The A & P

[Lazarus Short]

2Thes. 1:8-9
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

This is spiritual death also known as the second death. It's eternal separation from God.

I just demonstrated that "spiritual death" is an oxymoron. As for eternal separation from God, it is contrary to the doctrine of the omnipresence of God. I have been doing a word study on "fire" and related words, and have found that God dwells in fire, and that fire is part of His nature. So, in verse eight, the "flaming fire" is the presence of God.

 

[Saint Steven]

"I declare unto you, brothers and sisters..." Who are Paul's brothers and sisters? Does it include those who reject Christ?

You have quite an imagination, Steven!

Do you also believe that the Ten Commandments only have an application for the Israelites alive at that time?

- Does "flesh and blood" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "the perishable" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "the imperishable" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "We will not all sleep" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "we will all be changed" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "the dead will be raised imperishable" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "we will be changed" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "the mortal with immortality" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "the perishable" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "the imperishable" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "the mortal with immortality" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "Death has been swallowed up in victory" only apply to the Corinthian church?
- Does "Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?" only apply to the Corinthian church?

No it doesn't.

1 Corinthians 15:50-55
I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.”
55 “Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?”

 

[FineLinen]

Poor old Charlie has managed to steer this thread in wonderful directions yielding great posts. Thank you Charlie.

The Lord Jesus Christ, the Archegos & Prodromos, has a stacked deck. He not only undoes the fall of Adam, He does it with flair!

In Hebr. 9.14 His blood is posus mallon. In Rom. 11.24 the wild & natural olive branches are in the same posus mallon dimension.

Yes, and this majestic Prince-Leader of Reconciliation not only undoes the despair of Adam, He does it posus mallon!

Mallon =

More.

To a greater degree by far.

Jesus Christ IS the Mallon Saviour of the all/ ta pante.

 

[Saint Steven]

Poor old Charlie has managed to steer this thread in wonderful directions yielding great posts. Thank you Charlie.

@Charlie24
From post #143

 

[Charlie24]

Poor old Charlie has managed to steer this thread in wonderful directions yielding great posts. Thank you Charlie.

The Lord Jesus Christ, the Archegos & Prodromos, has a stacked deck. He not only undoes the fall of Adam, He does it with flair!

In Hebr. 9.14 His blood is posus mallon. In Rom. 11.24 the wild & natural olive branches are in the same posus mallon dimension.

Yes, and this majestic Prince-Leader of Reconciliation not only undoes the despair of Adam, He does it posus mallon!

Mallon =

More.

To a greater degree by far.

Jesus Christ IS the Mallon Saviour of the all/ ta pante.

Poor ol Charlie gets ill at times and says things or projects things he should't.

I'm working on it and ask for your prayers, thanks.

 

[FineLinen]

Poor ol Charlie gets ill at times and says things or projects things he should't.

I'm working on it and ask for your prayers, thanks.

Dear Charlie: I know exactly where you dwell in understanding of our God (I assure you F.L. has been there). The Road into Him is by steps of revelation by the Spirit of the Lord. Laz & the Saint can only speak of what we have seen and heard. The rest is in the Realm of His disclosure without which we all shall say and project where we presently are. I trust He will bring you to new avenues within Him in His good timing.

“Grace is the celebration of life, relentlessly hounding all the non-celebrants in the world. It is a floating, cosmic bash shouting its way through the streets of the universe, flinging the sweetness of its cassations to every window, pounding at every door in a hilarity beyond all liking and happening, until the prodigals come out at last and dance, and the elder brothers finally take their fingers out of their ears.” - Robert Farrar Capon-

 

[Lazarus Short]

Charlie, please note that Laz once subscribed to the doctrine of Hell.

 

[Saint Steven]

Poor ol Charlie gets ill at times and says things or projects things he should't.

I'm working on it and ask for your prayers, thanks.

After about five pages or so of banter, what did you learn about the greater hope that you didn't know before? (seemed like you knew next to nothing)

 

[Charlie24]

After about five pages or so of banter, what did you learn about the greater hope that you didn't know before? (seemed like you knew next to nothing)

That's a pretty good guess! You're right.

