Creeping Universalism

tulipbee

Worker of the Hive
Apr 27, 2006
2,835
297
✟25,849.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
...If you don't, then you're not a member of the elect, but are one of those whom we are commanded to not even wish "God speed" to, because you do not abide in the doctrine of Christ: ...

sci-proof2.JPG


While I have taken an extra step to prove to myself that the Bible is scientifically proven to be written by God through automatic trance of the apostle's hand, Your inaccurate accusations that I don't hold the Bible being that Word of God is getting really, really, really boring. There must been 5,000 members on Christianforums posting 5 million post loaded with with Bible quotes to prove each other wrong. If we have this many denominations on this world's largest Christian forum each proving the other wrong while they themselves think they're right, then theres the repetitive endless debates God inspires creativity and you're not creative, possibly, lacking a kind of human love. I'm interested in how man interprets the Bible so lets move on, but you're still welcome to your posts. Nobody is stopping you.

I had a friend who sounded really slickly good but later found him to be sneaky in interpreting the Bible. "Soul Sleep" is an idea but I believe Jesus is still first-born meaning He is the only one in Heaven in humans time on planet Earth and that meaning judgement day hasn't arrived yet. In God's time (man's past, present and future happening all at once), the Elects have/has/will already been chosen whether I have any say so about myself being Elect. Let's cut the Hyper-Calvinist fables while we're talking.

I would like Hedrick to guide this post and explain the difference between "creeping universalism and inclusivism. He did an excellent describing the difference between inclusivism and universalism.

Let's come back, as well, to your claim that the Catholics might believe Bin Laden (was that him?) is in/or going to Heaven. I posted Hitler might/will be saved but I got that from, probably a universalistic,:
-------------------------------------------
Quotes by Neale Donald Walsch in his "conversations with God":

Walsch: But those who have taught me all about the rights and wrongs, the dos and don'ts, the shoulds and shouldn'ts, told me all those rules were laid down by You—by God.

God: Then those who taught you were wrong. I have never set down a "right" or "wrong," a "do" or a "don't." To do so would be to strip you completely of your greatest gift—the opportunity to do as you please, and experience the results of that.... To say something—a thought, a word, an action—is "wrong" would be as much as to tell you not to do it.... To prohibit you would be to restrict you. To restrict you would be to deny the reality of Who You Really Are.

God: Evil is that which you call evil. Yet even that I love, for it is only through that which you call evil that you can know good; only through that which you call the work of the devil that you can know and do the work of God. I do not love hot more than I do cold, high more than low, left more than right. It is all relative. It is all part of what is.

I do not love "good" more than I love "bad." Hitler went to heaven. When you understand this, you will understand God.

---------------------------------------------------

Maybe we should, now, discuss the thresholds or "fine line" between universualism and inclusivism. As Hendrik explains: some are saved and some are not. Perhaps the Catholics and Billy Graham belives that a person who believes in higher power could/might be saved. Perhaps the atheists are the ones not saved.

So far in this topic, we're discussing the thresholds of creeping universalism. If creeping universalism is an idea floating among the some PCUSA'ers, how does that compare mixing inclusivism with creeping universalism. I supposed creeping universalism is the same as universalism, --------- Am I right?
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
So far in this topic, we're discussing the thresholds of creeping universalism. If creeping universalism is an idea floating among the some PCUSA'ers, how does that compare mixing inclusivism with creeping universalism. I supposed creeping universalism is the same as universalism, --------- Am I right?
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]

The term "creeping universalism" doesn't indicate a separate idea from universalism. Rather, it suggests that universalism is slowly taking over the PCUSA. I don't think that's the case. There are certainly some universalists there, but I've seen no evidence that it's increasing. If you equate universalism with not believing that hell exists (the closest question I can find) about 25% of members seem to hold that. (I'm splitting the don't knows between yes and no.)

Inclusivism is more widespread. One survey says that 40% of members agree that all religions are equally good (elders and pastor were far lower), and something like 53% that non-Christians can be saved. (This survey didn't report "don't know".) However to show that a lot depends upon how you word the question in the same survey 72% agreed that Jesus is the only absolute truth. Given the answer to that last question, I suspect that some of the 40% who said that all religions are equally good ways of finding ultimate truth may have meant that members of all religions can be saved, not that non-Christian religions give us the full truth.

