Universal reconciliation

[AmericanChristian91]

I hope that UR is the case, that even though Justice will be served to those in Hell, people in that place can still accept the grace of God, and with time, all of mankind will be in Heaven.

However I just hope that is the case. I'm not sure 100% that UR is real, therefore I don't talk about it to others (of course the fear of being called a heretic helps to). Of course since I have hope, Im not 100% convicted that ET is true.

I think it is ok to have an "unsure" belief when it comes to certain beliefs within Christianity.

 

[Hillsage]

Depends on how sensitive one is I guess. Apparently for those that are hyper-sensitive it must be so.

I guess that's why I waited to show YOUR "hyper sensitivity" and not mine. If I was really "sensitive" I'd have made a point concerning your "rudeness" to me first, but I did not. But keep on 'justifying' yourself if it's really that important to 'try' to prove it doesn't bother you. But it's pretty easy to see through that IMO.

The point was about permanent versus temporary, and the question was why it should be important that Adam not live forever if his banishment was only temporary vs permanent - the claim being all humans are only temporarily separated from God.

Except for most humans ending up in 'eternal banishment' with a garnish of continuous torture for that time. So, as anyone can see, your reasoning above actually makes sense, until you drop the ball in eternal Hell.

In case you didn't catch it, Adam walked with God and could have remained so eternally happy had he not sinned and there is no mention in his banishment of it being temporary - in fact the fact he would now die suggests a permanence to that condition - one which would require supernatural intervention to overcome - rather than a temporary one that come to end no matter what.

In case you didn't catch it. The lamb of God was slain before the foundation of the world, proving God knew differently than you believe, above. But maybe if YOU were God what you say above would have happened. Thankfully what you say doesn't happen though. And, from our perspective, your view doesn't really end very well concerning a 'victory for God' against the adversary for God's creation. Doesn't end well for all His beloved which He fries forever, according to your side, either.

So it all boils down to the fact that if ETERNAL HELL was the price for SIN, JESUS NEVER PAID IT. Easy for 'our eyes' to see.

 

[Hillsage]

I hope that UR is the case, that even though Justice will be served to those in Hell, people in that place can still accept the grace of God, and with time, all of mankind will be in Heaven.

However I just hope that is the case. I'm not sure 100% that UR is real, therefore I don't talk about it to others (of course the fear of being called a heretic helps to). Of course since I have hope, Im not 100% convicted that ET is true.

I appreciate your honesty and candidness AC91. For I too was where you are at 'in hoping', as I've stated before. Just keep asking the questions that trouble you with UR and allow us to present the position we've come
to accept as 100%. For some it was quickly but for some of us, not so much.

I think it is ok to have an "unsure" belief when it comes to certain beliefs within Christianity.

While I totally agree considering 'most' doctrine, I do think there's an importance that is often overlooked concerning 'most' doctrine too. In your opinion, what is the 'distilled down', 'bottom line' purpose for 'correct doctrine'?

 

[fatherjimparker]

<<<..... Adam walked with God and could have remained so eternally happy had he not sinned and there is no mention in his banishment of it being temporary - in fact the fact he would now die suggests a permanence to that condition - one which would require supernatural intervention to overcome - rather than a temporary one that come to end no matter what.>>>

That divine intervention has happened, so, Adam's banishment was temporary

 

[Hillsage]

<<<..... Adam walked with God and could have remained so eternally happy had he not sinned and there is no mention in his banishment of it being temporary - in fact the fact he would now die suggests a permanence to that condition - one which would require supernatural intervention to overcome - rather than a temporary one that come to end no matter what.>>>

That divine intervention has happened, so, Adam's banishment was temporary

AMEN And then add to that, the understanding that when God created 'man' he didn't just have 'a man' named 'Adam' without his wife 'Eve', in mind. He had 'mankind' in mind.

Strong's 0120 'adam: ruddy,i.e. a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.)

GEN 1:27 So God created man/ADAM in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

So, proof again that it is up to God to ultimately save ADAM, and thank God His plan was big enough to do that. Not just for 'Adam/a man', but also his wife...and 'Adam/mankind' too.

Like the song says; "How great is our God, how great is His plan, He the greatest one, for ever the same."

