The Doctrine of "Universalism" (Christian Universalism or Otherwise) True or False?

[IamRedeemed]

Since there seems to be a few "Universalists" that seem to enter into other threads, attempting to present what I believe is "another" Gospel whenever a means to segway into it presents itself, it has been agreed that this topic should have a thread of its own so we can get down to brass tacks. No matter what variances there may be between your regular variety of Universalists and those who insist that there is a difference because they are called Christian Universalists, it has been my experience that all of the varieties have the same end and that is they believe ALL will be saved no matter what. (as you may have already guessed, I am not a Universalist)

Since I believe that the souls of people who listen to Universalists are at risk, these would therefore be then considered
ESSENTIAL doctrines and definitely should be discussed in the open rather than veiled under the guise of other topics.

So, I am going to present several Scriptures that clearly refute the doctrine of Universalism of any kind and welcome those who believe in Universal Salvation to come and make their cases and reconcile their belief with these Scriptures. OSAS believers might want to tune in as well as all of the Scriptures I plan to share are directed to believers who have believed on Christ and not unbelievers.


Jude 1:3-6
Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not. And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

In other words, Jude is saying, "I was all set to encourage you in our common salvation, but a more urgent need arose for me to exhort you in the faith because some are creeping in among you sowing false doctrines and if you listen to them, you can lose your soul! Therefore if you aren't sure I am telling you the truth that your souls are at stake, let me bring to your remembrance the Israelites who God saved out of Egypt and then destroyed because of unbelief. Oh, and incase you think you are better than them, let me then remind you that God spared not the angels who forsook the estate that God gave them with Him in Heaven and followed after foolishness losing their own home and whose days have been numbered and will be destroyed."


Hebrews

Where do I start in the Book of Hebrews? There are so many!
I'll try to keep my commentary brief to get through these. They are pretty much self explanatory anyway.


Hebrews 2:1-3
For this reason we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away from it. For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just penalty, how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard,

Hebrews 3:12-14
Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For we are made partakers of Christ, ifwe hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end;

exhort:
–verb (used with object) 1.to urge, advise, or caution earnestly; admonish urgently. –verb (used without object) 2.to give urgent advice, recommendations, or warnings.
Hebrews 4:1-2
Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

Hello??? Just checking in with ya to make sure you are still watching this.

Hebrews 4:11
Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.
(what? Labor? but why?...isn't everyone going to be saved anyway? Why not just kick back and enjoy? hmmmm )
Moving on......

Hebrews 6:4-8
For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
For the earth which drinks in the rain that comes upon it, and brings forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receives blessing from God: But that which bears thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.

Hebrews 10:26-31
For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sins,
But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Hebrews 10:38-39
Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.
What? There are some that draw back unto perdition? Does that mean backslide to the point of no return?Yes it does. Lord have mercy.

Hebrews 12: 15-17
Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. For you know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.

Hebrews 12:25-29
See that you refuse not him that speaks. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaks from heaven: Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he has promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. And this word, Yet once more, signifies the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: For our God is a consuming fire.

James 5:19 (this refers to a believer, one who backslid)
Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converts the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, (that's SECOND DEATH) and shall hide a multitude of sins.

2 Peter 2:4-9
For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;
And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds The Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:

Clearly there is more to show you and I will, but this ought to provide a clear foundation in which to start. We haven't even finished with Peter or gotten to the word penned by John.

 

[Tissue]

(as you may have already guessed, I am not a Universalist)

So, I am going to present several Scriptures that clearly refute the doctrine of Universalism of any kind and welcome those who believe in Universal Salvation to come and make their cases and reconcile their belief with these Scriptures.

This isn't the language of someone interested in an open discussion, but rather, someone quite convinced that they are right, and are charged with the task of proving Universalists wrong, instead of engaging in an open conversation.

Thus, because I have some Universalist sympathies, and because, due to your previous conduct, it seems highly unlikely any actual progress will be made in this discussion, I think I'll stay away for now.

EDIT: Wow. Literally, less than 60 seconds after posting this, I have been reported for irrelevance. Impressive.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Subscribe

 

[Apollo Celestio]

I always equate universalism to atheism. All paths reach the same summit, or rather.. Abyss.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Universalist beliefs seem to stem from fear and intellectual reasoning about the end of things, and about eternal life and eternal death. They don't want to deal with the unpleasant possibility of damnation so they stick their heads in the sand and ignore it. They ignore the innumerable Scriptural references to the fact that there is a choice involved: "CHOOSE LIFE," says it all.

