Christian Universalism. What's not to like?

[ozso]

I understand completely what UR teaches MMXX.

If you understand completely what UR teaches, then you're purposely making false statements about what it teaches

The error is what you said ........
"The premise of UR is that in going through the trials of hell and also especially when confronted by the radiant glory of Jesus, as Paul was, they will come to believe as Paul did."

That's what UR teaches as far as I know. So far no UR proponents have told me I'm wrong.

NO WHERE in Scripture is there any suggestion that anyone goes through the trials of hell and then makes a decision for Christ!!! NO WHERE!!

Where did I say that it did?

Now as I have said.....ALL Of UR teachings are based on the twisting and misrepresentation of Scriptures just as you just did.

No I just explained what UR teaches. The same as I would explain what any other belief, doctrine, theology teaches whether it be Calvinism or Mormonism.

And then what Paul did has no bearing at all on your assumption. Paul was ALIVE when he was confronted by Jesus. Those in Hell ARE DEAD SOULS!

How can a dead soul weep and gnash teeth?

You are saying and said........
"UR in no way has ever suggested that there will be unbelievers in haven."

That again is a misrepresentation and worst a purposeful deception.

Incorrect. And another false accusation. You said universalism teaches people will go to heaven no matter what. What I said in reply meant that universalism says repentance and belief is required, so universalism (the kind that's discussed in this thread) doesn't teach "no matter what".

Of course everyone in heaven will be believers has never been a debate. The debate is whether or not those in HELL CAN THEN BE SAVED.
They have died! They are dead!

Yet Jesus says they talk, feel, weep, ask for mercy etc.

IF UR was possible and those in hell went through the torments and trials and then decided that they would like to come to Christ......THEY WOULD NOT BE DOING SO BECAUSE JESUS DIES FOR THEM BUT BECAUSE THE TORMENTS OF HELL WERE REAL.

What?

 

[Major1]

If you understand completely what UR teaches, then you're purposely making false statements about what it teaches



That's what UR teaches as far as I know. So far no UR proponents have told me I'm wrong.



Where did I say that it did?



No I just explained what UR teaches. The same as I would explain what any other belief, doctrine, theology teaches whether it be Calvinism or Mormonism.



How can a dead soul weap and gnash teeth?



Incorrect. And another false accusation. You said universalism teaches people will go to heaven no matter what. What I said in reply meant that universalism says repentance and belief is required, so universalism doesn't teach "no matter what".



Yet Jesus says they talk, feel, weap, ask for mercy etc.



What?

Universalism applies passages like Acts 3:21 and Colossians 1:20 to mean that God intends to restore all things to their original state of purity through Jesus Christ (Romans 5:18; Hebrews 2:9), so that in the end everyone will be brought into a right relationship with God (1 Corinthians 15:24–28).

But such a view runs counter to the teaching of the Bible that "all who call upon the name of the Lord" will be united to Christ and eternally saved, not all people in general.

Jesus Christ taught that those who reject him as Savior will spend eternity in hell after they die:

• Matthew 10:28
• Matthew 23:33
• Matthew 25:46
• Luke 16:23
• John 3:36

 

[Major1]

That's not what UR teaches. You can't properly argue against something going by false assumptions. The premise of UR is that in going through the trials of hell and also especially when confronted by the radiant glory of Jesus, as Paul was, they will come to believe as Paul did. UR in no way has ever suggested that there will be unbelievers in haven. But rather those who are unbelievers in this age, will become believers in the age to come.

Now I'm not saying that's true or not, but I am saying that's how UR works. If you stay uninformed about how UR works, you're going to keep coming up with invalid arguments.

Universalism was taught by Origen (A.D. 185–254) but was declared heresy by the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 543. It became popular again in the 19th century and is gaining traction in many Christian circles today.

One reason for the resurgence of universalism is the current attitude that we should not be judgmental of any religion, idea, or person. By refusing to call anything right or wrong, universalists not only cancel the need for Christ's redeeming sacrifice but also ignore the consequences of unrepented SIN.

 

[Major1]

No, you are putting limits on the atonement that should not be there.

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

Some here have claimed that there is such a thing as Christian universalism.
They claim that the Bible teaches that Jesus is the only way, that all will be saved, and that salvation occurs quickly after death for those who have not become Christians in this life. This view erringly states that salvation can occur after death. I find nothing in Scripture that suggests such a thing can happen.

Another variation of Christian universalism teaches that those who are not Christian in this life will convert to Christianity in the afterlife after suffering varying degrees of punishment. This is well outside of Christian orthodoxy regarding the doctrine of salvation since it implies that deliverance from God’s wrath is accomplished after one’s work of suffering is completed. This view is not compatible with the Christian faith and would demonstrate a person is not saved who holds to it.

Unitarian universalism teaches that everyone of all faiths will be saved and that Jesus is not the only means of salvation. This, of course, violates essential doctrines of the Christian faith and cannot be considered a viable option at all.

