Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Dear BNR: You most certainly do not know about "that". My suggestion to you, take some time and acquaint your thinking with a remarkable treatise by Dr. Hanson.
God is the God of ta panta!
I’d rather just stick with the scriptures and early church writings.
You ask about justification in the context of Mat 25:46.I think there are other examples of this in the gospels that have been bothersome. They seem to contradict salvation by grace and rather use works as the basis. I am wondering if these work into the Universalism view somehow. Which would bring the gospels into Universalism.
Well, that's a nice web page. But I'm pretty sure it was created by humans, not the Holy Spirit.
Thanks for your reply. I especially like your last paragraph quoted above.… The NT was written by a number of people in rather different situations. You’re never going to turn it into a theology textbook. So there will always be loose ends. But I think there’s enough support
If God didn't show up at your church next Sunday, would you notice?You asked what The Holy Spirit was doing in The Church. I posted what The Holy Spirit is doing.
.
Theophilus, (160-181 A.D.) “Bishop of Antioch.” (3) And God showed great kindness to man in this, that He did not suffer him to continue being in sin forever; but, as it were by a kind of banishment, cast him out of Paradise, in order that, having by punishment expiated within an appointed time the sin, and having been disciplined, he should afterward be recalled.—Theophilus. To Autolycus, Book 2, chap. 26.
This is about Adam, it is not about someone who was cast out of heaven but was cast out of the garden of Eden. This has nothing to do with punishment for those who do not repent. If anyone wishes to view the context of this quote feel free to click on this link and see exactly what Theophilus was actually talking about.
CHURCH FATHERS: To Autolycus, Book II (Theophilus of
Antioch)
However if your interested in seeing what Theophilus actually wrote about the punishment for those who don’t repent here’s what he wrote in Autolycus Book 1 chapter 14
Theophilus To Autolycus, Book I chapter 14
Therefore, do not be sceptical, but believe; for I myself also used to disbelieve that this would take place, but now, having taken these things into consideration, I believe. At the same time, I met with the sacred Scriptures of the holy prophets, who also by the Spirit of God foretold the things that have already happened, just as they came to pass, and the things now occurring as they are now happening, and things future in the order in which they shall be accomplished. Admitting, therefore, the proof which events happening as predicted afford, I do not disbelieve, but I believe, obedient to God, whom, if you please, do you also submit to, believing Him, lest if now you continue unbelieving, you be convinced hereafter, when you are tormented with eternal punishments; which punishments, when they had been foretold by the prophets, the later-born poets and philosophers stole from the holy Scriptures, to make their doctrines worthy of credit. Yet these also have spoken beforehand of the punishments that are to light upon the profane and unbelieving, in order that none be left without a witness, or be able to say, “We have not heard, neither have we known.” But do you also, if you please, give reverential attention to the prophetic Scriptures, and they will make your way plainer for escaping the eternal punishments, and obtaining the eternal prizes of God. For He who gave the mouth for speech, and formed the ear to hear, and made the eye to see, will examine all things, and will judge righteous judgment, rendering merited awards to each. To those who by patient continuance in well-doing Romans 2:7 seek immortality, He will give life everlasting, joy, peace, rest, and abundance of good things, which neither has eye seen, nor ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man to conceive. 1 Corinthians 2:9 But to the unbelieving and despisers, who obey not the truth, but are obedient to unrighteousness, when they shall have been filled with adulteries and fornications, and filthiness, and covetousness, and unlawful idolatries, there shall be anger and wrath, tribulation and anguish, Romans 2:8-9 and at the last everlasting fire shall possess such men. Since you said, “Show me your God,” this is my God, and I counsel you to fear Him and to trust Him.
That’s two false claims of early church writers advocating universalism. Iranaeus and Theophilus taught eternal punishment. And of course I will provide a link for anyone interested in validating my quote.
CHURCH FATHERS: To Autolycus, Book I (Theophilus of Antioch)
This is about Adam, it is not about someone who was cast out of heaven but was cast out of the garden of Eden.
My friend BNR: Bingo!
Who prevails? Adam and his fallingness or the Last Adam as the One who makes the polus righteous?
EVERY knee, every tongue, in every dimension IN/EN the Master!
“"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'”
Matthew 7:21-23 NASB
That's informative. Thanks.That council was eventually accepted by most of the West, sort of. It's dubious whether you can consider it an ecumenical council, as the Pope explicitly forbade it from meeting. But today it is generally considered ecumenical, because of its acceptance in the West.
Of course Protestants often accept only the first four councils. I tend to agree with that judgement. I even have questions about Chalcedon. The problem isn't its substance. It is about the best you could do using the philosophical concepts they were using. But the process behind it (and even Nicea, to be honest) wasn't really Christian. They should have done more work in getting various parties together. You really can't do theology by politics. The aftermath made it clear just how bad a mistake it was. The following councils tried to clean up the mess, but resulted in alienating parts of the Church, and possibly weakening it enough that they were unable to resist Muslim incursions.
3. Individuals who believe & why.
That's good....Look here all you damnationists: His ways are higher than our ways. ...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?