Deuteronomy 30:19
I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live;

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

EDIT: Wow. Literally, less than 60 seconds after posting this, I have been reported for irrelevance. Impressive.

Actually, so far this appears to be the only relevant post in this thread, IMO. Your pre-nuptial assessment in the first paragraph bes "spot on". Well done.

There bes no such thing as dialogue where minds on one side present themselves as simultaneously closed AND hostile, so why bother?
[bible]2 Corinthians 4:3-6[/bible]

 

[icedtea]

Let me dip my toe in.
I do not at this time believe in universalism.
I do not find verses supporting it, nor does it seem Just.
Is there a verse somewhere (where, i can never recall the where) which says something like "The evil I have forechosen for destruction?
(forgive if this was in the op, it was quite long and I did not read every word.

 

[IamRedeemed]

From where I stand it is clear that there is no contest, but some Universalists
insist they have a case and rather than open a thread, continue to inject their
ideas in other threads.

Therefore, this thread gives them the arena to attempt to prove their case. I believe
proponents of Universalism, use a few Scriptures out of context of the whole of the
Word of God to support their doctrine, while ignoring tons of other Scripture that
refutes what they are trying to make the other Scriptures say.

I have sympathy also for everyone in fact who follows false doctrines, believing it
will take them to the desired location.

Let's try to stick to the issues instead of the ad homimems and red herrings though k?

Just an FYI, I didn't report you, but I am really not surprised you were reported though.

This isn't the language of someone interested in an open discussion, but rather, someone quite convinced that they are right, and are charged with the task of proving Universalists wrong, instead of engaging in an open conversation.

Thus, because I have some Universalist sympathies, and because, due to your previous conduct, it seems highly unlikely any actual progress will be made in this discussion, I think I'll stay away for now.

EDIT: Wow. Literally, less than 60 seconds after posting this, I have been reported for irrelevance. Impressive.

 

[IamRedeemed]

They have a few verses that they believe supports it, and that
is why I am inviting them here. To present their case.
Most of my OP is Scripture, and you should try to read them all, even
if you just read two at a time or something, especially since you said
specifically that you don't believe in Universalism "at this time".
So, I think it would be important for you to equip yourself by being
familiar with the verses I have already shared and the ones I will be
adding as the conversation continues.

Let me dip my toe in.
I do not at this time believe in universalism.
I do not find verses supporting it, nor does it seem Just.
Is there a verse somewhere (where, i can never recall the where) which says something like "The evil I have forechosen for destruction?
(forgive if this was in the op, it was quite long and I did not read every word.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Let me dip my toe in.
I do not at this time believe in universalism.
I do not find verses supporting it, nor does it seem Just.
Is there a verse somewhere (where, i can never recall the where) which says something like "The evil I have forechosen for destruction?
(forgive if this was in the op, it was quite long and I did not read every word.

Different methods of reading scripture get employed among different groups of people. Some read with the "proof text" method -- looking for specific texts which point concretely to a literal notion around which they build a doctrine. Others read scripture more holistically, and things learned by reading it holistically typically don't get laid out in bullet-point format, so to speak, like notions manufactured by proof-texting.

The understanding which unfolds from reading holistically tends to be both different and richer than that which unfolds from reading via the "proof text" method. Unfortunately this can make it a little problematic when bugged by proof-texters to "provide a VERSE!!"

As for not finding the idea of ultimate reconciliation for all to be "just", well, the Scripture does state that mercy triumphs over justice. It also admonishes us to love our enemies, to bless those who curse and persecute us, to return good for evil, and a whole bunch of other things that aren't "just" by any stretch of human imagination.

When you get right down to it, the notion of roasting people for eternity, magickally keeping them alive to feel it (people normally perish when roasted alive), all for the sins of a paltry lifetime whose duration does not even compare as large as a drop in an ocean, and who could not help being born that way (sinners) seems pretty freaking unjust to most reasonable people.

Funny how we "permit" God to be "not just" (in human perception) when it comes to destroying and torturing and other things that we would consider monstrous evil coming from a fellow human being (such as Hitler), but yet we bes NOT willing to permit Him to be "not just" (in human perception) if that means being good to everyone (including the undeserving) and saving everyone in spite of themselves? Now, how does THAT work???