 

[SarahsKnight]

So guys, if I don't counter-argue something, please don't take
it personally; I'm refraining out of respect for my own sanity
rather than to be spiteful. Sappy as this may sound, in the
end I want Love to prevail.

Well, as far as I am concerned Chaela that last part only shows that you have a beautiful mind.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

I guess that's why I waited to show YOUR "hyper sensitivity" and not mine. If I was really "sensitive" I'd have made a point concerning your "rudeness" to me first, but I did not. But keep on 'justifying' yourself if it's really that important to 'try' to prove it doesn't bother you. But it's pretty easy to see through that IMO.

LOL, am not sure one can prove a lack of sensitivity by claiming that someone suggesting most Christians & myself are not really Christians is equivalent to my pointing out that repeatedly taking things out of context puts that attempt at a defense of a belief on the same shaky grounds as others who do the same. It does not matter that their claim is more out there – it was not a comment about people – just the method of defending a belief/practice.

Except for most humans ending up in 'eternal banishment' with a garnish of continuous torture for that time. So, as anyone can see, your reasoning above actually makes sense, until you drop the ball in eternal Hell.

And how in your mind does this address the question of my quoted post?

If banishment from God is temporary, why was it important for Adam (and by implication mankind) to no longer be capable of living forever?

In case you didn't catch it.

Most folks consider imitation flattery – forgive me for copying the attitude.

The lamb of God was slain before the foundation of the world,

proving God knew differently than you believe, above.

Actually chronologically speaking this occurs many thousands of years later. I agree with the Fathers that because it is True Who He is, the effect of that Act is Eternal - no beginning -no end. So in effect, because He is Divine that Act is before the foundations of the world. Yes, God is also Omniscient. But if one believes that, doesn’t it also make Him cruel in not letting Adam know the banishment was only temporary?

But maybe if YOU were God what you say above would have happened. Thankfully what you say doesn't happen though.

Assuming this is a response to my post am unclear whether you are saying Adam was NOT banished permanently with no mention of it being temporary ("no mention" not that God did not have a plan) or are you saying that Adam was not created to be eternally happy with God?

The openning of the Bible sets the stage and gives the reason for God needing to intervene on our behalf. Am saying if from the beginning the banishment is only temporary - we just need to be purged or learn something or however one wants to look at life/hell - then there is no need for Him to intervene. Some will love Him now the rest will get there later in Hell.

And, from our perspective, your view doesn't really end very well concerning a 'victory for God' against the adversary for God's creation. Doesn't end well for all His beloved which He fries forever, according to your side, either.

Not sure that is true perspective, since in the orthodox view the victory is already won, His Kingdom is here and now and our choices, for which He said we will be judged is here and now - not also maybe later. In fact He declares victory while still on the Cross.

So it all boils down to the fact that if ETERNAL HELL was the price for SIN, JESUS NEVER PAID IT. Easy for 'our eyes' to see.

No, am saying it boils down to this; if as you just suggested above, sin does not cause a permanent banishment from Good, then there was no need for Jesus to do anything. The banishment is temporary; so live how you like for tomorrow we die and nothing eternal will really happen to you. Nothing we do will have eternal consequence. Kind of like what Satan said to Eve, nothing bad will happen.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

<<<..... Adam walked with God and could have remained so eternally happy had he not sinned and there is no mention in his banishment of it being temporary - in fact the fact he would now die suggests a permanence to that condition - one which would require supernatural intervention to overcome - rather than a temporary one that come to end no matter what.>>>

That divine intervention has happened, so, Adam's banishment was temporary

Yes, exactly right.
I guess my point is that the traditional view requires that the banishment was/is potentially eternal and therefore one possible reality for all humans (and that realized by the damned) from which none can escape except for supernatural intervention.

Whereas in the UR view there is no potentially eternal banishment and so nothing eternal to be saved/escape from. The only thing to be saved from is a temporary process of purification in the next life, which whatever one sees that process is, it is seen as an ongoing process of which some successfully complete in this life and others take longer with. Am not saying that the UR cannot claim supernatural intervention to allow that process, it just does not seem necessary to me in that view. It also suggests to me Hell, is seen as just a place to give some people more time. And if time is what they need to "get better" then what was the reason for removing immortality from the equation in the first place?