I post this just so that some of you will realize that some of us actually do know what it is that you are promoting.

 

[ozso]

Universalism applies passages like Acts 3:21 and Colossians 1:20 to mean that God intends to restore all things to their original state of purity through Jesus Christ (Romans 5:18; Hebrews 2:9), so that in the end everyone will be brought into a right relationship with God (1 Corinthians 15:24–28).

But such a view runs counter to the teaching of the Bible that "all who call upon the name of the Lord" will be united to Christ and eternally saved, not all people in general.

Christian universalism also teaches "all who call upon the name of the Lord" will be united to Christ and eternally saved.

Jesus Christ taught that those who reject him as Savior will spend eternity in hell after they die:
Matthew 10:28
Matthew 23:33
Matthew 25:46
Luke 16:23
John 3:36

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John 3:36&version=NIVUK
The only one of those that say what you want them to say is Matthew 25:46. Although verse 41 says it better. However, there's the question of how literal Jesus is being in the Sheep and Goats parable.

 

[ozso]

Universalism was taught by Origen (A.D. 185–254) but was declared heresy by the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 543.

That's not how it went. Certain things Origen said/taught were deemed heresy, rather than universal redemption as a whole. And there were problems with that council, which I'll look up later as it's close my bedtime.

It became popular again in the 19th century and is gaining traction in many Christian circles today.

That's also the time it got safe to talk about.

One reason for the resurgence of universalism is the current attitude that we should not be judgmental of any religion, idea, or person. By refusing to call anything right or wrong, universalists not only cancel the need for Christ's redeeming sacrifice but also ignore the consequences of unrepented SIN.

That doesn't apply to any Christians I know of who believe in universal redemption.

 

[ozso]

Some here have claimed that there is such a thing as Christian universalism.
They claim that the Bible teaches that Jesus is the only way, that all will be saved, and that salvation occurs quickly after death for those who have not become Christians in this life. This view erringly states that salvation can occur after death. I find nothing in Scripture that suggests such a thing can happen.

Another variation of Christian universalism teaches that those who are not Christian in this life will convert to Christianity in the afterlife after suffering varying degrees of punishment. This is well outside of Christian orthodoxy regarding the doctrine of salvation since it implies that deliverance from God’s wrath is accomplished after one’s work of suffering is completed. This view is not compatible with the Christian faith and would demonstrate a person is not saved who holds to it.

Unitarian universalism teaches that everyone of all faiths will be saved and that Jesus is not the only means of salvation. This, of course, violates essential doctrines of the Christian faith and cannot be considered a viable option at all.

I post this just so that some of you will realize that some of us actually do know what it is that you are promoting.

The problem is you said things that indicated you didn't know what you were talking about beforehand.

 

[Hmm]

Fantastic post.
I want to address these last two sentences with a slightly different take.

I don't see our restoration as a battle of wills between God and us to break us down and finally get us to surrender. I see it as a thorough working through of a lifetime of issues and entanglements that we brought with us to the afterlife.

Like the Apostle Paul, as Saul on the road to Damascus, our presuppositions about God will disappear in the moment. Nothing like being presented with reality to get us to wake up and smell the coffee.

When face-to-face with God, who could cling to their atheism? When face-to-face with Love, who could resist help? When face-to-face with hope, who would choose something less?

Who could lie to the Presence that looks deep into your soul and knows our every anxious thought? Who could resist the healer that offers you relief from a life of pain and hurt?

There would undoubtedly be a lot to do, and this would take time, an age of some length. And perhaps not a whole age for one person, but for the lot. We are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses here, perhaps the same will be true there.

We might witness each one being transformed and even cheer them on as they overcoming each issue. From the greatest to the least. Now that would require an age of some length and certainly be remembered as an age for the event.

I even imagine Satan being the last one to be transformed. Held until his whole demon army has been transformed. Then the restoration of all things will be complete.

Anyway, just my thoughts on the subject. Thanks for reading.

This is beautifully expressed.

I don't see our restoration as a battle of wills between God and us to break us down and finally get us to surrender. I see it as a thorough working through of a lifetime of issues and entanglements that we brought with us to the afterlife.

Just to explain myself, because I wouldn't want you to think I was disagreeing with what you said about a "battle of wills", I used the term subsequent to this post in my reply to Andrewn before I had read it. I would have expressed it in a different way otherwise.


I guess there are two ways to look at this, the effect of human free will on UR.

1. Free will allows for the possibility of someone continually holding out against God and so effectively remaining in hell forever, thus thwarting God's aim of universal restoration.

or 2. This eternal "battle of wills" is not actually possible for the reasons you gave such as here:

When face-to-face with God, who could cling to their atheism? When face-to-face with Love, who could resist help? When face-to-face with hope, who would choose something less?

