Universalism and 2 thessalonians

[FLANDIDLYANDERS]

This does not necessary mean they have been 'churched'; rather, it incoperates anyone who has received the fullness of the revelation of God and have rejected it

agreed!

 

[Raphael777]

Actually, scripture makes it quite clear that God alone is immortal, and there is no evidence, at all, that any of the people going into the lake of fire were able to eat from the tree of life, and therefore live forever. So, it is far more likely that they are simply destroyed, and that in itself is an eternal punishment. No, there is no heresy here.

Also, which verse 11 are you refering to above??

However, in Jewish mythology, Adam and Eve - in a state of original holiness and justice - were created and were intended originally to be immortal, and only became mortal by choosing to eat from 'the tree of knowledge of good and evil' (Genesis 2:17)? Death makes an it entrance into human history through this 'original sin' (cf. Romans 6:12).

Moreover, Christianity has constantly maintained that our souls are immortal. St. Augustine, for example, in "The City of God"asserts that "[the soul] is therefore called immortal, because in a sense, it does not cease to live and to feel..." 1 Samuel 28, Luke 16:19-30 and 1 Peter 3:19 (a reference to the limbo of the Fathers) validate the existence of the immortality of the soul, even of the damned.

Eating from the 'tree of life' - a reference to the tree in the primeval paradise (Genesis 2:9) - symbolically refers to the eternal life which rewards the saints, not to the immortality of the soul. The souls of the damned are still immortal, even though they do not, metaphorically speaking, 'feed' off the tree of life.

Verse 10 (what i meant to say) is from chapter 20 of the Book of Revelation, which refers to the pool of fire and sulpur, where the Devil, the beast, the false prophet (v. 10) and those whose name was not found written in the book of life in 'Death and Hades' (v. 14) are 'tormented day and night forever and ever' (Revelation 20:10).

My reference to the concept of annihilation as 'heresy' stems from the belief of the Early Church in the eternal nature of hell, and their labelling of such notions like annihilation as heresy - including Origenism (attributed to Origen though it appears to represent his thought only in part), which was condemned at the Council of Constantinople (AD 553). Origenism contained the belief in the final release of all sinners from hell. The position of the Early Church is clear:

St. Ignatius of Antioch asserts, 'A man become so foul will depart into unquenchable fire: and so will anyone who listens to him' (Letter to the Ephesians[A.D. 110]).

Second Clement: 'If we do the will of Christ, we shall obtain rest; but if not, if we neglect his commandments, nothing will rescue us from eternal punishment' (Second Clement [A.D. 150]).

And St. Justin Martyr..."No more is it possible for the evildoer, the avaricious, and the treacherous to hide from God than it is for the virtuous. Every man will receive the eternal punishment or reward which his actions deserve. Indeed, if all men recognized this, no one would choose evil even for a short time, knowing that he would incur the eternal sentence of fire. On the contrary, he would take every means to control himself and to adorn himself in virtue, so that he might obtain the good gifts of God and escape the punishments" (First Apology [A.D. 151]).

"We have been taught that only they may aim at immortality who have lived a holy and virtuous life near to God. We believe that they who live wickedly and do not repent will be punished in everlasting fire".

"[Jesus] shall come from the heavens in glory with his angelic host, when he shall raise the bodies of all the men who ever lived. Then he will clothe the worthy in immortality; but the wicked, clothed in eternal sensibility, he will commit to the eternal fire, along with the evil demons".

In the Martyrdom of Polycarp, it is stated, "Fixing their minds on the grace of Christ, [the martyrs] despised worldly tortures and purchased eternal life with but a single hour. To them, the fire of their cruel torturers was cold. They kept before their eyes their escape from the eternal and unquenchable fire" (Martyrdom of Polycarp [A.D. 155]).

 

[apenman]

Ya, whatever! There is no real scriptural evidence for what you are saying. Scripture states clearly that God alone is immortal:

1 Timothy 6:15-16 15 which God will bring about in his own time -- God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen. (NIV)

And the KJ:

1 Timothy 6:15-16 15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen. (KJV)

 

[Raphael777]

Ya, whatever! There is no real scriptural evidence for what you are saying. Scripture states clearly that God alone is immortal:

1 Timothy 6:15-16 15 which God will bring about in his own time -- God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen. (NIV)

And the KJ:

1 Timothy 6:15-16 15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen. (KJV)

Are you denying the immorality of the soul? By extension, the saints can therefore never attain 'eternal life', since, having 'mortal' souls, they would truly die at death. What then can be made of biblical passages that speak of the immortality of humans (cf. Romans 2:7; 1 Corinthians 15:53)? Also, is the difference between 'is' and 'hath' [has] in the above quotation significant? God, the Son, 'hav[ing]' immortality, implies that He possesses it and is its source, which is something I do not deny. God is immortal, but Scripture implies that God bestows an immortal soul into every human.

