Is it okay to simply assume that God saves all?

Clare73 said:

The text says what you've said?

God is not responsible for man's disobedience of his laws regarding slavery.

Click to expand...

I have only talked about what the bible says. You are the one going into mans disobedience.

Clare73 said:

Yes, we are all born without eternal life, and in spiritual death, thanks to Adam who lost it for us.

Click to expand...

Is it nice to have someone else to blame for being "spiritually dead" and not yourself?

Hmm said:

But none of this refers to hell.
In general though, why does every sign of God's displeasure have to mean an eternal punishment? Is it the only option He has, like a human judge who can either let you go free or put you on death row but nothing in between. Is God less powerful than Judge Judy?

Click to expand...

I neither said not implied anything I did not quote. You appear to have decided to assume things not stated. My post refuted the UR claim that all mankind will be saved righteous/unrighteous alike even after death.

Hmm said:

So our starting point when thinking about universalism doesn't have to be "How does this fit into the Bible?" It could instead be "How could God possibly allow any one of His children to be be lost/annihilated/tortured forever".

Click to expand...

Well, there is arguing which claims that if there were God who is loving and good and fair, there already would be no suffering because it's not fair how certain innocent ones suffer much more than others who are more guilty of wrong.

So, your quoted question could work as a back-door argument in favor of atheism. I am not saying you mean this, but if God is good so He would not have people suffering after they die, then one could add to this that God who is good also would not allow suffering now in this life. And if already suffering is unfair, how could there be a fair God letting people suffer now?

But I have read some arguments using scriptures of certain universalists who do not try to use the argument you gave and I just quoted.

In any case, there is already suffering and punishment because of sin. But God has not already gotten rid of this or prevented this. And many are suffering in their sin, right while they have never had an opportunity to hear the Gospel . . . it seems, anyway.

People suffer consequences, and suffer because of not being with God . . . already. And God has not stopped this. And, often enough, ones suffer more than they deserve, it would seem to me, for even wrong things they do.

In any case, at least we could say, sin is not fair. Satan's kingdom is not fair with his children. They are in "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience," our Apostle Paul does say in Ephesians 2:2. And the things of Satan's spirit are cruel and dishonest and unfair . . . causing much cruelty and abuse much more than I would say people deserve to suffer while giving in to Satanic things . . . such as worry, and unforgiveness, and being dominated by lusts which waste people for foolish pleasure and the frustration and anger and arguing involved in not getting it. This stuff is unfair. And God is better

So . . . we could go atheistic and say this is unfair and therefore a fair God would not allow this now or cause this after people die. But I have thought and prayed about how it can be that there is endless suffering . . . already started . . . right while there is God so good. And I experience that God is kind and good; so what am I supposed to do? Do what God blesses me to do to help anyone be with God and spend eternity with Him.

So - Hmm . . . you said:

Let's just thrash this out a bit and take an example from one of theses categories. Suppose we have a adult with severe learning difficulties. He's spiritually dead and then dies having only been born the once. Does he go to hell?

Click to expand...

Let's say someone is like a dead piece of wood: what will happen to that wood, in the presence of fire? It does not matter how intelligent the wood is or isn't; still it will burn in the fire.

The character of the wood decides what will happen to it, in different circumstances.

"For our God is a consuming fire." (Hebrews 12:29)

Your character has a lot to do with what becomes of you in the presence of God. We can see what became of certain people in the presence of Jesus > they hated Him. Others loved Him.

And may be, by now, you have seen how much knowledge helps people. There are ones who know smoking has ruined people and their lives; yet, they now are still smoking and even helping others to start smoking. Their character, not their knowledge or intelligence, can have so much to do with what they do - - or are capable of doing.

On the day of judgment, Jesus will know what we have done, and the character in which we have done things. And, possibly, in the case of ones who are incapable of knowing and understanding, He will know what their character is capable of. The fire will prove.

