Is the number of Christians who are open to universalism dependent on how it's described?

[2PhiloVoid]

Is that an avoidance tactic?
Maybe even a 2PhilAvoidance tactic? - LOL

cc: @Hmm

Are you implying that you'd like for me to be involved in your discussion?

If so, I appreciate the indirect affirmation, but I'm kind of thinking it's best I avoid chat about Eschatology or Soteriology so as not to ruffle anyone's feathers among various brethren. I'm not sure if anyone has noticed, but I'm not really here on CF to defend any one singular Christian point of view other than a general and minimal Trinitarian view.

Besides, being that I see myself as an Inclusivist who has never discounted the potential for a more Universalized Invitation to Salvation in Jesus Christ, my conceptual residence sits only over in the next couple of neighborhoods from yours, nestled in one of those exclusive existential grottos. The air-conditioning is fabulous here ... !

 

[Jipsah]

If they can describe it in such a way that the truth of God's Word is blinded from the eye of the believer, sure.

"The truth of God's Word", I take it, being that most of the people God created are to be tortured/tormented forever. Zat it?

 

[Jipsah]

The “draw” of man is the wonderful invitation and not a kidnapping. The invitation is good news to everyone, but some will still refuse.

And are tortured forever.

God does desire everyone to be saved, but He is not going to force His Love on a person (holding the shotgun at a shotgun wedding), since that is not loving o His part nor would the Love they received be Godly type Love.

So He doesn't hold a shotgun on anyone, but He does torture them forever if they reject His love.

So, you think you deserve eternal life with God in heaven by God’s definition of deserve?

Nah, we all deserve to be tortured forever.

To the contrast: the father did fully know the young son fully deserved to starve to death in the pigsty for his choices. The father also had forgiven the son, but the son had never of his own free will humbly accepted that forgiveness as pure undeserved charity until he showed that acceptance and humility in returning and speaking.

Should the father have arranged it so that if the prodigal hadn't accepted forgiveness that he was to be tortured forever?

God’s forgiveness is huge and can result in us obtaining a huge Godly type Love (Luke 7, If you are forgiven of an unbelievable huge debt you will automatically receive an unbelievable huge Love), but repeatedly refusing that forgiveness to the point of never free willingly accepting that forgiveness, results in not going to heave and the second death.

And as a bonus, you'll be tortured forever.

 

[Jipsah]

They still killed some people; they just killed "less" people than they say they did.

Fewer. (Sorry, sometimes I can't help it. )

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Fewer. (Sorry, sometimes I can't help it. )

That's perfectly fine, Jipsah. Keep those learning moments coming my way. That'll teach me to make fewer mistakes.

'Fewer' and 'Less'

We all want fewer problems and less trouble with fewer and less

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I was really meaning self-criticism anyway. If you're a perfectionist as I suspect he is then it can be hard to commit to any ideas because every idea is problematic to an extent. This is a good thing.in many ways though.

You're sweet to say so, but no, I'm no perfectionist. It's more like I've always realized that the Bible, all by itself, serves as a very poor axiomatic position by which to establish any practical truth on a human scale, let alone evaluate it as an effective platform by which to deduce all that many truths about Reality.

Moreover, I don't think that the term 'perfect,' like so many superlative terms, has much if any tangible meaning. It does make for a nice platitude, though. It's just no the kind of concept that lends itself easily to describe any aspect of a worldview, paradigm or praxis.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll put my copy of Pascal's Pensees and John W. Loftus' book, The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, and Michael Martin and Ricki Monnier's, The Impossibility of God, back on my shelves.

And Merry Christmas!

 

[Hmm]

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'll put my copy of Pascal's Pensees and John W. Loftus' book, The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails, and Michael Martin and Ricki Monnier's, The Impossibility of God, back on my shelves.

I like the picture of all these egos jammed together on your shelves! (joke!)

I agree with what you say but would you not also say that while we need to allow ourselves intellectual freedom to explore arguments in theology without fear, there is objective truth somewhere and so we also need a sense of commitment to something? This seems like a dilemma to me and I don't how it's resolved but almost certainly not by intellectual argument alone.