Why should I look past the words of Christ and countless other scripture to understand a theory with no scriptural proof whatsoever?

But on the other hand, it seems you know next to nothing about the complete Word of God or you would know this is a farce!

 

[Saint Steven]

That's a pretty good guess! You're right.

Why should I look past the words of Christ and countless other scripture to understand a theory with no scriptural proof whatsoever?

But on the other hand, it seems you know next to nothing about the complete Word of God or you would know this is a farce!

This is intellectual dishonesty, my friend. We agree on the first point, but let's take a hard look at the other two. Thanks.

To claim that the greater hope has "no scriptural proof whatsoever" is a grand exaggeration. That would be zero, none, nada. Yet we have provided lots of scriptures that should have given you pause to consider what is being said here. And frankly the rebuttals were weak at best. And you refuse to own them.

And then to claim that I "know next to nothing about the complete Word of God..." No need to defend myself against such a ridiculous insult. I'll let the readers judge for themselves. But I'm personally surprised to read something like that from you after you seeing my debate points on the Calvinism topic. "I know next to nothing" ??? Another grand exaggeration.

I can only conclude that fear got the better of you and give you the benefit of a thoughtless (and hopefully regretful) outburst in self defense. I know you to be a more caring soul than that.

What say you now?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Charlie24 said: ↑
That's a pretty good guess! You're right.

Why should I look past the words of Christ and countless other scripture to understand a theory with no scriptural proof whatsoever?

But on the other hand, it seems you know next to nothing about the complete Word of God or you would know this is a farce!

 

[Charlie24]

This is intellectual dishonesty, my friend. We agree on the first point, but let's take a hard look at the other two. Thanks.

To claim that the greater hope has "no scriptural proof whatsoever" is a grand exaggeration. That would be zero, none, nada. Yet we have provided lots of scriptures that should have given you pause to consider what is being said here. And frankly the rebuttals were weak at best. And you refuse to own them.

And then to claim that I "know next to nothing about the complete Word of God..." No need to defend myself against such a ridiculous insult. I'll let the readers judge for themselves. But I'm personally surprised to read something like that from you after you seeing my debate points on the Calvinism topic. "I know next to nothing" ??? Another grand exaggeration.

I can only conclude that fear got the better of you and give you the benefit of a thoughtless (and hopefully regretful) outburst in self defense. I know you to be a more caring soul than that.

What say you now?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Charlie24 said: ↑
That's a pretty good guess! You're right.

Why should I look past the words of Christ and countless other scripture to understand a theory with no scriptural proof whatsoever?

But on the other hand, it seems you know next to nothing about the complete Word of God or you would know this is a farce!

I say give me your #1 support of the "great hope" with scripture and your best points to support it.

Please, don't write a book!!! Keep it short and to the point.

 

[Saint Steven]

I say give me your #1 support of the "great hope" with scripture and your best points to support it.

Please, don't write a book!!! Keep it short and to the point.

Firstly, it's called the "greater" hope.

Which aspect of Universalism is the biggest sticking point for you? I'll address that.

Here's a list to pick from, or provide your own if I missed it. Thanks.
1) The reconciliation of all things (all of creation)
2) Salvation being available after physical life has ended
3) That the atonement is for all of humankind
4) The second Adam (Christ) has undone the damage caused by the first Adam
5) That no one will enter heaven until they make Jesus Christ Lord by willing confession
6) Souls have already been redeemed from the realm of the dead
7) The universal fatherhood of God to humankind

 

[Lazarus Short]

I say give me your #1 support of the "great hope" with scripture and your best points to support it.

Please, don't write a book!!! Keep it short and to the point.

To resolve my own trilemma of damnation versus annihilation versus reconciliation, I studied the entire Bible, and took notes that became book-length. I'm not sure there is a short-cut short of God revealing it to you directly. The most foundational thing I can mention is that ALL the non-natural/supernatural FIRE mentioned in the Bible is God-fire, not Hell-fire. For instance, if you're tossed into the Lake of Fire, you are dragged into the presence of God, the One Who dwells in fire.

 

[Lazarus Short]

Firstly, it's called the "greater" hope.

Which aspect of Universalism is the biggest sticking point for you? I'll address that.