No

Saint Steven said:

Just so you know, I'm a recovering Evangelical.

Click to expand...

Lot of that going on around here

BPPLEE said:

Will this include people like Hitler, Stalin, serial killers, child molesters, rapists and Devil worshippers?

Click to expand...

Yep. They're probably not gonna like the process very much, buy even they'll have to confess that whatever they suffer was precisely what they deserved. Evil doesn't win, and Satan ends up with nothing, not even a hell filled with shreiking lost souls.

Clare73 said:

Yes, we are all born without eternal life

Click to expand...

But wait, ECT is based on everyone having eternal life, either in bliss or in torment. Can't torment the dead, can we?

Jipsah said:

But wait, ECT is based on everyone having eternal life, either in bliss or in torment. Can't torment the dead, can we?

Click to expand...

Actually eternal life is about guality, as well as duration.
Eternal life is God's life, who is eternal, and which he gives us.

Only the born again have the life of God in their spirits.
Everyone else has immortal life.

Jipsah said:

Lot of that going on around here

Click to expand...

Recently I watched a dialog in a movie that I had to write down because it was so bizarre.

Young Man: I'm worried about the future.
Woman: Don't worry, God will take care of you.
Young Man: How do you know that?
Woman: God will never give you more than you can handle.
Young Man: What does that mean?
Woman: It's in the Bible.

Hmm said:

Do you think the verse I quoted "clearly indicates" that slavery is okay?

And if not, why not?

Click to expand...

Yes the verse you quoted indicates that slavery was ok at that time. This should come as no surprise since God clearly defined the laws concerning slavery in Leviticus. You think that verse doesn’t indicate that slavery was acceptable by God but that interpretation is not biblical.

Tolworth John said:

This is a passage telling Christians who where slaves, how to behave towards their owner.
It does not justify owning slaves.
The bibles attitude towards slavery can br seen in
1 Timothy 1:10
New International Version
10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine , and in the OT laws against trding in slaves.

The problem of universalism, that everybody will be saved is it goes against the whole of the bible.

In the OT compliance with Gods laws was required for his blessings and failure brought punishment.
In the NT it is equally clear that some people will be saved whie others will not.

Click to expand...

That translation is inaccurate the words “slave traders” is not in that verse it says “perjurers” which refers to people lying under oath aka committing perjury. I don’t know where the NIV translators came up with “slave traders” from that Greek word.

Edit: My mistake I misread the NIV version of that verse.

Hmm said:

So the meaning of a passage changes over time and depending on who is reading it?

Click to expand...

No the meaning doesn’t change at all it simply only applied to those people during that time.

BNR32FAN said:

That translation is inaccurate the words “slave traders” is not
in that verse it says “perjurers” which refers to people lying under oath aka committing perjury. I don’t know where the NIV translators came up with “slave traders” from that Greek word.

Click to expand...

From my post #33, regarding 1 Timothy 1:10:

Clare73 said:

That refers to Exodus 21:16, and in the Greek of 1 Timothy 1:10, it is andrapodistes; i.e., "men stealing," kidnapping, and making into slaves, for which the penalty was death.
It does not refer to the slavery legislated by God in Leviticus 25:39-54.

Click to expand...

Clare73 said:

From my post #33, regarding 1 Timothy 1:10:

Click to expand...

Yes I apologize I misread the NIV version.

BNR32FAN said:

Yes I apologize I misread the NIV version.

Click to expand...

1 Timothy 1:10 condemns kidnapping (man-stealing of Exodus 21:16) to sell into slavery, not the slavery legislated by God in Leviticus 25:39-54.

Hmm said:

Thanks for demonstrating so well the dangers of intellectualising faith. There for the grace of God go I (shudder emoji).

Click to expand...

“As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you. Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession. You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.”
‭‭Leviticus‬ ‭25:44-46‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

What about this verse? Does this verse indicate that it was ok to own slaves?