 

[apenman]

Are you denying the immorality of the soul?

The soul is only immortal if God provides eternal life, it comes from God at that point.

Romans 2:6-7 6 God "will give to each person according to what he has done." 7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. (NIV)

It states, "he will give eternal life", not that he has already made the soul immortal.

1 Corinthians 15:52-57, "in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: "Death has been swallowed up in victory." 55 "Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?" 56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." (NIV)

It is at the point of transformation that the saying becomes true, not before. The soul is not created immortal, it becomes immortal when God provides that immortality.

 

[Rev. Smith]

There is one atheist who stayed atheist even though he met God. There are some who turn to Budism. It's really varied. That's what adds to the credibility.

why it is an argument for open theism, If God is everywhere and in all things, then why did his primary revelations come only to the Jews? The first is easy to understand - they were the choosen peopel. But why did Jesus only preach in Palestine (and if we accept the Mormon testimony - in North America)?

In other words, if the Buddhists and Muslims have it wrong - why didn't God choose make a new covenant with them, as he did with the Jewish, Greek and Pagen medditeranian world?

One answer - because they already have truth, are already saved.

Universalism implies open theism, and the near death data your report seems to support that.

Can we as Christians endure if we are "a" truth, instead of "the" truth?

 

[Multi-Elis]

I often think the issue of universalism is built upon the false notion that an eternal hell contradicts one of God's most important attributes, His goodness

This is a good point--to some extent. I share your understanding that those who go to hell do so out of free-will, because they prefer their selfishness to Love. But it is the eternal character that doesn't match God's goodness. Actually, one can speculate: When you are caught in a trance of selfishness or in a trance of being addicted, (by trance I mean you are so involved you don't notice any thing else) one can really wonder when the person will get out of the trance enough to see that their situation is extremely bad and that they need salvation. But consider this:

For many years, I had no clue who this man Jesus Christ was. Oh, I was raised up to be a Christian alright ... but I never really understood who Christ really was until after my experience. I found too many in Christianity come off as haughty and oppressive ... and because of this ... I wanted to distance myself as far away from the faith as I could! But in the process, I also distanced my self from Jesus, The teacher of Love and that was unfortunate! It was not Jesus' fault that so many who 'said' they subscribed to the Lord of Love's ways ... came off acting like they had a board up their backside! Perhaps if I had had better examples of Christ-Love as a child, I would have understood the Lord when I was first taught to believe in him, but that was not in the cards for me.

So now, I never EVER judge anyone if they are unsure about what they feel when it comes to God, Christ or the Bible.

That is part of the testamony of a NDE. It shows that some people reject God for the wrong reasons. In rejecting God, they don't benifit as much from the help God offers, that would otherwise help a person choose to Love. So they are almost in a hopeless state. I cannot accept that God's goodness would send people "eternally" to hell because they made some bad decisions. I can accept that they stay in hell untill they make a right decision, or some other help comes along.

What about the Cross? What about the great suffering of the Son of God? Do you believe it was for nought? That Jesus of Nazareth was some sort of cosmic Fool?

I think we answerd this. Each according to his(her) personal revelation. Mine is on page 9.

Can we as Christians endure if we are "a" truth, instead of "the" truth?

Rev. Smith, I realy like your thinking here. I don't know if christians have the truth or a truth. Based on NDE's it seems as if the Son of God does exist and does welcome us home at death. He is Love. Now some may call him Budha or Apollo, but I don't think it has as much to do with His name as with His existance. If we call Him Jesus because we know (by whatever standard) that he walked on earth 2000 years ago, it is hard to see if we have the truth or a truth.

I don't agree with what I see as Islam taken litterally. That is, if Islam is defined by the book, then parts of it are good and parts aren't. For me an honest seeking muslum who tries with his whole heart to seek God and do what He asked, is doing something different than following the dogma. I think God is most concerned with that diference.

