Calvinism, Arminianism, or Universal Restoration

"Many are called, but few are chosen" (Matthew 22:14) means "All are called", BTW, if we understand this as a Semitic idiom ( many = all). That suggests there is a universal call by God upon all people to be saved.

In our modern liturgy in the ELCA, the Words of Institution are read as
"This cup is the new covenant in my blood, shed for you
and for all people for the forgiveness of sin."

public hermit said:

Universal Restoration includes major premises of Calvinism and Arminianism, while avoiding their flaws.

This breakdown is based on a sermon by Elhanan Winchester as found in A Larger Hope? by Robin Parry and Ilaria Ramelli (pg. 119)

1. God loves all
Calvinism- No
Arminianism- Yes
UR- Yes

2. The objects of God's love will come to salvation
Calvinism- Yes
Arminianism- No
UR- Yes

3. God desires all to be saved
Calvinism- No
Arminianism- Yes
UR- Yes

4. All God's purposes will be accomplished
Calvinism- Yes
Arminianism- No
UR- Yes

5. Christ dies for all
Calvinism- No
Arminianism- Yes
UR- Yes

6. All for whom Christ died will be saved (his blood was not shed in vain)
Calvinism- Yes
Arminianism- No
UR- Yes

Calvinists hold that God only loves some, that only some will be saved. In other words, God is unwilling to save all. Arminians hold that God loves all, but only some will be saved because human freedom will thwart God's will. In other words, God is unable to save all. Classical Universal Restoration (Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, et al) asserts that God loves all, is willing to save all, and is able to bring all to salvation willingly. In other words, God is willing, God is able, and God will save all. The UR position is the more fitting account of God's love, will, and power.

Click to expand...

It is Gods will that we love .... love is not a forced issue ..... God chooses to manifest Himself through the power of love .... that's not thwarting anything. Some will not choose love .... God will honor all choices made .... even the choices that lead to their own destruction.

His will is that we turn from sin ..... some won't unfortunately ..... His Word does not teach that ALL will saved .... God don't force Himself on anyone .... He knows our choices but does not make them for us .... so no .... UR position is not more fitting.

2 Peter 2:1

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.

Does God destroy us ..... or do we destroy ourselves? Both .... if we are bent on self destruction .... then on the last day the Lord will destroy those who chose their own destruction.

public hermit said:

I'm my opinion, which I don't think is far off the mark, if at all, the Calvinist (Augustinian) account presents a God whose love is arbitrary and, hence, such a God is not by nature love. Calvin notoriously evades the scriptural notion that God is love and focuses solely on the sovereignty of the divine will. In short, Calvin's God is a tyrant worthy of fear but not worthy worship or love.

Click to expand...

Calvin's mother died while he was a child. From his biography, I suspect he never knew love and had a chronic painful condition.

public hermit said:

I think the force of the OP breakdown concerns three accounts of God's nature. The three accounts are not so much about what happens to the unsaved. They each present an image of the love, will, and power of God. What happens to the unsaved is simply a consequence of God's nature. I agree that the scriptures are ambiguous regarding the the outcome of the unsaved. This is why it's important to consider the nature of God.

Click to expand...

I agree w/ the OP that Calvinism and Arminianism have problems, especially Calvinism. I'm not sure that UR as presented is the solution. Remember:

Mat 10:28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear the One who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.

Joh 5:28 “Do not be amazed at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in their graves will hear His voice 29 and come out! Those who have done good will come to a resurrection of life, and those who have done evil will come to a resurrection of judgment.

Rev 21:8 “But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

So the soul is not indestructible.

1Co 15: 44 It is sown a soulish body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a soulish body, there is also a spiritual body.

.

public hermit said:

And, which account results in the greater glory of God given God's nature? Hands down, UR comes out on top.

Click to expand...

Yes, UR is logical. Are there biblical arguments against it?

public hermit said:

I meant to comment on this. I had forgotten that his mother died when he was a child. His dad sent him away to a noble family (Montmors) not long after. I've been slowly reading a biography on Calvin by William Bouwsma (John Calvin: A Sixteenth Century Portrait) that highlights how much anxiety Calvin had, which comes through in his theology, I think. There's that famous passage in ICR where he recounts all the possible ways one can come to an untimely death and how precarious life truly is. I take it that was more than a passing observation for him. God bless him, but his theology was still horrible, and I say that as a former 5-point Calvinist.

Click to expand...

Almost everybody in the 16th century had rough childhoods. Everybody understood God's wrath as quite real and palpable. Nobody understood the story of the Fall as just a metaphor. Almost everyone except perhaps the most educated and skeptical (there were a few) believed everything in nature had divine significance.

