Christian Universalism. What's not to like?

[ozso]

Where does it say the rich man was not screaming?

What it doesn't say is irrelevant. What it does say is that he was talking, and it was depicted as him talking in an ordinary fashion.

 

[Der Alte]

What it doesn't say is irrelevant. What it does say is that he was talking, and it was depicted as him talking in an ordinary fashion.

Luke 16:24
24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.​

Maybe you should try getting up a little earlier.

 

[ozso]

Come on man! You expect lucid, rational comments from a person on the point of death? Are you familiar with the term "hyperbole?" Which OBTW is from the Greek literally "to throw or place above."
Consider this was Simon a literal stone when Jesus called him "Petros?" i.e. stone. In the cotton patch gospel, yes it is an actual thing, Clarence Jordan called Peter "Rock Johnson."
Was Herod an actual fox when Jesus called him that? Were James and John actual sons of thunder when Jesus called them that? When a word, any word, is used figuratively that does not affect the inherent meaning. Now that I have provided you a link you might consider doing a little research and see how many times native Hebrew speaking scholars translated "olam" and "ad" as eternal, everlasting etc.

You're just agreeing with me here that the Bible uses hyperbolic, symbolic and figurative language. Yet several take the approach that the Bible is totally literal and if you don't take what's said at face value, you don't believe what the Bible says, or you're calling God a liar and so on. I see those claims being made a lot in UR threads. Usually by Baptist, Calvinist, Reformed members.

 

[ozso]

I quoted it exactly as printed. But I guess that is as good excuse as any. I think I highlighted certain passages.

The problem here is you cut and paste from one format to this format, and the two formats aren't compatible. So it comes out distorted. In this case you posted something that had several references, but since it was just one big wall of text, it was next to impossible to tell where one reference ended and the other started. In order to put it in order, one would need to spend time trying properly edit the whole thing.

 

[ozso]

Luke 16:24
24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
Maybe you should try getting up a little earlier.

φωνήσας (phōnēsas) means to call out. Like "hey you!". This is where you go back to the mode of KJV only and every word written is literal, so you see "cried" and decide that must mean literally crying as in screaming.

Now in your post #2214 you used reasoning when it came to deciphering what's literal and what's figurative. So when it comes to reasoning, if someone is engulfed in literal flames, they don't hold a conversation in a normal fashion like the rich man is depicted doing. Also if someone was literally in flames, they wouldn't ask for a drop of water to cool their tongue. Can you imagine someone who's literally on fire walking up to you and saying "can I have a drop of water to cool my tongue?". Luke 16:19-31 is obviously full of hyperbolic, symbolic, figurative language.

 

[Der Alte]

φωνήσας (phōnēsas) means to call out. Like "hey you!". This is where you go back to the mode of KJV only and every word written is literal, so you see "cried" and decide that must mean literally crying as in screaming.
Now in your post #2214 you used reasoning when it came to deciphering what's literal and what's figurative. So when it comes to reasoning, if someone is engulfed in literal flames, they don't hold a conversation in a normal fashion like the rich man is depicted doing. Also if someone was literally in flames, they wouldn't ask for a drop of water to cool their tongue. Can you imagine someone who's literally on fire walking up to you and saying "can I have a drop of water to cool my tongue?". Luke 16:19-31 is obviously full of hyperbolic, symbolic, figurative language.

And you psychoanalyzed me when and know how I interpreted the passage? My method is this "If the plain sense makes good sense, it is nonsense to seek any other sense." That is what I do. Unlike the Hell no crowd I don't twist the scriptures trying to make them say what I want them to.
The word translated cried in the Lk 16:24 is not the usual word for "said" which is "epos" which occurs 983 times in the NT. "Phonesas" OTOH only occurs 42 times so it is NOT normal speech.
About the drop of water. Would a person who is being tormented in flames be thinking and speaking rationally? And OBTW I studied Greek and Hebrew at the graduate level more than 4 decades ago, don't assume that I don't know or have not have not considered what I say. I have BDAG, and BDB right here on my laptop. Have lexicons will travel.
Why don't you stick to what you actually know instead of trying to psychoanalyze me.