It is the same with atheists. They may, for some reason or another reject the idea of the existance of God. But the existance of morality, love, kindness, goodness, and a certain spirituality certainly exist amongst the serious. It is already amazing that some believe in all this love, when they believe we arrived here on earth by accident. I think that God is more concerned with how they live out their atheism than some dogma on whether God exists or not.

Actually, I tend to believe we have points of view on the truth. We see different parts. We can have a more or less distorted view of the truth, See broder or narrower parts of the truth, but still it is a point of view.

I came accross a passage in my history of the church book that might shed some light on the problem:

We must not confound truth with dogma. Truth is the divine substance, doctrine or dogma is the human apprehension and statement of it; truth is a life-giving power, dogma a logical formula; truth is infinite, unchanging and eternal ; dogma is finite changeable and perfetible.

That's fromSchaff's history of the christian church, volume 1 page 512.
I think that our intellectual way of perceving the truth is our own personal dogma or doctrine. We can't do with out, if we want to process the truth, but we often don't really need it to live the truth.
Maybe a lot of christianity (apostles, christian teachers, even NDE's testamonies) is just a way to understand, or process the truth, but many outside christianity still live it.

 

[Raphael777]

It is at the point of transformation that the saying becomes true, not before. The soul is not created immortal, it becomes immortal when God provides that immortality.

But I thought you said only God is immortal, so you have directly contradicted yourself...
It also does not explain why, in Jesus parable, Lazarus' damned soul existed after His death (Luke 16:19-31) and was not annihilated...

 

[apenman]

But I thought you said only God is immortal, so you have directly contradicted yourself...
It also does not explain why, in Jesus parable, Lazarus' damned soul existed after His death (Luke 16:19-31) and was not annihilated...

Only God is immortal, he gives us eternal life, which is not exactly the same thing. I used the word immortal because I was quoting the verse, nothing more. To be immortal means to have always existed, no beginning, no end, we have a beginning, so in that context we are not immortal.

 

[DaveS]

Someone shoot this thread quick, it is getting to long!

Digging up the last direct post to me I had:

To quote St. John Damascene, 'There is no repentance for the angels after their fall, just as there is no repentance for men after death'.

In that, St' John Damascene made a rather large assumption. How can you compare angels and humans experiences? You can't.

The angels rejected God knowing for certain that He exists. In this it is a mortal sin as they tried to replace God.
A non-Christian simply believes something else having not personally 'seen' God.

How can you compare these?!

 

[Raphael777]

Multi-Elis, I would argue that those who have rejected God for the wrong reasons, through no fault of their own but through the fault of others who did not evangalise in accordance with the truth, have not culpably rejected God and therefore are not damned. St. Peter records that Jesus 'preach[ed] to the spirits in prison' (1 Peter 3:19) - understood as the 'limbo of the Fathers' by St. Thomas Aquinas - who did not possess or have knowledge of the fullness of God's revelation, which was brought by Jesus. Possibly, a similar situation occurs upon death for those who have not known or who have not possessed the 'fullness' of knowledge of the Gospel???? (just an idea, not too sure about it though...)

I also don't think the damned soul can repent, by the very reason of their persistant state of hatred for and rejection of God. I also don't believe repentence is possible after death, since 'between [heaven and hell] a great gulf has been fixed, to prevent those who want to cross from [heaven] to [hell] or from [hell] to [heaven].' (Luke 16:26) Our life is the opportunity to make this decision.

 

[Raphael777]

Only God is immortal, he gives us eternal life, which is not exactly the same thing. I used the word immortal because I was quoting the verse, nothing more. To be immortal means to have always existed, no beginning, no end, we have a beginning, so in that context we are not immortal.

Our body certainly had a beginning at conception. When you mean 'we', i am assuming that a human being consists of soul and body, not just soul, not just body. In this sense, i would certainly argue that humans have their beginning at conception, the point at which the soul is infused. However, in Jeremiah, it states, 'Before i formed you in the womb, i knew you; before you came to birth i consecrated you...' (Jeremiah 1:5) which implies that our souls existed before conception. Moreover, Christianity understands the immortality of the soul to be 'that quality or attribute of the soul by reason of which it cannot die', not 'to have always existed'. Maybe our different of the interpretation of the term is partially why we are disagreeing.

Also, I need an answer to my Lazarus enquiry...