 

[2KnowHim]

If banishment from God is temporary, why was it important for Adam (and by implication mankind) to no longer be capable of living forever?

Why would God want Adam (or all mankind) to live in a state of Corruption forever?
This is surprising that you would even ask this question, are you really that ignorant of why Christ came or are you just playing games?
God did not want that, that's the whole purpose for sending His Son. And if you don't know this, then I stand in doubt of you and your claim to be born again.

 

[jugghead]

If we only see our heavenly Father as a Father of punishment rather than a Father of discipline(training), we only see Him through the perspective of a child, immature in seeing His purpose in discipline

If people find it offensive in what I just said, then this also is offensive to them

Heb 12:4 Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.
Heb 12:5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:
Heb 12:6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
Heb 12:7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
Heb 12:8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
Heb 12:9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
Heb 12:10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he (He) for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
Heb 12:11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

If banishment was permanent then this banishment (discipline) has no purpose

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Why would God want Adam (or all mankind) to live in a state of Corruption forever?
This is surprising that you would even ask this question, are you really that ignorant of why Christ came or are you just playing games?
God did not want that, that's the whole purpose for sending His Son. And if you don't know this, then I stand in doubt of you and your claim to be born again.

Actually some questions are posed to see if someone can express what they believe in some intelligible whole package rather than defend a bit of it.

Had Adam (mankind) been allowed continued access to the Tree (Cross) then we would have those that would love God in an eternal life surrounded by the sorrows of this current world living along side those who reject what is Good growing in their corruption without end and being able to do great harm (whatever they desire) with no consequence. No Mercy for those that Love Him and no Justice for those who do not. So death became necessary as soon as Adam sinned to make it possible to correct (Love) that potential nightmare world and in order to allow a restoration of both Mercy and Justice.

When making that restoration possible, God indicated what He was about to do could restore us all (Love) to a perfect relationship with Him IN THIS LIFE (like Adam before sin) and IF we are, then that restoration in this life makes it possible to share eternally in His Happiness in the next life - Mercy. Reject that free gift IN THIS LIFE by refusing to love that which is Good (written on all our hearts) and none of that is possible - including in the next life - Justice. His act makes possible in this life a restoration for those that Love Him allowing them to then share both now and eternally in His Victory over what a man had brought into reality - death and evil.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

If we only see our heavenly Father as a Father of punishment rather than a Father of discipline(training), we only see Him through the perspective of a child, immature in seeing His purpose in discipline

If people find it offensive in what I just said, then this also is offensive to them

Heb 12:4 Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.
Heb 12:5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:
Heb 12:6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
Heb 12:7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
Heb 12:8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
Heb 12:9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
Heb 12:10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he (He) for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
Heb 12:11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

If banishment was permanent then this banishment (discipline) has no purpose

As the writer is not speaking to mankind but literally His children, am not sure those children should find those words offensive. I would agree those who do not Love Him would find those Words offensive.

Banishment always serves a purpose, it just is not redemptive. Life imprisonment, permanent ban/excile, all forms of capital punishment have a purpose - separation. And BTW those types of punishment can be just, merciful and loving - naturally since God Himself endorsed using those as one possible punishment.
Death came and is still here for us all and will be till He comes again. So from the perspective of this world death is not temporary, we are not going to evolve or discover on our own a means around it or to end it. In relation to the way this world was, death and corruption is also permanent - by itself this world will not restore to the way it was.

The escape He offers from death is not around it but through it. And He asks us to Love Him with all our Hearts in order to make it possible to join Him in that escape He offers on the other side. Yet UR is saying we are all destined to escape it anyway.

How then is it possible to go through that death He says we can overcome by Him and not escape (by Him),not overcome, only to be allowed to later to overcome it?

To me it is like saying God throws us a life ring but it does not really matter that He did what He did to make that throw possible because He is going to throw it anyway. If His plan is just to forgive us all anyway, why tell us we need to love Him with all our hearts?

 

[jugghead]

No Mercy for those that Love Him and no Justice for those who do not. So death became necessary as soon as Adam sinned to make it possible to correct (Love) that potential nightmare world and in order to allow a restoration of both Mercy and Justice.

If there are none righteous, no not one and we all fall short of the glory of God, is it righteous justice to save only some and not others if we are ALL guilty of the same thing?

