Universalism and 2 thessalonians

[PastorJason]

I'm really sorry for the whole context thing... In fact I had read the whole passage, but it was those two verses that were particualrly troubling me.. I read a commentary from N.T Wright (Someone who I regard very highly in theological terms) about that particular passage and he says that Paul is also talking about how Jesus will judge at the end of the world. It's the whole "separation from God for eternity" part that I found particularly disturbing.. I mean everlasting surely means what it says right? I must admit I have only just started on the whole theological journey, so please forgive the lack of understanding of context etc... Hopefully this will improve on future posts!

Craig -

No sweat. I was just trying to point out that pulling back from a single verse or even two together into a larger view helps immensely when thinking about scripture. Other tools include taking into account who the author was, when the book was written, where it was written, to whom it was written, etc. For example, for 2 Thessalonians the author was Paul. Who was he? What was his point of view? Who were the Thessalonians? What was the previous letter to their churches about? Part of the difficulty with Paul's letters is that we don't have the letters from the churches to Paul, only the one way communication. It's like trying to figure out the fullness of a long phone conversation only by overhearing one side. We can make educated guesses at best, but even then we don't have the full context of the dialogue.

Congratulations on setting your feet on the path of "God talk". I'm sure things will get better with time, and there's no reason to apologize for not knowing. There are plenty of things I still don't know, and I pray for help with those all the time. The path of righteousness takes a lifetime, sometimes you have to look to those who have walked it a while for help, and sometimes, like me, you need to remember what it was like as I started my journey.

I'm the one who should apologize if my words caused harm.

Godspeed on your journey, and as CK already said - keep asking questions. They're good for all of us to hear, and likely someone else has the same one.

In God's Service,

PJ

 

[DaveS]

To change the message to attract more people is a gross error. Jesus never tailored His teaching to make it more acceptable. If there is a hell, there is a hell. Disbelieving in it does not make it go away any more than disbelieving in death is going to allow you to live forever. Some are turned away from the truth. That is the state of humanity. There are multitudes, however, who come to Jesus Christ without changing the message.

That is not completely what I was saying, the age old view is 'believe in God otherwise you burn in hell for eternity'. That is not going to attract people truthfully! Rather it should be 'believe in God and gain eternal life' (at least more easily).

God is love, yes, but love is not God. A person cannot know love without first knowing God. Many talk about love but few have any inkling of what it really is. Even fewer actually do it. Talk is cheap.

But that says that love is God! To know God is to know love, therefore, God must be love or at least so attached to God that it is indistinguishable. Everything God does is out of love. True, to know God is to know love but I also maintain that people can know love without knowing and labeling God. Ultimtaely, these people will get to know and label God, whether it be in this life or the next.

No one is a "good person" for their whole life. In God's consideration, good is total, absolute righteousness in all thoughts, words, and deeds. Jesus said that no one is good but God. Isaiah said we all like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way. That is why one cannot obtain salvation by good works. Our works are not good. Even when we do "good" works, they are tainted by wrong motivations, like pride, desire for recognition, guilt, or desire to impress God or other people.

This is why Jesus' sacrifice was absolutely necessary for salvation of mankind. He paid the debt of sin that we cannot pay except by eternal death. Jesus was not just a "martyr." He was atonement for us all. He made it possible through faith for us to be righteous before God through His own blood. There is no other hope for mankind, no other way to touch the One True God.

So.. NDE's?

It's a good message, but it does not bring salvation. The issue of sin and forgiveness must be addressed, DaveS. Love is a good thing, but it is only by the Holy Spirit and God's grace that we can even understand what love is much less be able to live a life of love. The world does not truly even comprehend what love is. Many think "sex" when you say "love."

True love is the kind Jesus lived, pouring out one's life for others with their highest good in mind without concern for one's self. Truly loving others will open one up to great rejection and disappointment. People are not willing to do this on their own. Only the grace of God and His Holy Spirit can enable us to exhibit that kind of love. Jesus' love brought him to the Cross. If you want to tell others about love, tell them about the Cross. That was the purest love.

Right... so we can't love and we cannot do good?