Which is the right one I think depends on what freedom for a person means. If it means the ability to do whatever you want then 1. is probably right because we could in theory choose to indefinitely reject God forever for whatever reason we want, out of simple bloody-mindedness for one. But if freedom means growing to be who we are meant to be then 2. seems to be the only option. If we are made to be united with God then as God works at removing our ignorance and selfish delusions, we become free to respond in the only way we can which is to bow the knee and gladly confess that Christ is Lord. This is very similar to how babies always respond to love in a positive way. It is their nature to do so and they are not free to do otherwise.

I believe that option 2 is the correct explanation of human freedom because we are made in the image of God and God has declared His desire and intention to one day restore all creation and be "all in all".

So, in short, I agree with you! Just wanted to clarify that.

 

[Der Alte]

* * *

How can a dead soul weep and gnash teeth? * * * Yet Jesus says they talk, feel, weep, ask for mercy etc. * * *

The rich man was dead wasn't he? Seems he was complaining about being tormented in flames.

Matthew 13:42
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Matthew 13:49-50
49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.​

Where is one verse, 2 or more would be better, which unequivocally says these wailers and teeth gnashers will get out of that furnace?
How can a loving God toss people into a furnace of fire where they weep and gnash their teeth. And of course the wailers and teeth gnashers will be filled with love for God after the wailing etc. just like prisoners in the world today are filled with warm fuzzies for the people they blame for putting them in prison.

 

[Hmm]

And of course the wailers and teeth gnashers will be filled with love for God after the wailing etc. just like prisoners in the world today are filled with warm fuzzies for the people they blame for putting them in prison.

Instead of prison, think hospital and buying a box of chocolates for the nurses.

 

[ozso]

The rich man was dead wasn't he? Seems he was complaining about being tormented in flames.

Matthew 13:42
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Matthew 13:49-50
49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.​

Where is one verse, 2 or more would be better, which unequivocally says these wailers and teeth gnashers will get out of that furnace?
How can a loving God toss people into a furnace of fire where they weep and gnash their teeth. And of course the wailers and teeth gnashers will be filled with love for God after the wailing etc. just like prisoners in the world today are filled with warm fuzzies for the people they blame for putting them in prison.

In the parable the rich man's soul was alive, as opposed to Major1 saying souls will be dead. That's all that I was addressing. This post is so snarky it doesn't really merit any further comment. If you want more people to read what you say (as you complain they don't) I would suggest along with being more legible in your longer posts, that you also dispense with the snark.

 

[ozso]

Instead of prison, think hospital and buying a box of chocolates for the nurses.

Yep, someone who actually understands what UR is about, knows that UR views sin as a sickness that needs healing from the Great Physician.

So far I've only had to spend one night (24hr stay) in a hospital, and I can say that it was pure torture and dragged on forever.

 

[Der Alte]

Instead of prison, think hospital and buying a box of chocolates for the nurses.

Good show me a verse where Jesus says the unrighteous will be placed in a hospital where they can buy chocolates for the nurses.

 

[Saint Steven]

Again.....twisting and changing the meaning of Scriptures to meet what you want them to say.

John 3:16....
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

Do you grasp the meaning of.......THAT WHOSOEVER BELIEVETH IN HIM????

So you claim the scripture I posted doesn't mean what it plainly says?

How am I changing the meaning by simply quoting it. Seems more like you are changing the meaning to what it clearly doesn't say. To date you have rejected all the scripture I have posted simply because it doesn't align with your dogma.

And John 3:16 is clearly a UR text. Do you not grasp the meaning of.......FOR GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD????

 

[Saint Steven]

Some here have claimed that there is such a thing as Christian universalism.

And rightly so.

 

[Saint Steven]

They claim that the Bible teaches that Jesus is the only way, that all will be saved, and that salvation occurs quickly after death for those who have not become Christians in this life.

Quickly?
We said in an age. (aionios) Quickly would be a short age.
But... time flies when you're having fun, so... maybe you are right. - lol

 

[Saint Steven]

This view is not compatible with the Christian faith and would demonstrate a person is not saved who holds to it.

I hope you aren't claiming that Universalists aren't saved. (that's a forum "No, no.")

 

[Saint Steven]

I post this just so that some of you will realize that some of us actually do know what it is that you are promoting.

FAIL.

 

[Saint Steven]

I believe that option 2 is the correct explanation of human freedom because we are made in the image of God and God has declared His desire and intention to one day restore all creation and be "all in all".

Terrific post, thanks.
I grabbed this last bit to respond to.
I think that meeting God in the afterlife will be very disarming. Our baggage will actually be carry-on instead of in our head. The thought to resist God will probably seem foreign and completely inappropriate in his presence. This is all conjecture on my part, but seems to be a way to view the transformative environment.

 

[Hmm]

Good show me a verse where Jesus says the unrighteous will be placed in a hospital where they can buy chocolates for the nurses.

Easter eggs?