To take universalism, I find the arguments for it so persuasive that it I believe it is certainly true while still knowing that it's not something that can be proven. I believe its argument is true but it's more like something to bet on rather than prove. But another big thing it has in its favour is that it's a very moral position. Universalists naturally tend to abandon those aspects of Christianity which are no longer acceptable in the wider moral society such as sexism, racism and all kinds of discrimination and all the love of entirely unreasonable punishment for your enemies that is an inherent part of Infernalism.

As with evolution I guess, eventually people who can't let go of these hatreds will become extinct and Christians in future generations will look on ECT and Annihilationism in the same way we look on Christians in the past who defended slavery, as a tragic and damaging form of moral blindness.

And Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas too!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I like the picture of all these egos jammed together on your shelves! (joke!)

I agree with what you say but would you not also say that while we need to allow ourselves intellectual freedom to explore arguments in theology without fear, there is objective truth somewhere and so we also need a sense of commitment to something? This seems like a dilemma to me and I don't how it's resolved but almost certainly not by intellectual argument alone.

To take universalism, I find the arguments for it so persuasive that it I believe it is certainly true while still knowing that it's not something that can be proven. I believe its argument is true but it's more like something to bet on rather than prove. But another big thing it has in its favour is that it's a very moral position. Universalists naturally tend to abandon those aspects of Christianity which are no longer acceptable in the wider moral society such as sexism, racism and all kinds of discrimination and all the love of entirely unreasonable punishment for your enemies that is an inherent part of Infernalism.

As with evolution I guess, eventually people who can't let go of these hatreds will become extinct and Christians in future generations will look on ECT and Annihilationism in the same way we look on Christians in the past who defended slavery, as a tragic and damaging form of moral blindness.



Merry Christmas too!

If that's not the most salutory and conciliantory post I've ever read, I don't know what is ...

 

[Hmm]

Nice pic. of me leading you and Pascal is it? whilst walking backwards at the same time!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Nice pic. of me leading you and Pascal is it? whilst walking backwards at the same time!

Why would you assume that I intended for any of those mice to represent you in any form or fashion?

As far as I'm concerned, you're not in that picture whatsoever, brother Hmm. If you are, then I'm too blind to see it.

 

[Hmm]

Why would you assume that I intended for any of those mice to represent you in any form or fashion?

As far as I'm concerned, you're not in that picture whatsoever, brother Hmm. If you are, then I'm too blind to see it.

No assumptions, merely a joke or at least a failed attempt at one.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

No assumptions, merely a joke or at least a failed attempt at one.

Oh, don't you worry yourself about it. You probably succeeded, but being that I'm too morally blind to have understood it, it likely passed me by ...

 

[Hmm]

.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

.

Now do you understand 'why' I said what I said to Steven back up in post #61?

If you still don't, you have my condolences and have a Merry Christmas anyway.

 

[Hmm]

Now do you understand 'why' I said what I said to Steven back up in post #61?

If you still don't, you have my condolences and have a Merry Christmas anyway.

I have no idea "why" you say what you do. Only you can know that. Merry Christmas.

 

[JulieB67]

they need to have a conversation or read a thread about what universalism actually means.

To me it was the opposite when it came to certain doctrines. I saw some threads on a certain Christian board almost 20 years ago and it's that thread that actually got me into reading the "entire" bible for myself for the first time seeking only the truth no matter what that might be. It wasn't the actual thread that changed my mind, it was the Word of God. The seed was planted and then I sought it out for myself.

I had been taught many false doctrines including ECT my entire life up to that point. While I did drop those doctrines upon reading and studying the entire bible for myself, I do believe the LOF is the second death as in that's permanent. The soul is destroyed which coincides with Christ's teachings in Matthew 10:28 as well as the rest of the Bible that points out that the wicked will perish -turned to ashes. That's what I got out of all of the bible as a whole. I believe we are refined by fire through our lifetimes as pointed out in different verses but that is our physical life. And those verses point that out.