Here's a list to pick from, or provide your own if I missed it. Thanks.
1) The reconciliation of all things (all of creation)
2) Salvation being available after physical life has ended
3) That the atonement is for all of humankind
4) The second Adam (Christ) has undone the damage caused by the first Adam
5) That no one will enter heaven until they make Jesus Christ Lord by willing confession
6) Souls have already been redeemed from the realm of the dead
7) The universal fatherhood of God to humankind

A few words about #2 - Is the idea that your eternal destiny is set at the moment of your death any better of an idea than the idea that your life is governed by the position of the planets at the moment of your birth? Holding up this mirror shows just how ridiculous it really is. For one thing, it limits God, the One Who has no limits. Can He save after death? Sure, as He told Job, nothing is too difficult for Him. For another thing, where in the Bible is this stated? I know of no such place.

 

[Charlie24]

Firstly, it's called the "greater" hope.

Which aspect of Universalism is the biggest sticking point for you? I'll address that.

Here's a list to pick from, or provide your own if I missed it. Thanks.
1) The reconciliation of all things (all of creation)
2) Salvation being available after physical life has ended
3) That the atonement is for all of humankind
4) The second Adam (Christ) has undone the damage caused by the first Adam
5) That no one will enter heaven until they make Jesus Christ Lord by willing confession
6) Souls have already been redeemed from the realm of the dead
7) The universal fatherhood of God to humankind

I'm thinking that universalism as a whole claims that everyone will be saved in the end.

Can you give me your best point on this? I'm also thinking everything listed will fall in line with this point.

 

[Charlie24]

To resolve my own trilemma of damnation versus annihilation versus reconciliation, I studied the entire Bible, and took notes that became book-length. I'm not sure there is a short-cut short of God revealing it to you directly. The most foundational thing I can mention is that ALL the non-natural/supernatural FIRE mentioned in the Bible is God-fire, not Hell-fire. For instance, if you're tossed into the Lake of Fire, you are dragged into the presence of God, the One Who dwells in fire.

Laz, with all due respect sir, the only way you could possibly come to this conclusion is by rationalizing scripture. That simply will not cut it.

You have defied many scriptures that present a literal hell, and you have done it with absolutely no scripture. Do you understand why I take this position?

I don't want to fight and drag you through the mud nor do I want to be in the mud. I'm just saying there is no convincing evidence of your claim from scripture.

 

[Charlie24]

Look guys, the only way that doctrine can be confirmed is by scripture proving scripture.

That's the only way it can be confirmed and valid. The scripture that seems to contradict must be dealt with using only scripture to validate.

In this case, the contradictions to your claims are overwhelming.

 

[Saint Steven]

I'm thinking that universalism as a whole claims that everyone will be saved in the end.

Can you give me your best point on this? I'm also thinking everything listed will fall in line with this point.

That seems to fall under 5) That no one will enter heaven until they make Jesus Christ Lord by willing confession --- but as you noted, the others will fall in line. It also hinges somewhat on the definition of "in the end." And I think I have already shared this with you, but it bears repeating. You may have to hear/read it three times before it resonates with you. But I think this does that best job of covering all the bases, as it were. I'll make it as easy as A-B-C.

A) Every knee will bow in heaven and on earth and under the earth (the realm of the dead) and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord. (Philippians 2:10-11) That's everyone - everywhere.

B) No one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:3) Those acknowledging Jesus Christ is Lord, do so by the Spirit.

C) The very reason that Christ died and returned to life is so that he might be the Lord of BOTH the dead and the living. (Romans 14:9)

D) Anyone who declares (acknowledges) with their mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” will be saved. (Romans 10:9)

E) The NT Greek word used for "acknowledge" in Phil.2:11 is defined as giving full agreement, to whole-heartedly and openly declare without reservation. See note with Strong's definition at the bottom of this post.

Therefore: Everyone everywhere will be saved in the end.

Philippians 2:10-11
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

1 Corinthians 12:3
Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says,
“Jesus be cursed,” and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit.