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

From where I stand it is clear that there is no contest, but some Universalists
insist they have a case and rather than open a thread, continue to inject their ideas in other threads.

Discussing a topic from the perspective one holds to does not constitute "injecting" ideas into a thread. Do you "inject" the idea of eternally burning torture chambers manufactured by God into every thread? No, but if you believe in such things it will naturally form the perspective from which you discuss a topic. Well, those who believe the Scriptural indications that ultimately everyone will be reconciled to God also share and discuss things from THEIR perspective as a matter of course. Attempting to single out and marginalise them by portraying them as conducting some sort of nasty little covert operation for being like anyone else and discussing things from the perspective THEY hold, is just plain silly if not downright patronising.

The fact of the matter stands that those who believe the Good News feel just as excited about it as you folks do about what you believe, and just as much a sense of urgent need to make known the truth of God in the face of so many nasty lies about Him with the hope that this truth will set people free and point them to the only Way of Salvation. However this does not mean like those with other beliefs, they feel their job for God to be left undone if they have not thoroughly browbeaten the hesitant and skeptical with thunderous threats of doom, or if they have failed to snap bruised reeds clean in half and stomp smoking flax down into the ground where it can never ignite again -- which in case you miss the point bes precisely how someone believing the Good News of God's plan to reconcile all, even His enemies, in CHRIST, feels about those who mysteriously need to scream and holler threats about killing you for all eternity over and over again if you won't accept a gracious and undeserved GIFT. We find that behavior to be psychotic, to say the least, and we just don't perceive God as psychotic.

To characterise their participation in discussions as anything less than valid and their sense of Gospel commission as something nefarious simply because it does not involve attempts to threaten, bully or coerce people into "faith" (another word for trust, so prey tell HOW do you threaten, bully, and coerce TRUST???) constitutes one long running AD HOMINEM in itself, and one which you ought to withdraw from your OP, stat.

Therefore, this thread gives them the arena to attempt to prove their case. I believe
proponents of Universalism, use a few Scriptures out of context of the whole of the
Word of God to support their doctrine, while ignoring tons of other Scripture that
refutes what they are trying to make the other Scriptures say.

It is not that more difficult scriptures get ignored; it is that proper comprehension of them requires unravelling an entire thick paradigm of lies whats been woven over centuries of entrenched indoctrination and responsible for how most people typically interpret those passages. The scope of such labor goes far beyond the capacity of a single post or even a series of posts on a message board to handle and also is not restricted to the flat one-dimensional exchange of pitting idea against idea. The real work of unravelling that paradigm takes place in the heart through the healing ministry of the Holy Spirit, and His timing cannot be rushed or forced. What those who have been blessed with the Reconciliation Awareness do is merely to catalyze the process in the brain with some of the more readily accessible passages of scripture and let the Spirit continue to guide the journey from there, as He is the BEST Teacher and knows exactly how to work with each person who will let Him.

Having said that, yes, some who believe in the Ultimate Reconciliation of All in Christ (and btw many who do prefer the term "UR" for "ultimate reconciliation" rather than "universalist" which can be confused with those who do not believe Christ's sacrifice necessary) do enjoy debating and debate throw-downs, so perhaps some of them will stop by and give you what you seek. However, at a certain point, you must understand, it crosses the line into the futility of that old saying about attempting to teach a pig to sing, so to speak (i.e., don't bother as you will only waste your time and annoy the pig). Those who believe the Good News do not tend to be those who thrive on continual conflict or "getting their hate on" and like all Christians, seek to avoid situations that promise a relentless temptation of the flesh to become aroused into reactions that could dishonor God and mar one bearing witness to important soul-saving truth.

I have sympathy also for everyone in fact who follows false doctrines, believing it
will take them to the desired location.

And again, the patronising attitude here is a real turn off. If your posts demonstrated more of a respectful peer-dialogue invitation you might get more nibbles on your hook. Just food for thought. Most people have no interest in turning up for a discussion where they have already been judged negatively and have to spend the entire time defending against those false judgments rather than discussing the supposed topic.

Let's try to stick to the issues instead of the ad homimems and red herrings though k?

Given some of the language in your OP, it hardly perceives you to be in a position to charge someone else with "ad hominem" when you have already laid bait by suggesting those who believe the Good News to be illegitimately participating in discussions here, to be presenting 'another gospel' (a direct reference to Paul's charge in Galatians which, read in context and with understanding, would be utterly invalid here since the Galatians phrase refers to legalists and those pushing "sanctification by works" doctrines), and to be jeopardising others' eternal welfare by their mere presence of participation from their own perspective. Maybe you could try taking your own advice and altering the OP as a show of good faith?