 

[ozso]

And you psychoanalyzed me when and know how I interpreted the passage? My method is this "If the plain sense makes good sense, it is nonsense to seek any other sense." That is what I do. Unlike the Hell no crowd I don't twist the scriptures trying to make them say what I want them to. The word translated cried in the Lk 16:24 is not the usual word for "said" which is "epos" and it occurs 983 times in the NT. "Phonesas" OTOH only occurs 42 times so it is NOT normal speech.
About the drop of water. Would a person who is being tormented in flames be thinking and speaking rationally? And OBTW I studied Greek and Hebrew at the graduate level more than 4 decades ago, don't assume that I don't know or have not have not considered what I say. I have BDAG, and BDB right here on my laptop. Have lexicons will travel.
Why don't you stick to what you actually know instead of trying to psychoanalyze me.

He called out to Father Abraham who was across the gulf. No, a person who's engulfed in literal flames would not be thinking and speaking rationally. That's the whole point. Therefore the conclusion is that it's symbolic and figurative.

 

[ozso]

Yes Steve.

ALL men are lost and separated from God Steve. In fact ALL men were dead to God.

Isaiah 59:2......
"But your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you so that he does not hear."

Ephesians 2:1....
"And you hath he quickened, (Saved)who were dead in trespasses and sins;"

DEATH is the event that keeps a lost man lost!

While the idea of a second chance for salvation is appealing, the Bible is clear that death is the end of all chances...

Your idea about those who do not believe really makes no sense at all. ? YOU say, they will repent and believe if they were given a second chance? The answer is no, they would not because their hearts are not changed simply because they die. Their hearts and minds “are at enmity” against God and won’t accept Him even when they see Him face to face.

DEATH is the event that keeps a lost man lost!

DEATH is the event that keeps a lost man lost!

DEATH is the event that keeps a lost man lost!

There's no way I can see that someone who adheres to the doctrine of a certain theologian could possibly see things any other way. In that situation one is forced to think within the narrow box that theologian built; which is that God only predestined a few to accept Him, and purposely created everyone else, billions and billions of people, to be completely irredeemable totally depraved enemies against Him. So of course going by that, there's no hope whatsoever even for them in this life. They're all sons of perdition, and like Judas, it would have been better for them if they had never been born.

 

[Hmm]

What needs to be taken into consideration regarding what Jesus said, is that it was all said before the Cross. After the resurrection, Jesus bridged the separation. That's why there's so many illustrations of the Cross acting as a bridge across a gulf / chasm. Jesus bridged the separation.

Good point. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus appears on the surface to be evidence for ECT because of verse 26: “between you (the rich man) and us (Abraham, Lazarus and everyone else in heaven) a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who might want to pass from here to you cannot do so, and no one can cross from there (Hades) to us.”

But, as you say, this is talking about the time before Christ’s death and resurrection and it's true that at that point, those in Hades were not savable. But that's the entire point of Christ’s sacrifice! He rescued everyone trapped in, or on the path to, Hades and allowed them to enter into heaven. This parable is not describing ECT but is illustrating why Christ’s upcoming death is necessary in the first place.

Saying that “no one can cross from” Hades to Heaven means that no one can ever cross over also contradicts other parts of the NT. Peter says that Christ brought the Gospel to those who were dead in Hades: “He (Christ) was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit, in which also he went and made a proclamation to the spirits in prison, who in former times did not obey, when God waited patiently in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water” (1 Peter.3:18-20). And later, in 1 Peter 4:6: “For this is the reason the gospel was proclaimed even to the dead, so that, though they had been judged in the flesh as everyone is judged, they might live in the spirit as God does.”

Why is the Gospel being preached to those in Hades if their fate is ECT?

 

[Andrewn]

-

 

[Saint Steven]

While the idea of a second chance for salvation is appealing, the Bible is clear that death is the end of all chances...

Where is your evidence for that? Are we reading the same Bible?

 

[Hmm]

Where is your evidence for that? Are we reading the same Bible?

Indeed. I would be interested in seeing the scripture that proves there are no further chances after death. It's wishful thinking that there aren't although it's a very odd thing to wish for!