John 13:34
Matthew 25:34-40
Deuteronomy 6:4-9
Mark 28:31
Matthew 5:44
Romans 12:17-21

From a quick flick through Bible..

 

[flautist]

God is love, yes, but love is not God. A person cannot know love without first knowing God. Many talk about love but few have any inkling of what it really is. Even fewer actually do it. Talk is cheap.

However, it's not only Christians who know love. My fiance is an atheist, and he has more love for mankind than I have seen most Christians have. He is one of the most compassionate individuals I have ever met. And it's not just talk. He lives it. When asked his life goals, he always simply says, "To make a positive difference in people's lives." And he lives it, every day. That, my friends, is love.

 

[DaveS]

However, it's not only Christians who know love. My fiance is an atheist, and he has more love for mankind than I have seen most Christians have. He is one of the most compassionate individuals I have ever met. And it's not just talk. He lives it. When asked his life goals, he always simply says, "To make a positive difference in people's lives." And he lives it, every day. That, my friends, is love.

Thanks for the back-up case study!

 

[mortsmune]

However, it's not only Christians who know love. My fiance is an atheist, and he has more love for mankind than I have seen most Christians have. He is one of the most compassionate individuals I have ever met. And it's not just talk. He lives it. When asked his life goals, he always simply says, "To make a positive difference in people's lives." And he lives it, every day. That, my friends, is love.

I cannot comment on your fiance. You gave no specifics. I will admit that being a Christian does not automatically mean a person will love. I continue, however, to stand on the statement that only by God's grace can truly produce love in people. Wanting to make a difference and doing good deeds is not necessarily love. True love is absolute unselfishness. When people do good things, they are usually tainted by inner motives that are not purely selfless.

My whole point is that humans are incapable of absolute love. Therefore, doing loving things will not redeem a person. Good things cannot undo or outweigh our breaking of God's commandments. One white lie will destroy any hope of "being good enough" to go to heaven. Grace and the sacrifice of Christ are the only way we can obtain the righteousness necessary to have a true relationship with a Holy God and to enjoy His presence forever.

Your fiance may be more loving than some, maybe even most, Christians, but he is not absolutely righteous, and everything he does is not always motivated by pure love. He needs the redemption that can only come through Jesus Christ.

Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Rom 3:11 There is none that understands, there is none that seeks after God.
Rom 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that does good, no, not one.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

[mortsmune]

But that says that love is God! To know God is to know love, therefore, God must be love or at least so attached to God that it is indistinguishable. Everything God does is out of love. True, to know God is to know love but I also maintain that people can know love without knowing and labeling God. Ultimtaely, these people will get to know and label God, whether it be in this life or the next.

To say God is love is not the same thing as saying love is God. God is love, but He is not JUST love. He is righteous. He is holy. He gets angry. He is a person; an infinite and almighty person, but a person. Love is not a person. Love is an act and an attitude.

The only way to know love is to experience it firsthand. A lot of people talk about love. Few have any real understanding of what it is. To truly come to Christ in faith is to "know love." Love entails self-sacrifice, giving while expecting nothing in return. It is always willing to forgive and never reacting from self-centered concerns, never being angry over any personal hurt. It means absolute selfless giving.

 

[GreenPartyVoter]

Love entails self-sacrifice, giving while expecting nothing in return. It is always willing to forgive and never reacting from self-centered concerns, never being angry over any personal hurt. It means absolute selfless giving.

And no other major religion or philosophy teaches this?

 

[mortsmune]

Perhaps. But no other religion has a Savior who provided a complete atonement for sin and who rose physically from the dead, which resurrection was witnessed and attested to personally by some 500 hundred people.

Other religions are trying to attain the unattainable goal of absolute love, while Jesus was absolute love and as such was the personal sacrifice for our sin, bringing us full access to the throne of the Father as adopted sons and daughters with a full inheritance as such.

 

[GreenPartyVoter]

Perhaps. But no other religion has a Savior who provided a complete atonement for sin and who rose physically from the dead, which resurrection was witnessed and attested to personally by some 500 hundred people.

Other religions are trying to attain the unattainable goal of absolute love, while Jesus was absolute love and as such was the personal sacrifice for our sin, bringing us full access to the throne of the Father as adopted sons and daughters with a full inheritance as such.