 

[Tissue]

From where I stand it is clear that there is no contest,

And this is exactly the sort of language I am referring to. It would be foolish for a Universalist to discuss their position with you because you are already so convinced that it is incorrect. Just as it does little good to argue with an atheist who will never consider religious belief reasonable, or a Chicago Cubs fan who will never consider faith in their team unreasonable, so participation in this topic would be a waste of time and energy on both sides.

...but some Universalists
insist they have a case and rather than open a thread, continue to inject their
ideas in other threads.

Is this not exactly what you, yourself, do? As do we all? Just about every post I read of any substance assumes some sort of theological claim that not all of Christianity holds to be equally true.

Practically every day, I see someone putting a discussion in perspective of a specific eschatology (usually premillenial). While I find this somewhat silly, particularly when it is irrelevant to the main discussion at hand and is not supported by evidence, I'm certainly not angry with it.

The fact that you use this terminology, in light of your first post, is clear evidence that you will likely never consider Universalism a valid belief, or even rational, which is an absolute requirement if you wish to engage in a fair, open conversation about values that real humans on the other side of the computer screens are sincerely struggling with.

I completely respect your sincerity in your conviction, but please realize that Scripture is anything but conclusive on many issues, and there simply aren't easy answers for every problem that arises in Scripture.

Just an FYI, I didn't report you, but I am really not surprised you were reported though.

And, as a follow-up FYI, the report was Closed with no action taken.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Salt and light ... salt and light!
We are the infiltrators of salt and light!
Look out cuz we are all around you and in your midst just like the Kingdom of God is said to be!! Sprinkled among your congregations like salt, quietly burning the love in our hearts like light, we move undetected among you, hidden, unseen, giving human eyes to the Holy Spirit on His mission to detect souls prepared for the glorious DAY to dawn and that DAY STAR to rise in their hearts.

Salt and light, moving unseen, hidden, undetected, among you all. We sit in your pews, we teach your children in Sunday or Sabbath school, we post on your message boards, we are everywhere!! Behold the Kingdom of God in your midst. The table is laden with the feast and the doors are flung open. come ye all to the nuptials ..... come now!!!

 

[IamRedeemed]

I started to respond to your post and then I realised it goes on and on.
This is NOT a stage for your ongoing personal rants. Put me on ignore.
It's a great feature. I use to never use it. Now I wonder why I
didn't use it more often?

and btw I never said your previous post was a violation, just that I am not surprised
it was reported. I wouldn't be surprised if this one of yours is reported either, and
you probably won't get the same result with this one. Why you are addressing the results
of your reported post to me, I don't know as I said I did not report your post. That doesn't mean
I won't report your posts though. And you won't have any doubt that it is me, if and
when I do, as I will be sure to use the same font and color and make NO effort to be
anonymous.

Meanwhile back at the ranch....

Are you able to present an argument that shows that I have either
misunderstood or misrepresented the Scriptures that I shared so far
in the OP that refute the doctrine of Universalism?

If not, then "k thanks bye".

And this is exactly the sort of language I am referring to. It would be foolish for a Universalist to discuss their position with you because you are already so convinced that it is incorrect. Just as it does little good to argue with an atheist who will never consider religious belief reasonable, or a Chicago Cubs fan who will never consider faith in their team unreasonable, so participation in this topic would be a waste of time and energy on both sides.



Is this not exactly what you, yourself, do? As do we all? Just about every post I read of any substance assumes some sort of theological claim that not all of Christianity holds to be equally true.

Practically every day, I see someone putting a discussion in perspective of a specific eschatology (usually premillenial). While I find this someone silly, particularly when it is irrelevant to the main discussion at hand and is not supported by evidence, I'm certainly not angry with it.

The fact that you use this terminology, in light of your first post, is clear evidence that you will likely never consider Universalism a valid belief, or even rational, which is an absolute requirement if you wish to engage in a fair, open conversation about values that real humans on the other side of the computer screens are sincerely struggling with.

I completely respect your sincerity in your conviction, but please realize that Scripture is anything but conclusive on many issues, and there simply aren't easy answers for every problem that arises in Scripture.