The people doing the surveys had the following comment: "Recent research has foun a sizable number of Mainline Protestants who place more emphasis on "right behavior" than on "right belief." They tend to reject the uniqueness of God's revelation in Jesus Christ, place less emphasis on church involvement, and see morality a more central than spirituality. At least two terms have been applied to this group: lay liberals and Golden Rule Christians. The Panel survey repeated questions developed in earlier research to explore this issue. Results suggest that over one-half and perhaps as many as two-thirds of members and elders fit tho category."

While they may be right, I will note that I belong to a fairly liberal PCUSA church, and everyone that I know thinks Jesus died for our sins. So if our people are Golden Rule Christians, the summary in the previous paragraph is incomplete, in that it doesn't include God's grace, which I know most of our members do rely on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tulipbee
Upvote 0
P

Petruchio

Guest
Your inaccurate accusations that I don't hold the Bible being that Word of God is getting really, really, really boring.

I made no such accusation, though you probably just felt like that since you realized you hold views absolutely contrary to the scripture. Tis your conscience.

There must been 5,000 members on Christianforums posting 5 million post loaded with with Bible quotes to prove each other wrong.

We're in the Confessional, Covenantal, Creedal section, so in theory we should all uphold the forum statement of faith for this section, which you don't. You'd be a better fit in the Unorthodox section where you can discuss with the Mormons about how long we'll have to suffer in outer darkness before being let into the Terrestial Kingdom.

Let's cut the Hyper-Calvinist fables while we're talking.

Your view is a kind of hyper-Calvinism, since you deny the need to evangelize. You go further, since you deny the need for conversion or holding to Christian doctrines, which Paul would have called "accursed."

Am I right?

To be honest, I got bored when you called for Hedrick to explain your position. So I just sort of fell asleep and then chose this one phrase to respond to.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

tulipbee

Worker of the Hive
Apr 27, 2006
2,835
297
✟25,849.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
...To be honest, I got bored when you called for Hedrick to explain your position. So I just sort of fell asleep and then chose this one phrase to respond to.

He is definitely creAtive in his post. His honesty has demonstrated worthy of reading. If I need to know something, he is the first I would turn to. He convinced me to stay with PCUSA. I'm done with Fundies but I'll read what they have to say. Thank you hanging out with us in this topic. You're funny and it's been fun.
 
Upvote 0

tulipbee

Worker of the Hive
Apr 27, 2006
2,835
297
✟25,849.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
...We're in the Confessional, Covenantal, Creedal section, so in theory we should all uphold the forum statement of faith for this section, which you don't. ....

It does say I need to obey every letter to the confessions listed here. I'll need to make my wife wear dresses and head coverings and command her to be silent in our pews.

I never understood how we allow agnostics and atheists in our forums while the basic statements of Christianity are listed on the front page.
 
Upvote 0
P

Petruchio

Guest
It does say I need to obey every letter to the confessions listed here. I'll need to make my wife wear dresses and head coverings and command her to be silent in our pews.

There's nothing in the statement of faith about wearing dresses and head coverings. Here is the link for you to review the actual statement of faith for this section, since you must be reading some for another:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7423440/

Though, the mods must be asleep, considering what's gone on in this thread compared to this statement in the guidelines:

"House Rules-
All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here (Community Rules). In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic."

Maybe the loophole is that, since you have the icon, you're still counted even though you teach against its theology? Or maybe I should just experiment with the report button. But I don't actually mind the debate though, if you can actually call it 'debate.'

I never understood how we allow agnostics and atheists in our forums while the basic statements of Christianity are listed on the front page.

If you're comparing yourself to an atheist or an agnostic, believe me, I am quite pleased with you doing so.
 
Upvote 0

tulipbee

Worker of the Hive
Apr 27, 2006
2,835
297
✟25,849.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Though, the mods must be asleep, considering what's gone on in this thread compared to this statement in the guidelines: .....

I can see you're debating as well besides you're not supposed to suggest the mods might be asleep or not doing their job according to the rules listed here. I think the problem with most Christian is their honesty. They don't practice what they preach and not being honest to themselves. Why you and I are having personal argument beats me but I really, really, really want to focus on having a conversation about creeping universalism. Although I did learn from you but you're making our conversations more difficult than it needs to be. The rules are like healthcare. It's not perfect but we're all working on it together to make it work. Could you be a little more creative and work with us having conversations about inclusivism and how it effects Presbyterians?