However, as a liberal Christian I don't believe this. We are back to St. Peter sitting on souls (or Pastors sitting on potential church members) twisting their arm in order to get them to cry Jesus.

Faith should not be about passwords and cliques. Who is Jesus anyway but GOD. If you are an honest, fervent seeker of GOD I believe you can find Him, whether through Christianity or through another way.

 

[apenman]

Perhaps. But no other religion has a Savior who provided a complete atonement for sin and who rose physically from the dead, which resurrection was witnessed and attested to personally by some 500 hundred people.

Other religions are trying to attain the unattainable goal of absolute love, while Jesus was absolute love and as such was the personal sacrifice for our sin, bringing us full access to the throne of the Father as adopted sons and daughters with a full inheritance as such.

What you miss is the fact that the sacrifice of Christ is applicable to all people, consider the following:


1. Christ pays the price for all sin.

Understanding that the sacrifice of Christ is applicable to every person who has ever, or will ever live is "square one" in understanding scripture. If we fail to understand this point, then everything after that will just be a series of mistakes. Here is the proof-text:

1 John 2:2, "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." (NIV)

Now, let's ask the question, what is John stating here?? He says our sins, meaning Christians, and then goes on to say, not only ours but the whole world. If John was saying that the sacrifice of Christ was only paying the price for Christian sin, he would have stopped at the word our. Instead, he goes beyond the context of our, meaning Christian sin, and adds the context of all sin, being the whole world.

2. All things are place under Christ.

1 Corinthians 15:27, 'For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.' (NIV)

And:

Hebrews 2:8, 'and put everything under his feet." In putting everything under him, God left nothing that is not subject to him. Yet at present we do not see everything subject to him.' (NIV)

So, from the verses above we see that "everything" is under Christ, and that the only exception to this is God himself. This includes every single human being who has ever or will ever live.

note: Now, this is what most Christians miss, that Christ took charge of "the entire creation" from beginning to end. Christ's sacrifice is applicable to all people without exception, and this is what places "all things" under Christ, so he then becomes "Lord of all" and "judge of all" from beginning to end. So, many Christians see the whole world as going to hell, and it's only when a person believes that they come under Christ, but this is simply not accurate, the fact is all people are under Christ.

 

[mortsmune]

What you miss is the fact that the sacrifice of Christ is applicable to all people, consider the following:


1. Christ pays the price for all sin.

Understanding that the sacrifice of Christ is applicable to every person who has ever, or will ever live is "square one" in understanding scripture. If we fail to understand this point, then everything after that will just be a series of mistakes. Here is the proof-text:

1 John 2:2, "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." (NIV)

Now, let's ask the question, what is John stating here?? He says our sins, meaning Christians, and then goes on to say, not only ours but the whole world. If John was saying that the sacrifice of Christ was only paying the price for Christian sin, he would have stopped at the word our. Instead, he goes beyond the context of our, meaning Christian sin, and adds the context of all sin, being the whole world.

2. All things are place under Christ.

1 Corinthians 15:27, 'For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.' (NIV)

And:

Hebrews 2:8, 'and put everything under his feet." In putting everything under him, God left nothing that is not subject to him. Yet at present we do not see everything subject to him.' (NIV)

So, from the verses above we see that "everything" is under Christ, and that the only exception to this is God himself. This includes every single human being who has ever or will ever live.

note: Now, this is what most Christians miss, that Christ took charge of "the entire creation" from beginning to end. Christ's sacrifice is applicable to all people without exception, and this is what places "all things" under Christ, so he then becomes "Lord of all" and "judge of all" from beginning to end. So, many Christians see the whole world as going to hell, and it's only when a person believes that they come under Christ, but this is simply not accurate, the fact is all people are under Christ.

Everything "under" Christ does not mean everyone is saved. That's a big stretch.

consider this:
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

 

[apenman]

Everything "under" Christ does not mean everyone is saved. That's a big stretch.

I didn't say that everyone is saved. The sheep and the goats is the judgment of Christ, that being the judgment of the entire world, Christians and non-Christians. Now, in that judgment the goats are condemned, so not everyone is saved. However, in the sheep and the goats religious beliefs are not even mentioned, so salvation is not based on having the correct religious beliefs.