Romans 14:9
For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

Romans 10:9
If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

Note on "acknowledge" in Philippians 2:11
S1843 eksomologéō (from 1537 /ek, "wholly out from," intensifying 3670 /homologéō, "say the same thing about") – properly, fully agree and to acknowledge that agreement openly (whole-heartedly); hence, to confess ("openly declare"), without reservation (no holding back).

 

[Lazarus Short]

Laz, with all due respect sir, the only way you could possibly come to this conclusion is by rationalizing scripture. That simply will not cut it.

You have defied many scriptures that present a literal hell, and you have done it with absolutely no scripture. Do you understand why I take this position?

I don't want to fight and drag you through the mud nor do I want to be in the mud. I'm just saying there is no convincing evidence of your claim from scripture.

Challenge accepted.

First, yes I did rationalize Scripture. I put my common sense to it, using a few tools such as good concordances (Strong's & Young's), the OED and Biblehub. I was also aware of translations without Hell, so I was not discouraged in my quest.

I read along in my KJV, and came up to the first instance of "hell" at Deuteronomy 32:22. The center-column reference said, "or Sheol." I looked that up, and got "hell" again. I checked the OED, which told me that "hell" originally meant "hidden and covered" as a noun, and "to hide, to cover" as a verb. To place potatoes in a trench below frostline to keep them over the winter is still called "helling the potatoes" to this day, as my father told me, for he had done it. Moving on, I found that "sheol" referred to the grave, the pit, the place of the dead, hidden, covered and unknown. "Hell" was not a bad choice in the original meaning, but the word has been conflated into a doctrine about fire, punishment and suffering the original meaning lacked. I went on to look at every instance of "hell" in the OT, and found that when
"sheol" was connected by context with the real world, it was translated properly as "the grave" or "the pit." About an equal number of times, "sheol" was rendered as "hell" because the context did not tie it to the real world. I see that as bias and bad translation. Honest translators, and there are some, should have translated "sheol" as "grave" and "pit" consistently, but they put doctrine before translation. My conclusion is that there is no literal Hell in the OT.

If you accept the above we can move on to the other words rendered as "hell," or we can discuss the above. I believe we can arrive at the conclusion that there is no literal Hell, and that the various Fires mentioned in the Bible really are Godfire.

 

[Charlie24]

That seems to fall under 5) That no one will enter heaven until they make Jesus Christ Lord by willing confession --- but as you noted, the others will fall in line. It also hinges somewhat on the definition of "in the end." And I think I have already shared this with you, but it bears repeating. You may have to hear/read it three times before it resonates with you. But I think this does that best job of covering all the bases, as it were. I'll make it as easy as A-B-C.

A) Every knee will bow in heaven and on earth and under the earth (the realm of the dead) and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord. (Philippians 2:10-11) That's everyone - everywhere.

B) No one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:3) Those acknowledging Jesus Christ is Lord, do so by the Spirit.

C) The very reason that Christ died and returned to life is so that he might be the Lord of BOTH the dead and the living. (Romans 14:9)

D) Anyone who declares (acknowledges) with their mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” will be saved. (Romans 10:9)

E) The NT Greek word used for "acknowledge" in Phil.2:11 is defined as giving full agreement, to whole-heartedly and openly declare without reservation. See note with Strong's definition at the bottom of this post.

Therefore: Everyone everywhere will be saved in the end.

Philippians 2:10-11
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

1 Corinthians 12:3
Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says,
“Jesus be cursed,” and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit.

Romans 14:9
For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

Romans 10:9
If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

Note on "acknowledge" in Philippians 2:11
S1843 eksomologéō (from 1537 /ek, "wholly out from," intensifying 3670 /homologéō, "say the same thing about") – properly, fully agree and to acknowledge that agreement openly (whole-heartedly); hence, to confess ("openly declare"), without reservation (no holding back).

Remember in our beginning of conversation that I accused you of taking scripture out context? I must revert back to that to make my points.

A) Yes, every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.
Where this fails is that both the saved and the unsaved will bow and confess.
How do I know this?
Matt. 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
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 see the pattern? There is a condition for entering the Kingdom of God.
But you will pass off these clear contradictions without a care, instead of searching to see why they don't fit your claims. In other words, you will rationalize them away.

Do I need to fill the page or how many pages will it take for you to see why I oppose your claims.