Luther experienced physical abuse at the hands of various authority figures in his life, that much is clear. His theology has a place for love, but it's not uncomplicated. There are alot of dialectics in Luther's thought, and he was not a systematic thinker.


I have always wondered about Quaker soteriology, which is something Quakers don't seem to focus on, as much as other Christian groups. Quaker beliefs seem to imply universal restoration, since they reject the notion of total depravity, and Quakers believe "that of God" is in everyone. Their religious outlook is rooted in mysticism, rather than moralism or legalism (as in most forms of western Christianity, arguably), so they aren't really seeking to reconcile justice with God's love.

The evolutionary cosmogeny of the Jesuit priest and paleontologist, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, also implies that the creation will ultimately find an eschatological fulfillment in the unification with God, the Omega Point. That is quite literally "universal reconciliation". Teilhard was well-known, controversially, for believing even the rise of the Nazis and the Holocaust of WWII were merely "birth pains" of a better world.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer in his "Letters and Papers from Prison" was quite skeptical of the notion that heaven and hell soteriology would be taken seriously by modern people, nor did he wish modern humanity to be bullied into a state of infantile reliance upon past religious certitudes. He never goes into questions of the last things that much, because his theology is so Christocentric. He believes the proper focus of the Christian's concern is this-worldly, however, in the light of God's self-revelation (and paradoxical hiddenness) in the Cross, and he speculates that an "Old Testament" faith relatively unconcerned with questions of life after death is more authentically "biblical" (later in his life, his thoughts and focus turn to the Old Testament for inspiration, perhaps feeling it had been too neglected by Christians of his day, not without justification considering the German Christian movement rejected most anything resembling Judaism).

public hermit said:

Universal Restoration includes major premises of Calvinism and Arminianism, while avoiding their flaws.

This breakdown is based on a sermon by Elhanan Winchester as found in A Larger Hope? by Robin Parry and Ilaria Ramelli (pg. 119)

1. God loves all
Calvinism- No
Arminianism- Yes
UR- Yes

2. The objects of God's love will come to salvation
Calvinism- Yes
Arminianism- No
UR- Yes

3. God desires all to be saved
Calvinism- No
Arminianism- Yes
UR- Yes

4. All God's purposes will be accomplished
Calvinism- Yes
Arminianism- No
UR- Yes

5. Christ dies for all
Calvinism- No
Arminianism- Yes
UR- Yes

6. All for whom Christ died will be saved (his blood was not shed in vain)
Calvinism- Yes
Arminianism- No
UR- Yes

Calvinists hold that God only loves some, that only some will be saved. In other words, God is unwilling to save all. Arminians hold that God loves all, but only some will be saved because human freedom will thwart God's will. In other words, God is unable to save all. Classical Universal Restoration (Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, et al) asserts that God loves all, is willing to save all, and is able to bring all to salvation willingly. In other words, God is willing, God is able, and God will save all. The UR position is the more fitting account of God's love, will, and power.

Click to expand...

I have objections with two of your statements:

4. All God's purposes will be accomplished

And

6. All for whom Christ died will be saved (his blood was not shed in vain)



In response to 4: We agree God desires for all to be saved, but His “desire” is not the same as God’s purpose. God’s “purpose” seems to be; to do or allow all He can to help willing individuals fulfill their earthly objective, which may not result in their salvation, because they did not fulfill their earthly objective.

In response to 6: You are suggesting if a person Christ shed His blood for is not saved, than Christ shed His blood in vain, which is not true. Christ’s Love compelled Him to shed His blood partly as a sacrificial show of His Love. This is who Christ is and the way He acts. Let us just imagine: The prodigal son never returning to his father, did the father wait in vain for the son to return or does the father waiting show his love to everyone a to who he is and what a Loving parent is to do? The father’s Love compels him to do what he did and not the son’s eventual return (that does not have to happen).

You are assuming deity Loves for the results, while Deity Loves because Deity is Love, it is unconditional, so no good results are needed.



Everything is driven by the objective and the objective is not to live forever in heaven, but eternal life is one of the results of our fulfilling our earthly objective.

Has God given man a mission statement? (this is always good to have)

You can take any command in scripture and have Biblical support for calling that command “Man’s Objective” and have Biblical support for saying that, but there are two overriding commands all other commands are bases on and subordinated to.

Would “Loving God and secondly others with all our heart, soul, mind, and energy” be our Mission statement given as a command?

God is Love, but how do we define this Love and measure this Love?

This Godly type Love is defined by Jesus’ words and deeds (you can also use 1 Cor 13 and 1 John 4), so what is that?