I think it's a problem for General Baptists and Particular Baptists to be in the same forum group called Baptist. In this group when we talk about women preachers between PCUSA and PCA, it's hard not to suggest one another that they may be wrong.

You're making our conversations more difficult and not being creative and allow God to lead the conversations. If I get ban cause of you then I'll say it's been fun talking to you. PCUSA'ers are cool people and we prove it here.

Modernize yourself and catch up with us.
 
Upvote 0
P

Petruchio

Guest
Why you and I are having personal argument

A wild guess would be your rants about me living next to Hitler in heaven, the stuff about being a Fundamentalist (because I'm orthodox), the accusations now of being a liar and a hypocrite, and whatever else I've missed. But, more importantly, it's your "arguments" against the teachings of the scripture (or, more accurately, the random stuff you say against the teachings of scripture). I can live with the former. It is the latter that offends me.

You're making our conversations more difficult and not being creative and allow God to lead the conversations.

The Word of God is in the Bible. Stick to it.
 
Upvote 0

tulipbee

Worker of the Hive
Apr 27, 2006
2,835
297
✟25,849.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
A wild guess would be your rants about me living next to Hitler in heaven, the stuff about being a Fundamentalist (because I'm orthodox), the accusations now of being a liar and a hypocrite, and whatever else I've missed. But, more importantly, it's your "arguments" against the teachings of the scripture (or, more accurately, the random stuff you say against the teachings of scripture). I can live with the former. It is the latter that offends me.



The Word of God is in the Bible. Stick to it.

If you hold all the PCUSA's multiple confessions, it gets wild. Your tolerance could be lower than we think. You can say whatever you want to say about me and I won't make a issue about it. I have tolerance. Creativity to me is finding ways to understand you and apply a modern conversation with you. My step mother was once married to a Presbyterian pastor while his assistant was the paster of the largest First Presbyterian Church in Atlanta. I asked my step mother what is Baptists, what is Lutherans, what is Orthodox and I asked her what is Presbyterian and she replied that Presbyterians takes the Bible and modernize it to fit today's society. So we add multiple confessions to the Book of Orders and change them according to votes guided by our Lord. You, probably, want it all go back to the Westminster Confessions only and nothing but that forever. PCUSA hold multiple confessions and each might not agree with it's other. That tells me that we get along better if we vote on what each of us believe. Thats why I enjoy Hedrick's post cause he tells us what the Presbyterians vote on, including those that don't know while he sometimes leave himself out. You're like a Republican that don't want Democrats to exist or vice versa. Life is more complicated than that.

Along with creativity, tolerance should be included. Presbyterians should tolerant of other Presbyterians in our own churches. Votes is fair. Some would think votes got out of hand and not apply to the rules of the forums but I would think we're all working on it. I would like to ask you to be more forgiving cause I don't remember offending you and calling you liar and but I do remember the Hitler statement like we all will go to the front of Heavens gate to await Judgement Day so everyone can be judged. So I would think we'll live in a big waiting room with Hilter and Bin Laden til God judges all when He is ready on His Own.

Speaking of creeping universalism and while we're on the subject on inclusivism which talks about those with other religions might be forgiven by the forgiving God. It beats me to hear that Hilter loved the Pope in his days and donated tons of wealth to honour Catholicism. I might have remembered that the Vaticans probably admitted that they did received wealth from Germany and offered to give back to the Jewish bloodlines. The paper trials got lost. Perhaps Hitler had a religion he believed.

hitler-rcc4.bmp


I'm not really interested in calling you a liar or offending you cause I'm a Presbyterian like I've always been and born into the family going back 100 years. I wouldn't be surprised if I slipped and said things in such a way without realizing it but I will admit I'm a sinner and still want to naturally sin based on my nature. It would b easier if you just tell me to delete my post to you. I was only seeking the creative mind of your yours but talking to you is like running on a treadmill. Huff puff huff puff. If you have low tolerance, please ask me to put you on ignore to make sure I don't say anything to you by accident. Your post don't bother me but if it bothers you please put me on ignore. As a Presbyterian, I would like to have conversations about creeping universalism and inclusivism with my follow Presbyterians who might be interested in the subject.

Let's move on.
 
Upvote 0