 

[mortsmune]

However, as a liberal Christian I don't believe this. We are back to St. Peter sitting on souls (or Pastors sitting on potential church members) twisting their arm in order to get them to cry Jesus.

Faith should not be about passwords and cliques. Who is Jesus anyway but GOD. If you are an honest, fervent seeker of GOD I believe you can find Him, whether through Christianity or through another way.

If by "this" you mean the sacrifice of Christ and His resurrection, then why do you even want to be called a "Christian."

As far as "twisting arms" and "passwords" and "cliques," such dramatic misrepresentation of the work of Christ is absurd and ignorant. It is certainly not a valid argument and offers no substantive statement of value.

It sounds like a lot of irrational anger and (dare I say) intolerance.

If one is an honest seeker of God, one will have to come to grips with the issue of sin and guilt. People who look every which way to find God while ignoring Jesus and the Cross and spitting on Christianity in the process can hardly be called "honest" seekers.

 

[apenman]

If by "this" you mean the sacrifice of Christ and His resurrection, then why do you even want to be called a "Christian."

As far as "twisting arms" and "passwords" and "cliques," such dramatic misrepresentation of the work of Christ is absurd and ignorant. It is certainly not a valid argument and offers no substantive statement of value.

It sounds like a lot of irrational anger and (dare I say) intolerance.

If one is an honest seeker of God, one will have to come to grips with the issue of sin and guilt. People who look every which way to find God while ignoring Jesus and the Cross and spitting on Christianity in the process can hardly be called "honest" seekers.

I have already shown you that the sacrifice of Christ is applicable to all people, and that all things are under Christ which is why the following is also true for all people, especially those who are honest seekers.

[font=Helv,Arial]The sum of the law.

[/font]If a person fulfills the sum of all laws then what else is there to do, I would say absolutely nothing, so consider the following:

Romans 13:8-10, "Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself." 10 Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." (NIV)

So, from the above we see that every command listed above, plus "whatever other command there may be" is summed up in the one command "love your neighbour as yourself". However, this law, being a part of the law of Moses, comes with a curse therefore it cannot be fulfilled, but the law of Christ, which is "love one another" is the exact same law without the curse. So, if a person fulfills the law "love one another", with Christ as the judge, then they have fulfilled every law and whatever other command there may be. So, no one is going to tell them that there is some law that they did not fulfill.

 

[GreenPartyVoter]

If by "this" you mean the sacrifice of Christ and His resurrection, then why do you even want to be called a "Christian."

Because Christ is as good an example of humanity at its best.

As far as "twisting arms" and "passwords" and "cliques," such dramatic misrepresentation of the work of Christ is absurd and ignorant. It is certainly not a valid argument and offers no substantive statement of value.

It's not dramatic. It's succinct. Christians who believe Christ is the only way to heaven see two choices: confess His name and go to Heaven, or not. (regardless of the quality of life one has led.)

It sounds like a lot of irrational anger and (dare I say) intolerance.

Not intolerant at all. I am not saying that it isn't ok to believe in Christ and the Nicene Creed. But it IS intolerant to tell oterhs they will go to Hell if they don't believe it too.

If one is an honest seeker of God, one will have to come to grips with the issue of sin and guilt. People who look every which way to find God while ignoring Jesus and the Cross and spitting on Christianity in the process can hardly be called "honest" seekers.

I am saying that you can come to grips with sin and guilt and experience the grace of God through other religions. In no way does that spit upon Christianity.

 

[mortsmune]

I didn't say that everyone is saved. The sheep and the goats is the judgment of Christ, that being the judgment of the entire world, Christians and non-Christians. Now, in that judgment the goats are condemned, so not everyone is saved. However, in the sheep and the goats religious beliefs are not even mentioned, so salvation is not based on having the correct religious beliefs.