Can we measure the “love” one being has for another being by the amount the Lover is willing to unselfishly sacrifice for the other being?

Is God this ultimate Lover? Would that “Love” compel even God to make beings that could Love like He Loves (this “Love of God” is totally unselfish [a measurement for pure Love] and thus is not for God’s sake at all, but is totally for the sake of others [which would also be God’s sake])?

So, if God is not doing anything for His own sake and everything for the sake of others, would He be expecting or needing anything from man or would God just be trying to give the greatest gifts He could give to man?

The reason this “Love” is the most powerful force in all universes is because it compels even God. So, to have this Love would make us like God Himself, so why does God not just make us with this Love and place us in heaven?

Are there something God just cannot do: like make another Christ, since Christ was never made but always existed?

Could God place this Godly type Love in a person at his/her creation (an instinctive love) or would an instinctive love be like a robotic love and not like God’s Love?

Could God just force His Love on man against the “will” of man or would that be like a shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun?

What does man need that he does not have instinctively in order for man to fulfill His Mission?

Man must have a very limited amount of autonomous free will to make at least the one choice to humbly accept or reject God’s Love (forgiveness/mercy/grace/charity).

Man’s objective seems to be to obtain and grow this Godly type Love to fulfill the mission (statement) of Love God and secondly others with all our heart, soul, mind, and energy.

Our “objective” while here on earth is to just accept God’s gift as it was given as pure charity, this will enable us to fulfill our mission.

God is not trying to get you to do something, but is trying to give you something.

The problem is not sin (unforgiven sin is a huge problem), because God will forgive our sins which helps us to Love (…he that is forgiven much will Love much….) God hates sin, but does allow it, so we can more easily accept His Love (in the form of forgiveness the easiest way for us to accept His charity). The problem is always our fulfilling our objective.

public hermit said:

"After Jesus had spoken these words, he looked up to heaven and said, ‘Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son so that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all people, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." John 17:1-3

Click to expand...

Don't forget John 13:3 and Luke 10:22 The Father has given all things into Jesus hands / and Heb 1:2 Jesus is heir of all things

"Frosted Flakes, Cheerios, or Universal Restoration?"

Seriously, you guys need to stop cooking up bizarre ways to propagate your Universalist doctrines. UR does not belong to the same genus that 'Calvinism' and 'Arminianism' belong to. One can be a Calvinist Universalist or a Calvinist Non-Universalist. One can be an Arminian Universalist or an Arminian Non-Universalist. Respectively, see Barth, Sproul, Hart, and Arminius.

public hermit said:

Universal Restoration includes major premises of Calvinism and Arminianism, while avoiding their flaws.

Click to expand...

Heaven help us.

public hermit said:

This breakdown is based on a sermon by Elhanan Winchester as found in A Larger Hope? by Robin Parry and Ilaria Ramelli (pg. 119)

1. God loves all
Calvinism- No
Arminianism- Yes
UR- Yes

Click to expand...

'Calvinism' as a foil to 'Arminianism' is the idea that justification comes from God's prevenient and irresistible grace. This is in no way incompatible with the idea that all will be saved, which is why Calvinists such as Barth can be keen on the idea.

public hermit said:

2. The objects of God's love will come to salvation
Calvinism- Yes
Arminianism- No
UR- Yes

Click to expand...

This is another misrepresentation to prop up a pet theory. Arminianism does not answer 'no' to this. For the Arminian all people may freely choose grace.

public hermit said:

3. God desires all to be saved
Calvinism- No
Arminianism- Yes
UR- Yes

Click to expand...

As above this is a conflation between Calvinism-as-historically-instantiated and Calvinism-as-a-foil-to-Arminianism. There is no logical reason that the Calvinist must answer 'no' to this.

public hermit said:

4. All God's purposes will be accomplished
Calvinism- Yes
Arminianism- No
UR- Yes

Click to expand...

False; see above.

public hermit said:

5. Christ dies for all
Calvinism- No
Arminianism- Yes
UR- Yes

Click to expand...

False; see above.

public hermit said:

6. All for whom Christ died will be saved (his blood was not shed in vain)
Calvinism- Yes
Arminianism- No
UR- Yes

Click to expand...

False; see above.

public hermit said:

Calvinists hold that God only loves some, that only some will be saved. In other words, God is unwilling to save all. Arminians hold that God loves all, but only some will be saved because human freedom will thwart God's will.

Click to expand...

But these are not definitions, they are rhetorical strawmen, useful for nothing more than partisan triumphalism.

public hermit said:

Classical Universal Restoration (Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, et al) asserts that God loves all, is willing to save all, and is able to bring all to salvation willingly. In other words, God is willing, God is able, and God will save all. The UR position is the more fitting account of God's love, will, and power.