 

[fatherjimparker]

DrBubbaLove said: << Yes, exactly right. I guess my point is that the traditional view requires that the banishment was/is potentially eternal and therefore one possible reality for all humans (and that realized by the damned) from which none can escape except for supernatural intervention. >>

OK....

DrBubbaLove said: << Whereas in the UR view there is no potentially eternal banishment and so nothing eternal to be saved/escape from. The only thing to be saved from is a temporary process of purification in the next life, which whatever one sees that process is, it is seen as an ongoing process of which some successfully complete in this life and others take longer with. Am not saying that the UR cannot claim supernatural intervention to allow that process, it just does not seem necessary to me in that view. It also suggests to me Hell, is seen as just a place to give some people more time. And if time is what they need to "get better" then what was the reason for removing immortality from the equation in the first place?>>

How was immortality "removed from the equation"? Are you referring to the fall?

If so, that is not the case after the resurrection; all will be raised imperishable and immortal.

 

[Hillsage]

LOL, am not sure one can prove a lack of sensitivity by claiming that someone suggesting most Christians & myself are not really Christians is equivalent to my pointing out that repeatedly taking things out of context puts that attempt at a defense of a belief on the same shaky grounds as others who do the same. It does not matter that their claim is more out there – it was not a comment about people – just the method of defending a belief/practice.
And how in your mind does this address the question of my quoted post?

It had nothing to do with addressing your question, it had to do with pointing out 'you not seeing yourself as guilty', for the very same thing you accused another of.

If banishment from God is temporary, why was it important for Adam (and by implication mankind) to no longer be capable of living forever?

Immortality has nothing to do with 'true' eternal life. They disobeyed and learned from experience the consequence of not 'living in obedience to God', and the temporal mortal results of living in deadly sin. Some lessons in life are 'taught' and learned, for some people the lesson must be 'caught' by experience.

Yes, God is also Omniscient. But if one believes that, doesn’t it also make Him cruel in not letting Adam know the banishment was only temporary?

No, it makes Him benevolent for having a plan which wouldn't be finished until the cross, thousands of years later. You amaze me. You think it "cruel of God" to not tell Adam that death was not eternal, but have no problem with a God who would torture most for eternity with no hope. Making it totally up to them if they get to enter this plan you and the Fathers say is eternal.

Assuming this is a response to my post am unclear whether you are saying Adam was NOT banished permanently with no mention of it being temporary ("no mention" not that God did not have a plan) or are you saying that Adam was not created to be eternally happy with God?

Plan or no plan wasn't the issue or lesson of man in the Garden. Obedience and fellowship was the issue, and Adam/Eve failed receiving what God told them they would...a death sentence...and banishment, which He didn't tell them about.

The openning of the Bible sets the stage and gives the reason for God needing to intervene on our behalf. Am saying if from the beginning the banishment is only temporary - we just need to be purged or learn something or however one wants to look at life/hell - then there is no need for Him to intervene. Some will love Him now the rest will get there later in Hell.
Not sure that is true perspective, since in the orthodox view the victory is already won, His Kingdom is here and now and our choices, for which He said we will be judged is here and now - not also maybe later. In fact He declares victory while still on the Cross.
No, am saying it boils down to this; if as you just suggested above, sin does not cause a permanent banishment from Good, then there was no need for Jesus to do anything. The banishment is temporary; so live how you like for tomorrow we die and nothing eternal will really happen to you. Nothing we do will have eternal consequence. Kind of like what Satan said to Eve, nothing bad will happen.

Am not saying that the UR cannot claim supernatural intervention to allow that process, it just does not seem necessary to me in that view. It also suggests to me Hell, is seen as just a place to give some people more time. And if time is what they need to "get better" then what was the reason for removing immortality from the equation in the first place?

These last two paragraphs reveal what you continually bring up, but never seem to grasp our position. Temporal vs 'true' eternity....immortality vs 'true' eternal life. I say 'true' eternal, because YOUR bibles say 'eternal' and many translations do not use the word AT ALL. A fundamental error IMO which your whole theology rests on, and ours does not. And if the foundation is wrong nothing built on it will stand final judgment.