The sheep and goats is not the only passage in the Bible on salvation. The ones I quoted before indicate believing in Jesus as the prerequisite for salvation. Take the sheep and goats story in context with the rest of scriptures. Otherwise, only those who visit prisoners, feed the hungry and clothe the naked will be saved. That would exclude most people. The Bible clearly indicates that we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus. Even Jesus Himself said that we must believe on him. He said: "For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes on Him should not perish but have everlasting life."

If you are going to give credence to Bible at all as having authority, then interpret it honestly and take things in context. Otherwise, just make up whatever beliefs you want and believe them simply because that is what you want to believe and forget about the Bible altogether. Don't pick your belief and then try to justify it by taking scriptures out of context and misinterpreting them.

 

[mortsmune]

Because Christ is as good an example of humanity at its best.

He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the father but by me." "Before Abraham was, I AM." "If you have seen me, you have seen the father." If he was not the unique son of God who died for our sins and was who He said he was, then you can't honestly say he was a good example of humanity at its best. He would be more of a megalomaniac or insane.

It's not dramatic. It's succinct. Christians who believe Christ is the only way to heaven see two choices: confess His name and go to Heaven, or not. (regardless of the quality of life one has led.)

Of course it is dramatic. Quality of life lived is the problem with all humanity. None is righteous, no, not one. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

Not intolerant at all. I am not saying that it isn't ok to believe in Christ and the Nicene Creed. But it IS intolerant to tell oterhs they will go to Hell if they don't believe it too.

It is not intolerant to tell others they will go to hell if they don't believe if that is the truth. If it is the truth, then telling people that is compassionate; not telling them is evil.

Upon what authority do you state that the hell of the Bible is not literally what is says? By what authority do you know that Christ is not the only way to salvation? He rose from the dead. Did you?

I am saying that you can come to grips with sin and guilt and experience the grace of God through other religions. In no way does that spit upon Christianity.

Other religions don't offer complete absolution of all sin through faith alone. Other religions offer things like punishing youself, being reincarnated millions of times to be rid of karma and to reach nirvana, a state of nonbeing, or dutiful adherance to rituals and obligations. I think that faith in Jesus is a much better way to reach salvation. It's as simple as can be. I don't understand why you detest the idea so much.

Use of expressions like "arm pulling" and "cliques," etc. is spitting on Christianity. What I see as compassion you are calling intolerance. What you call tolerance I call deception.

 

[FLANDIDLYANDERS]

Isn't the issue that it is only Jesus who decides who knows him and accepts him?
So isn't it better to see how much of Jesus has been revealled to others - what we have in common with them - and learn from and with those people.

 

[DaveS]

Grrr.. just lost my reply!

Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Romans 13:8-10, "Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself." 10 Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." (NIV)

As you can see, love is fulfilement of the law, the law is witness of belief. Therefore, if you love, you believe whether you know it or not.

Now onto the baptism bit which is, of course, symbolic.

If by "this" you mean the sacrifice of Christ and His resurrection, then why do you even want to be called a "Christian."

As far as "twisting arms" and "passwords" and "cliques," such dramatic misrepresentation of the work of Christ is absurd and ignorant. It is certainly not a valid argument and offers no substantive statement of value.

It sounds like a lot of irrational anger and (dare I say) intolerance.

If one is an honest seeker of God, one will have to come to grips with the issue of sin and guilt. People who look every which way to find God while ignoring Jesus and the Cross and spitting on Christianity in the process can hardly be called "honest" seekers.

Ahh.. now we've got to the bit where it is suggested that someobe is not a proper Christian.. who are we to judge?

Everything "under" Christ does not mean everyone is saved. That's a big stretch.

Everyone is potentially saved. Why would Christ go around going.. right I'll pick you... and you.. Besides, Christianity started when Christ died and rose again, free will dictates and Christianity dictates that anyone can become Christian, therefore, everyone had to be saved.

 

[GreenPartyVoter]

If you are going to give credence to Bible at all as having authority, then interpret it honestly and take things in context. Otherwise, just make up whatever beliefs you want and believe them simply because that is what you want to believe and forget about the Bible altogether. Don't pick your belief and then try to justify it by taking scriptures out of context and misinterpreting them.

All Christians pick and choose. It is a question of the degree to which they do this. Some churches hold to Levitical law down the line, others serve pork and lobster at their Sunday School picnics.