And, as a follow-up FYI, the report was Closed with no action taken.

 

[Tissue]

I started to respond to your post and then I realised it goes on and on.
This is NOT a stage for your ongoing personal rants. Put me on ignore.

No reason to put you on ignore.

And personal rants? Aren't you the one who created this topic as a means of disproving UR? Aren't you the one who degraded their position and their person, using language like "inject their beliefs"? This is the language of rants.

and btw I never said your previous post was a violation, just that I am not surprised

it was reported. I wouldn't be surprised if this one of yours is reported either, and
you probably won't get the same result with this one. Why you are addressing the results
of your reported post, I don't know as I said I did not report your post. That doesn't mean
I won't report your posts though. And you won't have any doubt that it is me, if and
when I do, as I will be sure to use the same font and color and make NO effort to be
anonymous.

I have no trouble believing that you would be quite open in reporting a post.

Are you able to present an argument that shows that I have either

misunderstood or misrepresented the Scriptures that I shared so far
in the OP that refute the doctrine of Universalism?

If not, then "k thanks bye".

I have already stated I have no interest in addressing you on this level, due to your conduct and representation of the opposing side. The only argument that can come out of this is two or more equally stubborn sides constantly assaulting one another with little or no effect, and that sort of discussion does not interest me.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

I have already stated I have no interest in addressing you on this level, due to your conduct and representation of the opposing side. The only argument that can come out of this is two or more equally stubborn sides constantly assaulting one another with little or no effect, and that sort of discussion does not interest me.

^^ make that MISrepresentation and we have a total QFT here. ^^ hear, hear.

 

[Zaac]

From where I stand it is clear that there is no contest, but some Universalists
insist they have a case and rather than open a thread, continue to inject their
ideas in other threads.

Therefore, this thread gives them the arena to attempt to prove their case. I believe
proponents of Universalism, use a few Scriptures out of context of the whole of the
Word of God to support their doctrine, while ignoring tons of other Scripture that
refutes what they are trying to make the other Scriptures say.

I have sympathy also for everyone in fact who follows false doctrines, believing it
will take them to the desired location.

Let's try to stick to the issues instead of the ad homimems and red herrings though k?

Just an FYI, I didn't report you, but I am really not surprised you were reported though.

This just made me think about some of our other threads. How does one ascribe to a universal theology without rendering the work of a resurrected Jesus Christ useless?

Perhaps one of these universalists can explain what all are saved from ? How are they saved and who does the saving? And what do universalists do about sin?

 

[Phinehas2]

I think we need to be clear that IamRedemed posted many citations from the Bible.
so I cnat entertain

This isn't the language of someone interested in an open discussion, but rather, someone quite convinced that they are right,

Thats not really relevant, the Bible is convicing that universalism is a human error. In fact it goes back to the first disobedience, did God really say?
The Bible shows us that universalists are wrong.
In short howver, if one looks at the Bible there are a number of verses where one could easily interpret universalism as much as eternal life and death, but there are a no passages which categorically state all will be saved, whereas there are a number of verses that categorcially state not everyone will be saved.

and are charged with the task of proving Universalists wrong, instead of engaging in an open conversation.

I think IamRedeemed posts are an open invitation for universalists to cite where the Bible says all will be saved.

Usually if people dont like the message they attack the messanger.

 

[Tissue]

I have UR sympathies. I'm not a full-fledged, arguing UR. It's not that I don't like the message, it's that the message isn't actually conducive for true conversation, and since I don't belong to either polarity (I am neither die-hard anti-UR, or certain of UR), there simply isn't any room for me to truly argue. In fact, there doesn't seem to be any room for ANYONE to have a reasonable discussion with concession and better understanding.

The OP used Scripture as a weapon, while I argue a certain degree of delicacy should be used when arguing such a controversial topic.

For example, I have my sympathies, not due to any particular piece of Scripture, but due to the overwhelming sense of horror and unfairness that eternal damnation creates in my mind. For most Christians, this is a simple matter of deficiency on my part, in that I simply cannot understand God's Justice, and should instead agree with them (who, apparently, do understand God's Justice).

The idea that I do not like the message, and am thus attacking the OP is ridiculous. If you'll read my posts, I have said nothing as a personal assault against IAmRedeemed, but rather, have questioned the structure and stance of the message, rather than the actual content itself. You might not consider this an important distinction, but as it sets the tone and proceedings for the rest of the discussion, I consider it, at the very least, relevant.