I also believe our Father is very long suffering which is why we are still here. There would be no point to his long suffering if all he has to do is throw us into the LOF. That's not biblical. It's his will that all would come to repentance. But that's why he's long suffering. But many UR's call that failure but salvation is open to all. So that's success. It's the individual that fails.

And it does state anyone that's not in the book of life will be thrown into the LOF which is the second death. We can't count the LOF as repentance. Change has to come from our hearts and minds, not the LOF. That's what faith and trust in Christ is all about. And faith and hope are for things unseen, not seen.
And we are taking away the power of the second death that Christ talks about if we think otherwise. The salvation is there for all but sadly not all will take it. Not to get too off base of your thread but I think threads should be for you to plant seeds but ultimately it should drive someone into the Word to seek out the truth for themselves. And believe me, if I had seen any kind of truth upon my studies I would have believed in UR. Because that's what drove me finally into reading the entire bible for the first time, I was seeking the truth and would accept that truth. And while I didn't see ECT, I didn't see UR either.

In the end we all have to decide for ourselves but it should be from the Word. -the entire Word.

 

[Hmm]

Thanks for your thoughtful post. I had a few thoughts while reading it:

And it does state anyone that's not in the book of life will be thrown into the LOF which is the second death.

The possibility seems to open that the Book of Life contains everyone's names but also that it's not fixed and a name may not be included at one point but added sometime later.

It wasn't the actual thread that changed my mind, it was the Word of God... The seed was planted and then I sought it out for myself.In the end we all have to decide for ourselves but it should be from the Word. -the entire Word.

Yes, I should have said that I first encountered the idea of Christian universalism from one of these threads but this inspired me to read up on the topic. I even bought a book on it!

But many UR's call that failure but salvation is open to all

Yes, anything less than universal restoration would be a failure in universalist eyes. It would mean that God failed to deliver on His promise in 1 Corinthians 15:22 that "for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ."

It's not just that we all have the possibility to be saved, we will all be gladly and freely saved eventually. Phillipians 2:11: "every tongue will confess and openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord (sovereign God), to the glory of God the Father.

 

[Der Alte]

***
It's not just that we all have the possibility to be saved, we will all be gladly and freely saved eventually. Phillipians 2:11: "every tongue will confess and openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord (sovereign God), to the glory of God the Father.

EOB Philippians 2:11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.​

ASV Philippians 2:11​

(11) and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.​

ESV Philippians 2:11​

(11) and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.​

ISV Philippians 2:11​

(11) Then every tongue in one accord, will say that Jesus the Messiah is Lord, while God the Father praising.​

KJV Philippians 2:11​

(11) And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.​

NET Philippians 2:11​

(11) and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.​

And then they will have to face Jesus.

Matthew 7:20-23
(20) So then, you will recognize them by their fruit.
(21) “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of heaven – only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.
(22) On that day, [Judgement day] many [NOT a few] will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many powerful deeds in your name?’
(23) Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Go away from me, you lawbreakers!’​

When Jesus says never He means never not by and by, some day.

 

[Andrewn]

While I did drop those doctrines upon reading and studying the entire bible for myself, I do believe the LOF is the second death as in that's permanent. The soul is destroyed which coincides with Christ's teachings in Matthew 10:28 as well as the rest of the Bible that points out that the wicked will perish -turned to ashes.

Is it possible that while the soul of an unbeliever is destroyed in the LOF, their spirit is saved?

 

[JulieB67]

Is it possible that while the soul of an unbeliever is destroyed in the LOF, their spirit is saved?

I really believe when Christ calls it the second "death" that's it. And to what purpose if some part was saved in the LOF? That's not honest repentance based on Christ's sacrifice. Repentance as we know is a change of heart/mind. I feel like that ultimately takes away from Christ's sacrifice if LOF could do that job.

And I feel like that makes our Father's long suffering pointless as well. Those are my beliefs.