Click to expand...

Origen and Gregory were Arminians (according to Protestant terminology)!

The current state of theology in which UR flourishes is so unbelievably facile. This whole OP is nothing more than, "Wouldn't it be nice!?," accompanied by a slew of category errors. UR is a logically possible outcome vis-a-vis salvation. The debate between Calvinism and Arminianism is about the nature of God and the nature of human freedom. There is no mutual opposition between the logically possible outcome in question and these two different approaches to grace.

Der Alte said:

Which is contradicted by Hebrews 10:26-31.

Hebrews 10:26-31​

(26) For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,​

(27) But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.​

(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.​

Some folks might try to argue that this does not refer to a "real" Christian but someone who has only heard the gospel. But note vs. 29 this definitely refers to someone who has been sanctified by the blood of the covenant then treats that blood as an unholy thing and insults the Spirit of grace.

Click to expand...

Not all born again believers who sin this sin are at a point of no return. This sin is from Hebrews 6 and only applies to those who tasted all of the gifts leading out from Pentecost in Jerusalem, so that there is no grace left to move them to repent left. Only those who tasted all graces and commit to a life of sin, cannot repent.

When people die, natural death or suicide, lived in sin, legalism or compassion... they have experiences that lead them to try to live life in love, if they are resuscitated.

Not all are fully successful. Some lose their wives...

In NDEs there is no infant condemnation. How they are when they die, determines what they experience, which is Catholic like, not Islamic or Hindu.

They are greeted by people who helped them get there, like family and friends, they never meet adversaries.

The implication is that all are loved and all experiences can motivate repentance. But those in Hell may be trapped a long time. And may never obtain life.

Will Satan be caught up in Universal salvation? Hitler?

GoldenKingGaze said:

Not all born again believers who sin this sin are at a point of no return. This sin is from Hebrews 6 and only applies to those who tasted all of the gifts leading out from Pentecost in Jerusalem, so that there is no grace left to move them to repent left. Only those who tasted all graces and commit to a life of sin, cannot repent.

Click to expand...

I read English, Hebrew and Greek, please quote scripture supporting these claims.

Der Alte said:

I read English, Hebrew and Greek, please quote scripture supporting these claims.

Click to expand...

From the NIV Hebrews 6:1-8
6 Therefore let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death,[a] and of faith in God, 2 instruction about cleansing rites,[b] the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3 And God permitting, we will do so.


4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6 and who have fallen[c] away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 7 Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8 But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.

There is a bit more In Hebrews 10.
This passage is about the eternal sin, it is grace that gives the opportunity to repent, and soften you heart, but if we harden our hearts to all grace, there is nothing left to make them soft and right again. And these Hebrews had the option of taking it easy, and rejoining the Pharisees, who considered it was right to kill Jesus, this after receiving all the graces from Pentecost on.

Hebrews 10:26-35
26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. 28 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”[d] and again, “The Lord will judge his people.”[e] 31 It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.


32 Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you endured in a great conflict full of suffering. 33 Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. 34 You suffered along with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions. 35 So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded.

GoldenKingGaze said:

From the NIV Hebrews 6:1-8
6 Therefore let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death,[a] and of faith in God, 2 instruction about cleansing rites,[b] the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3 And God permitting, we will do so.
4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6 and who have fallen[c] away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 7 Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. 8 But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.
There is a bit more In Hebrews 10.
This passage is about the eternal sin, it is grace that gives the opportunity to repent, and soften you heart, but if we harden our hearts to all grace, there is nothing left to make them soft and right again. And these Hebrews had the option of taking it easy, and rejoining the Pharisees, who considered it was right to kill Jesus, this after receiving all the graces from Pentecost on.
Hebrews 10:26-35
26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. 28 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”[d] and again, “The Lord will judge his people.”[e] 31 It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
32 Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you endured in a great conflict full of suffering. 33 Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. 34 You suffered along with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions. 35 So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded.

Click to expand...

Simply quoting the scripture does not really answer my request. To me this is the only vs, necessary.

"How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?"​

Those who have been sanctified by the blood of the covenant are Christians, [group #1] those who have not been sanctified by the blood of the covenant are not Christians [group #2]. If group #1 deliberately keeps on sinning after they have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left only the penalties listed.

Der Alte said:

Simply quoting the scripture does not really answer my request. To me this is the only vs, necessary.

"How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?"​

Those who have been sanctified by the blood of the covenant are Christians, [group #1] those who have not been sanctified by the blood of the covenant are not Christians [group #2]. If group #1 deliberately keeps on sinning after they have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left only the penalties listed.