 

[Saint Steven]

Your idea about those who do not believe really makes no sense at all. ? YOU say, they will repent and believe if they were given a second chance? The answer is no, they would not because their hearts are not changed simply because they die. Their hearts and minds “are at enmity” against God and won’t accept Him even when they see Him face to face.

This is the sort of rubbish that is used to blame the victim of ECT. Countless billions have gone into the afterlife with no knowledge of Jesus at all. And no opportunity to even reject him. The same God that requires us to love our enemies will also love his own.

 

[Saint Steven]

Example.......Romans 3:23.....
" For ALL have sinned, and come short of the glory of God".

Isiah 53:6.......
"We ALL, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all."

That's true. But what do you do with these ALLs?

Romans 11:32
For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Titus 2:11 ESV
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people,

1 Timothy 4:10
That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.

1 Corinthians 15:22
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

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

Romans 5:18
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.

 

[Hmm]

This is the sort of rubbish that is used to blame the victim of ECT. Countless billions have gone into the afterlife with no knowledge of Jesus at all. And no opportunity to even reject him. The same God that requires us to love our enemies will also love his own.

Good point. God wouldn't give us moral standards to uphold that higher than His own. Because He has commanded us to love our enemies and to forgive seventy times seven times, i.e. endlessly, we can be absolutely sure that that He will do the same. Torturing someone forever is not the best definition of love I've ever heard!

 

[Hmm]

That's true. But what do you do with these ALLs?

Romans 11:32
For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Titus 2:11 ESV
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people,

1 Timothy 4:10
That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.

1 Corinthians 15:22
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

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

Romans 5:18
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.

If mental gymnastics was an Olympic sport we'd have quite a few potential gold medalists here

 

[Saint Steven]

Good point. God wouldn't give us moral standards to uphold that higher than His own. Because He has commanded us to love our enemies and to forgive seventy times seven times, i.e. endlessly, we can be absolutely sure that that He will do the same. Torturing someone forever is not the best definition of love I've ever heard!

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's amazing that anyone would think that God would hold us to a higher level of godliness than he would hold himself to. Madness. Loving our enemies doesn't mean incinerating them. Yet this makes complete sense to the Infernalist.

"Well, those God-haters had it coming." Well, didn't our enemies "have it coming"? Seems so, yet we are directed to love them. (minus the incineration - lol)

 

[Saint Steven]

1 Corinthians 15:22
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

And if you have trouble understanding this one, our good friend @public hermit has written an excellent explanation. See below. Thanks.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 Corinthians 15:22 explained by Public Hermit

This is essentially a conditional statement.
It is upon the basis that all die in Adam that all also are made alive in Christ. Or better, if all had not died in Adam, then there would have been no need to make all (or any) alive in Christ.

If all died in Adam, then all are made alive in Christ.

The same set of people are being referenced in both the antecedent and the consequent. So, if "all" doesn't mean all in the consequent, then it doesn't mean all in the antecedent.

Modus tollens: If all are not made alive in Christ, then all did not die in Adam.

But, of course, all did die in Adam (according to the fans of eternal torment).

Therefore, all means all in both instances.

1 Corinthians 15:22
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

 

[Saint Steven]

If mental gymnastics was an Olympic sport we'd have quite a few potential gold medalists here

This post gets a 10

 

[Hmm]

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's amazing that anyone would think that God would hold us to a higher level of godliness than he would hold himself to. Madness. Loving our enemies doesn't mean incinerating them. Yet this make complete sense to the Infernalist.

"Well, those God-haters had it coming." Well, didn't our enemies "have it coming"? Seems so, yet we are directed to love them. (minus the incineration - lol)

Yes, it is amazing that anyone would hold these thoughts. I wonder if part of the reason is the unconscious assumption that.salvation is a zero sum game: i.e, in order for me and everyone who thinks the same as me to be saved there has to be an equal (or preferably much larger) number of people who are not saved? As well as limiting God's ability to do as He wishes, which is to save all, this idea also carries the implication that my salvation depends not only on Christ's sacrifice but also on all those who are sent to an eternal hell - in the zero-sum game paradigm, I could not be saved unless someone else was damned. Obviously this cheapens Christ's sacrifice on the cross.