Romans 2:7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;

Please don't answer all my post because your post, though relatively short, was still too long. I don't want to debate...but will answer your questions. Which sometimes, like now, asks a question. So please deal with this last verse and tell me what the difference is in your theology between "immortality" and "eternal life". Too much theology here is based upon swallowed 'words' which were never adequately chewed. Then, (especially when someone new comes and pukes out a big opinion filled post filled with so much 'mixed up error') there's simply no starting place to discuss anything in depth.

 

[Der Alte]

If there are none righteous, no not one and we all fall short of the glory of God, is it righteous justice to save only some and not others if we are ALL guilty of the same thing?

Mat 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
​

If they do not come to Jesus does He go take them by force?

Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. ​

When does Jesus say come unto me, now I know you?

Mat 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. ​

Where does Jesus say the "everlasting punishment" is over now you have "everlasting life?" How will those who have been punished feel about God and Jesus?

Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
​

When does Jesus uncondemn them?

Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Mat 13:50
​

When does Jesus say this will end?

Mar 9:44 [cast into hell] Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. Mar 9:46, Mar 9:48
​

When does Jesus say this will end?

Mt 18:6 “better for him [a person who offends a little one] that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

Mat 26:24 “it had been good for him [the one who betrays Jesus] if he had not been born.”

Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 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?
30 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.
31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
​

Three passages which refer to a fate worse than death.

 

[fatherjimparker]

Please pardon my excursus: how do you get the comment to which you are responding have a different background color?

I have been using font colors and some folk have objected.

 

[Hillsage]

If there are none righteous, no not one and we all fall short of the glory of God, is it righteous justice to save only some and not others if we are ALL guilty of the same thing?

I think you are seeking a YES or NO answer so I'll vote NO!.

But those with lesser vision, and a lack of understanding concerning what scripture itself calls the
"weightier matters of the law", will stand firmly at 'the end swing of their pendulum view'. A view which results in a lesser "dill and cummin" theology.

Sadly, they never fully grasp 'the full swing of the pendulum' wherein it's revealed that 'scripture is always held in tension.' Indeed, scripture which commands us to "honor your father and mother" just a few chapters earlier says; ;"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother,".

And again, in Galatians 5 Paul speaking says; "I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing." But 'in tension' with that swing of TRUTH is the corresponding opposite wherein Paul says concerning Timothy; "Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him be."

And so, even here, in this day, there are still those who would not have 'been circumcised by Paul' but with myopic eyesight and unhearing ears' would indeed have argued. And they would have done so, not from the understanding of the whole weighty swing of scriptural truth, but indeed with an understanding that most suffer from IMO. But none more than those 'educated' Pharisees of old to whom Jesus could never seem to correct in their theological error.

 

[Hillsage]

Please pardon my excursus: how do you get the comment to which you are responding have a different background color?

I have been using font colors and some folk have objected.

Left click your mouse and drag to the end of your desired text. Then go up to the color icon next to the U Underline icon. Select your color and left click it.

Hope this helps.

PS Just reread. Maybe I missed your question. This was for 'font color' and not 'background'. I don't even know the answer to that one.

 

[fatherjimparker]

If there are none righteous, no not one and we all fall short of the glory of God, is it righteous justice to save only some and not others if we are ALL guilty of the same thing?

God does not act toward mankind according to our concept of justice. In fact, He appears quite unjust in that He destroyed sin's power over all mankind to hold us in death whether we are believers or not. Both the righteous and the wicked will be raised immortal and imperishable for all eternity.

He also gives man his choice as to where he will spend that eternity; alive and united to Him as the Bride of Christ or separated from Him in the hell that we fabricate for ourselves. Those who strive to imitate God in His love and mercy are united to Him. Those who are self-willed, self-centered and self-loving suffer the loss of that relationship with Life and Love by their own choice.

So God does not punish sin by sending people to hell. He allows sinners, those who choose not to imitate Him, to choose hell rather than being united to Him.

Rom 2:6-10 (God) “will render to each one according to his deeds”: eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

God is well aware that we have a disability when it comes to fulfilling His "image and likeness" and that we all fall short of His Glory. He made us; He's aware of our flaws and does not punish us for what we cannot help doing IF we will confess and try again.

How great is His love that He does not deal with us according to justice but according to His mercy.

Whoever believes has eternal life.
Whoever does not believe, well, what you see is what you get.