God's justice is love. They see love for the believers and justice for the damned. Which would mean that God actually hates the damned. Why else would you decide to burn someone for eternity?

 

[Saint Steven]

OK, I'll read it and give you my honest response.

That's great, thanks.
I'm not asking you to believe it, only to understand it.
Then you can decide what to do with it.

 

[Saint Steven]

No---God has His justice and He says what it is. There are those who want to believe God doesn't really mean what He says. That is what Satan said to Adam and Eve---you shall not surely die. He lied---He still lies.

Humankind has laws in place to put limits on justice. One of them has to do with cruel and unusual punishment. It seems to me that the common understanding of hell is way beyond even human limits of cruelty. Your Annihilationist view actually addresses that. That the suffering will not be eternal.

 

[Saint Steven]

The victimization comes with a personal threat to them. Once you truly believe in hell, you also truly believe you could end up there if you don't do everything in your power to avoid it. And seemingly, one of those transgressions is NOT believing in hell. So, they see us as a personal threat that may send them to hell, and a public threat to those we may succeed to convince; who would then not take the "proper" precautions to avoid hell. Which then makes us responsible for their damnation. In other words, they feel the need to stop us immediately, for everyone's good. That's what we are up against from my perspective.

They are waiting for us to bring an authoritative biblical directive for them to acknowledge or reject. As we know, this doesn't work that way. We are reverse engineering from the outcome we see (UR) toward the beginning. The best we can do is present the scraps that the translation editors overlooked, or left for us.

Willing victims? What other choice do they think they have? You and I and our brothers know better, but do they? Seems not. They are certainly grappling with cognitive dissonance. What we are saying must resonate on a low level with them. But their VIEW of the Bible is screaming at them to ignore us. They always return to the mantra of God being both love and justice. Which they understand as the extremes in his character instead of the tight relationship we see. We understand that God's love is just and God's justice is love. They see love for the believers and justice for the damned. Which would mean that God actually hates the damned. Why else would you decide to burn someone for eternity?

Add to this their claim of being in possession of absolute truth. That their opinion is somehow the very Word of God. So, they say, you best take it up with the one with whom you are really arguing. SMH

 

[Shrewd Manager]

The victimization comes with a personal threat to them. Once you truly believe in hell, you also truly believe you could end up there if you don't do everything in your power to avoid it. And seemingly, one of those transgressions is NOT believing in hell. So, they see us as a personal threat that may send them to hell, and a public threat to those we may succeed to convince; who would then not take the "proper" precautions to avoid hell. Which then makes us responsible for their damnation. In other words, they feel the need to stop us immediately, for everyone's good. That's what we are up against from my perspective.

Thanks for the helpful insights, from one who's come from 'the other side'. So it's something of a case of conditioning then?

They are waiting for us to bring an authoritative biblical directive for them to acknowledge or reject. As we know, this doesn't work that way. We are reverse engineering from the outcome we see (UR) toward the beginning. The best we can do is present the scraps that the translation editors overlooked, or left for us.

Yes, they want something more than the express universal plan, universal promises, universal gospel and end times universal renovation confirmation encapsulated in: 'Behold I am making all things new.'

We're not just reverse engineering. Scripture is saturated in the UR message. I'd be confident that a hypothetical objective unprejudiced person reading a relatively unprejudiced Bible translation (eg the NASB or NKJV) would come out beaming that God has saved his beloved creation from His spiritual enemies, brought peace and joy to the world and they all lived happily everafter.

Willing victims? What other choice do they think they have? You and I and our brothers know better, but do they? Seems not.

I recall John 9:41:
Jesus said to them, "If you were blind, you would have no sin; but since you say, 'We see,' your sin remains.

They see love for the believers and justice for the damned. Which would mean that God actually hates the damned. Why else would you decide to burn someone for eternity?

That's right, no sense of justice (being proportionality) can account for eternal punishment for limited crimes. The only response they offer to this is 'It's a sin against the infinite God, therefore infinite punishment is condign'. Shocker, imho.

 

[Saint Steven]

Thanks for the helpful insights, from one who's come from 'the other side'. So it's something of a case of conditioning then?

Yes, conditioning. That's a great way to look at it. (loved the video, thanks)

Those of us who grew up in the church have heard about hell from our earliest memories. My Dad had a funny story about me as child telling a smoker that "Bad cowboys smoke stigarettes and they go down there." (pointing to hell)

Over the years I have had some questions about it. And my introduction to UR required some adjustments to my thinking. There were trade-offs. If hell is not eternal, then neither is life eternal. That was a tough one to swallow. But it follows logically. Can't have one without the other. And nothing says one age can't follow the previous one. So ultimately, what's the difference? We'll be ready for something new and exciting in short order anyway. We are restless souls after all.

 

[Saint Steven]

Yes, they want something more than the express universal plan, universal promises, universal gospel and end times universal renovation confirmation encapsulated in: 'Behold I am making all things new.'

We're not just reverse engineering. Scripture is saturated in the UR message. I'd be confident that a hypothetical objective unprejudiced person reading a relatively unprejudiced Bible translation (eg the NASB or NKJV) would come out beaming that God has saved his beloved creation from His spiritual enemies, brought peace and joy to the world and they all lived happily everafter.