 

[Tavita]

Discussing a topic from the perspective one holds to does not constitute "injecting" ideas into a thread. Do you "inject" the idea of eternally burning torture chambers manufactured by God into every thread? No, but if you believe in such things it will naturally form the perspective from which you discuss a topic. Well, those who believe the Scriptural indications that ultimately everyone will be reconciled to God also share and discuss things from THEIR perspective as a matter of course. Attempting to single out and marginalise them by portraying them as conducting some sort of nasty little covert operation for being like anyone else and discussing things from the perspective THEY hold, is just plain silly if not downright patronising.

The fact of the matter stands that those who believe the Good News feel just as excited about it as you folks do about what you believe, and just as much a sense of urgent need to make known the truth of God in the face of so many nasty lies about Him with the hope that this truth will set people free and point them to the only Way of Salvation. However this does not mean like those with other beliefs, they feel their job for God to be left undone if they have not thoroughly browbeaten the hesitant and skeptical with thunderous threats of doom, or if they have failed to snap bruised reeds clean in half and stomp smoking flax down into the ground where it can never ignite again -- which in case you miss the point bes precisely how someone believing the Good News of God's plan to reconcile all, even His enemies, in CHRIST, feels about those who mysteriously need to scream and holler threats about killing you for all eternity over and over again if you won't accept a gracious and undeserved GIFT. We find that behavior to be psychotic, to say the least, and we just don't perceive God as psychotic.

To characterise their participation in discussions as anything less than valid and their sense of Gospel commission as something nefarious simply because it does not involve attempts to threaten, bully or coerce people into "faith" (another word for trust, so prey tell HOW do you threaten, bully, and coerce TRUST???) constitutes one long running AD HOMINEM in itself, and one which you ought to withdraw from your OP, stat.

It is not that more difficult scriptures get ignored; it is that proper comprehension of them requires unravelling an entire thick paradigm of lies whats been woven over centuries of entrenched indoctrination and responsible for how most people typically interpret those passages. The scope of such labor goes far beyond the capacity of a single post or even a series of posts on a message board to handle and also is not restricted to the flat one-dimensional exchange of pitting idea against idea. The real work of unravelling that paradigm takes place in the heart through the healing ministry of the Holy Spirit, and His timing cannot be rushed or forced. What those who have been blessed with the Reconciliation Awareness do is merely to catalyze the process in the brain with some of the more readily accessible passages of scripture and let the Spirit continue to guide the journey from there, as He is the BEST Teacher and knows exactly how to work with each person who will let Him.

Having said that, yes, some who believe in the Ultimate Reconciliation of All in Christ (and btw many who do prefer the term "UR" for "ultimate reconciliation" rather than "universalist" which can be confused with those who do not believe Christ's sacrifice necessary) do enjoy debating and debate throw-downs, so perhaps some of them will stop by and give you what you seek. However, at a certain point, you must understand, it crosses the line into the futility of that old saying about attempting to teach a pig to sing, so to speak (i.e., don't bother as you will only waste your time and annoy the pig). Those who believe the Good News do not tend to be those who thrive on continual conflict or "getting their hate on" and like all Christians, seek to avoid situations that promise a relentless temptation of the flesh to become aroused into reactions that could dishonor God and mar one bearing witness to important soul-saving truth.
And again, the patronising attitude here is a real turn off. If your posts demonstrated more of a respectful peer-dialogue invitation you might get more nibbles on your hook. Just food for thought. Most people have no interest in turning up for a discussion where they have already been judged negatively and have to spend the entire time defending against those false judgments rather than discussing the supposed topic.

Given some of the language in your OP, it hardly perceives you to be in a position to charge someone else with "ad hominem" when you have already laid bait by suggesting those who believe the Good News to be illegitimately participating in discussions here, to be presenting 'another gospel' (a direct reference to Paul's charge in Galatians which, read in context and with understanding, would be utterly invalid here since the Galatians phrase refers to legalists and those pushing "sanctification by works" doctrines), and to be jeopardising others' eternal welfare by their mere presence of participation from their own perspective. Maybe you could try taking your own advice and altering the OP as a show of good faith?

Excellent post, Moriah!! You said exactly how I feel, thank you. I just wonder how many have actually 'read' your post.

I'm not going to bother 'presenting my side' in this thread, I'm not interested in a slinging match, it'd be like talking to a brick wall.