 

[apenman]

However, in Jeremiah, it states, 'Before i formed you in the womb, i knew you; before you came to birth i consecrated you...' (Jeremiah 1:5) which implies that our souls existed before conception.

No! This is simply a reference to God's view from outside of time, in the context that he knows the end from the beginning. From the context of any point inside of time God can also see the end, and he therefore knows his people including the above reference.

Moreover, Christianity understands the immortality of the soul to be 'that quality or attribute of the soul by reason of which it cannot die', not 'to have always existed'. Maybe our different of the interpretation of the term is partially why we are disagreeing.

No, we disagree because what you are saying is not correct, or at least there is no real basis for this in scripture. In a similar example, it is believed by many Christians that angels do not have souls or freewill, yet the evidence in scripture is entirely the opposite, so people believing a certain thing means little to me.

Also, I need an answer to my Lazarus enquiry...

The lake of fire, which is second death, occurs after final judgment, the lazarus story is pre final judgment. All the dead who will be condemned, the goats, are kept until final judgment, they have a right to be judged. Then, after that judgment comes the lake of fire.

 

[Mailman Dan]

Furthermore, there are many who reject Christ only because he is misrepesented by religion, especially the Christian religion, and they too will be judged under the law of Christ the same as everyone, and if their faith fulfills that law then they are fine.

Thats probably as far from the Christian faith as you can get.


The BIBLE says, no one can keep the law, and no one is "good."

Romans 3:19-20

Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.


You can not fulill the law, and every christian should understand that. It's the law that tells us why Christ died for us.

Romans 6:14
For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.

Those "In Christ" are no longer under the law, but grace, because Christ paid our fine.


Romans 2:15
since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.

Even non-christians won't have an excuse for sin, because the conscience tells them it's wrong to lie, steal, use God's name as a curse word, hate/murder, ect...


Galatians 3:24

Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.





It shows us why we need Christ. Without payment for sin through Christ blood, we pay for it ourselves in the lake of fire, reguardless of ones "beliefs" if the bible is true on that subject.


Revelation 14:10,11 tells us the final, eternal destiny of the those still under the law and found to be in their sins: "He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone...the smoke of their torment ascended up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day or night."





Believe whatever you wish, but thats what it says. If you ignore it, it still exist.






Dan~~~>hopes you understand why Christ payment was so important

 

[Chrysalis Kat]

Dan -
Do you understand the difference between referrences to OT Law and referrences to the Law of Christ?

 

[Rev. Smith]

Reading Dan's post reminded me of a phenomina I've observed. Many Protestants seem to be members of the religion of Paul, ratrher than Christ. We are all Christians, yet not one quote from Jesus of Nazareth in the list.

What the Apostles had to say was important, but only as it supports the teaching of Christ. In the case of Paul, he is the first of the inheritor Apostles, an Apostle by appointment of the Church rather than selection be Jesus, and in fact never met the man.

So, Dan - we have an excellent view of Paul's vison of salvation - but what did Jesus teach? (somthing about sheep and goats clangs around in my head)

 

[apenman]

Hi Dan!!

You need to learn the difference between the law of Christ and the law of Moses. Under the law of Moses "all have sinned", "no one is righteous, no not one", and "all our righteousness is like filthy rags". The law of Moses requires a standard of perfection, and as none of us are perfect, except Christ, we all fail.

The law of Christ however is a completely different law, it's standard is mercy not perfection, and it can be fulfilled by any human being because the sacrifice of Christ is applicable to every human being.

James 2:12-13, "Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, 13 because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment!" (NIV)

So, remember Dan, when someone is talking about the law of Christ they are talking about the law, "love one another", not the law of Moses, and under that law, "Mercy triumphs over judgment!"

Peace!

 

[mortsmune]

OK, let's go back to square one here:

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)

The sacrifice of Christ is the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the whole world. If one does not understand this, then one does not understand the sacrifice of Christ. It is not "potentially applicable" to everyone, but only applied to those who believe, this is completely inaccurate.

You are again ignoring a plethora of scripture in making this statement. Yes, Jesus died for the whole world, but scripture is clear that it is by FAITH we are saved. Whosoever BELIEVES on Him shall not perish, etc., etc., etc.