Click to expand...

I could add, So long as their is breath there is hope. I can't recall where in the Bible it is, but that was Martin Luther's basis for not praying for the dead.

Not all Christians have tasted God's goodness or received the power of Jesus' blood. And it is of a nature that if you receive and sin that's actually normal you receive again, and it makes your heart clean.

Ecclesiastes 9:3-5 NKJV
3 This is an evil in all that is done under the sun: that one thing happens to all. Truly the hearts of the sons of men are full of evil; madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead. 4 But for him who is joined to all the living there is hope, for a living dog is better than a dead lion.


5 For the living know that they will die;
But the dead know nothing,
And they have no more reward,
For the memory of them is forgotten.

Der Alte said:

Simply quoting the scripture does not really answer my request. To me this is the only vs, necessary.

"How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?"​

Those who have been sanctified by the blood of the covenant are Christians, [group #1] those who have not been sanctified by the blood of the covenant are not Christians [group #2]. If group #1 deliberately keeps on sinning after they have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left only the penalties listed.

Click to expand...

Jesus' cross work and sacrifice made a surprise grace He was able to use to preach to the souls in Hell. They were set free and given gifts. According to Peter's letters. The blood can make one clean again and again. But going back to the Pharisees for relief from persecution in 1st Century Jerusalem, meant agreeing to no more become cleaned and to agree to the killing of Jesus.

GoldenKingGaze said:

Jesus' cross work and sacrifice made a surprise grace He was able to use to preach to the souls in Hell. They were set free and given gifts. According to Peter's letters. The blood can make one clean again and again. But going back to the Pharisees for relief from persecution in 1st Century Jerusalem, meant agreeing to no more become cleaned and to agree to the killing of Jesus.

Click to expand...

Where does scripture say that Jesus preached to souls in hell and that any were set free?
If the preaching was for salvation of imprisoned spirits then it was largely a failure only 8 souls were saved and they were not dead sprits but were alive when saved.
Hell is never called prison and prison is never called hell in the Bible.
Jesus earthly mission did not include preaching to the dead, anywhere.
There are no poor, brokenhearted, captives, blind or bruised in hell, only dead souls. The word translated "captives" literally means "prisoner of war."

GoldenKingGaze said:

Not all born again believers who sin this sin are at a point of no return. This sin is from Hebrews 6 and only applies to those who tasted all of the gifts leading out from Pentecost in Jerusalem, so that there is no grace left to move them to repent left. Only those who tasted all graces and commit to a life of sin, cannot repent.

Click to expand...

I can read the scripture I quoted in both English and Greek so no thank you I will decide for myself what they mean and do not require explanation.

Der Alte said:

Where does scripture say that Jesus preached to souls in hell and that any were set free?

1 Peter 3:18-20​

(18) For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:​

(19) By which [the spirit v. 18] also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;​

(20) Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.​

If the preaching was for salvation of imprisoned spirits then it was largely a failure only 8 souls were saved and they were not dead sprits but were alive when saved.
Hell is never called prison and prison is never called hell in the Bible.
Jesus earthly mission did not include preaching to the dead, anywhere.

Luke 4:18​

(18) The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,​

There are no poor, brokenhearted, captives, blind or bruised in hell, only dead souls. The word translated "captives" literally means "prisoner of war."

Click to expand...

I interpret Hell to contain gloomy dungeons, and the eight, Noah's family went to paradise at death. Jesus set free the captives, as from your quote. And Ephesians 4:8. His preaching with a new sacrifice and victory, worked, he got everyone out of Hell. Paradise gained newbies. Heaven was opened. Also 1 Timothy 4:10.

How many times can Jesus' sacred blood make your heart clean?

GoldenKingGaze said:

I interpret Hell to contain gloomy dungeons, and the eight, Noah's family went to paradise at death. Jesus set free the captives, as from your quote. And Ephesians 4:8. His preaching with a new sacrifice and victory, worked, he got everyone out of Hell. Paradise gained newbies. Heaven was opened. Also 1 Timothy 4:10.
How many times can Jesus' sacred blood make your heart clean?

Click to expand...

Eph 4:8 says nothing about Jesus freeing any souls from hell. Not one vs. says Jesus "got everyone out of hell."
Jesus did not say He would get everyone out of hell.
In fact, Jesus said "Not everyone will enter the kingdom of heaven." Then Jesus said "Many [not a few] will say to me in that day, [i.e. Judgement day] Lord, Lord, have we not ...in thy name done many wonderful works? Then Jesus will say, "I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." When Jesus says "never" He means never not some day by and by. And before any objections, in Jewish thought "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God" are synonymous