The aforementioned conditioning is preventing them from seeing it. Everyone knows that going up the ladder leads to a beating. "That's just how things work around here." (says the monkey)

It's all about POV from my perspective. (wow, that was redundant - lol) Anyway...
And I agree, if you believe in UR you can see it everywhere in scripture. I'm making new discoveries all the time.

Have you ever met "a hypothetical objective unprejudiced person" that was a Christian? Seems to me like that would be a rare find. - lol

 

[Shrewd Manager]

Yes, conditioning. That's a great way to look at it. (loved the video, thanks)

Those of us who grew up in the church have heard about hell from our earliest memories. My Dad had a funny story about me as child telling a smoker that "Bad cowboys smoke stigarettes and they go down there." (pointing to hell)

Haha, that's probably why the Marlboro Man was often pictured on his horse heading downhill. Sayonara, pardener.

There were trade-offs. If hell is not eternal, then neither is life eternal. That was a tough one to swallow. But it follows logically. Can't have one without the other.

Not sure about that. The reasoning goes: only God is eternal, so if God is in us then we have His eternal life. As has been said elsewhere, 'aionios kolasis' can mean correction for as long as it takes, which for slow learners may be an eternity (figuratively speaking).

For our heavily conditioned damnationist brethren, and for those of us suffering other thorns in the flesh and strongholds of satan, overcoming is the process of detaching from those ingrained habits and carnal modes of thinking.

 

[Saint Steven]

I recall John 9:41:
Jesus said to them, "If you were blind, you would have no sin; but since you say, 'We see,' your sin remains.

Sure, but how would a anti-UR person interpret that? I think they would apply that to someone other than themselves. The vast majority anyway. Remember, they believe they are the keepers of absolute truth. (the very "Word of God")

Saint Steven said: ↑
Willing victims? What other choice do they think they have? You and I and our brothers know better, but do they? Seems not.

 

[Saint Steven]

That's right, no sense of justice (being proportionality) can account for eternal punishment for limited crimes. The only response they offer to this is 'It's a sin against the infinite God, therefore infinite punishment is condign'. Shocker, imho.

Those are great points. Thanks.
And I hope you don't think I am arguing with you. I think this is interesting to sort through our individual perceptions.

Saint Steven said: ↑
They see love for the believers and justice for the damned. Which would mean that God actually hates the damned. Why else would you decide to burn someone for eternity?

 

[Saint Steven]

Haha, that's probably why the Marlboro Man was often pictured on his horse heading downhill. Sayonara, pardener.

That's funny.
And such amazingly great branding for such an awful product. (tobacco)
They always used the long shot in the ads and TV commercials so you could see the scenery but not the cowboy's tracheotomy.

 

[Shrewd Manager]

The aforementioned conditioning is preventing them from seeing it. Everyone knows that going up the ladder leads to a beating. "That's just how things work around here." (says the monkey)

It's all about POV from my perspective. (wow, that was redundant - lol) Anyway...
And I agree, if you believe in UR you can see it everywhere in scripture. I'm making new discoveries all the time.

You're very generous in giving allowance for damnationists to make a case from scripture. There really is no Biblical doctrine of ECT, and it just doesn't stack up on any logical assessment against who God is. The foundations are demonstrably rotten, and the whole thing is a house of cards.

Reminds me of the Sam Clemens quote 'It's far easier to fool someone than to convince them they've been fooled'.

Have you ever met "a hypothetical objective unprejudiced person" that was a Christian? Seems to me like that would be a rare find. - lol

I've never met any Christian or otherwise who fits the bill, hence 'hypothetical'. Perhaps I should have said 'mythical'!

 

[Saint Steven]

Not sure about that. The reasoning goes: only God is eternal, so if God is in us then we have His eternal life. As has been said elsewhere, 'aionios kolasis' can mean correction for as long as it takes, which for slow learners may be an eternity (figuratively speaking).

For our heavily conditioned damnationist brethren, and for those of us suffering other thorns in the flesh and strongholds of satan, overcoming is the process of detaching from those ingrained habits and carnal modes of thinking.

Yes, there it is. "(figuratively speaking)" A perceptive eternity. Rhetorical exaggeration.

Only God is eternal. That keeps things in perspective.

Saint Steven said: ↑
There were trade-offs. If hell is not eternal, then neither is life eternal. That was a tough one to swallow. But it follows logically. Can't have one without the other.

 

[Shrewd Manager]

Sure, but how would a anti-UR person interpret that? I think they would apply that to someone other than themselves. The vast majority anyway. Remember, they believe they are the keepers of absolute truth. (the very "Word of God")

Sure, that's a scripture that puts the fear into me when I stumble or backslide. Just because we're UR doesn't mean we will avoid a severe beating like the bad servant, for our sins in other departments. Perhaps even more so in some regards.

 

[Shrewd Manager]

Those are great points. Thanks.
And I hope you don't think I am arguing with you. I think this is interesting to sort through our individual perceptions.

Exactly. We don't need to agree on all points of UR, either man. An engaging and enlightened discussion, during a break in hostilities!

 

[Saint Steven]

You're very generous in giving allowance for damnationists to make a case from scripture.

I believe there is a biblical case for all three doctrines of the final judgment.

- Damnationism
- Annihilationism
- Universalism ​

Everyone chooses one. And they can all be defended biblically. They are all in conflict with each other though. Which is probably the case you are making.