When Christ died on the cross, and rose from the dead, he paid the price for all sin, without exception, and that sacrifice was applicable to all, right then and there, for all time. Now, this does not mean that all are saved, instead it means that all will answer to Christ. In fact, it is this sacrifice, and the fact that it is applicable to all, that makes him "Lord of all", and judge of all, and he is the only judge.

Now you seem to be contradicting yourself.

Now, all things are placed under him, which includes every single human being, from beginning to end, and Satan and all his followers, Christ in fact judges them all. The issue for all people then is, who has lived by faith, because it is a righteousness that is by faith "from first to last" which means the same standard will be applied to all people.

What do you mean by "lived by faith"? At its very root and essence, faith is believing (Greek: pistis=faith; pisteuo=believe same root meaning).

This is why we don't see any judgment in scripture in which people are judged by what they believed, because the same standard will be applied to all, and this includes those who lived before Christ. Furthermore, there are many who reject Christ only because he is misrepesented by religion, especially the Christian religion, and they too will be judged under the law of Christ the same as everyone, and if their faith fulfills that law then they are fine.

If you know someone who has lived a life of perfect love. I would like to meet them. On the one hand you say that Jesus' sacrifice saves all men; on the other hand you say that only those who love will be saved. Which is it?

Faith is expressed as love

This is not true. Faith is believing and trusting. Love is a fruit of faith produced only by the Holy Spirit. There is a difference.

love is the fullfillment of the law, that being the law of Christ, and all are judged the same under that law becuase the sacrifice of Christ is applicable to all. If one does not understand this, then one cannot possibly understand salvation.

The problem with your assertion is that people don't love naturally, not truly love. They may do humanitarian or seemingly compassionate things, but all humanly motivated acts are tainted with sin and selfish motivations. Only the Holy Spirit can motivate us to true love. The Bible does not say that we are saved by loving. It says we are justified, forgiven, and saved by believing on Christ. This is what grace is all about. You have a very strange belief.

 

[apenman]

You are again ignoring a plethora of scripture in making this statement. Yes, Jesus died for the whole world, but scripture is clear that it is by FAITH we are saved. Whosoever BELIEVES on Him shall not perish, etc., etc., etc.

No, I am not ignoring them, I simply understand what they mean.

Now you seem to be contradicting yourself.

I have been entirely consistant, I am not a universalist and never said that everyone is saved. Instead, I said the the sacrifice of Christ is applicable to all, which makes everyone answerable to Christ.

What do you mean by "lived by faith"? At its very root and essence, faith is believing (Greek: pistis=faith; pisteuo=believe same root meaning).

I will explain below where you disagree that faith is expressed through love, which it is.

If you know someone who has lived a life of perfect love. I would like to meet them.

It is only the law of Moses that demands perfection, the law of Christ does not, so no one has to live a perfect life of love.

On the one hand you say that Jesus' sacrifice saves all men; on the other hand you say that only those who love will be saved. Which is it?

I never said that the sacrifice of Christ saves all men.

This is not true. Faith is believing and trusting. Love is a fruit of faith produced only by the Holy Spirit. There is a difference. The problem with your assertion is that people don't love naturally, not truly love. They may do humanitarian or seemingly compassionate things, but all humanly motivated acts are tainted with sin and selfish motivations. Only the Holy Spirit can motivate us to true love. The Bible does not say that we are saved by loving. It says we are justified, forgiven, and saved by believing on Christ. This is what grace is all about. You have a very strange belief.

OK, so I said that faith is expressed as love and above you say that this is not true, so let's consider the following scripture:

Galatians 5:6, "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love." (NIV)

So, the only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love. This is what I said, that faith is expressed as love, or through love, which you said is not true. Now, I am certain that you will say that this only counts for those who are in Christ, and I will say that this counts for everyone because the sacrifice of Christ is applicable to everyone.

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, everything is under Christ, and this includes every single human being past, present and future. We simply do not see everything subject to him, but this does not change the fact.

So, all things are under Christ because his sacrifice is applicable to all, then faith is expressed through love, and love is the fulfillment of the law, that being the law of Christ. Now, in the sheep and the goats the sheep fulfilled that law, the goats did not, so the sheep are saved and the goats are not.

 

[ahab]

The law of Moses isnt the only covenant God made with people.

The law of Christ isnt a law like in the OT law but living by the Holy Spirit, Christ fulfils the law and the prophets. Paul refers to an example of this when he uses this example in Gal 6, to restore a brother. (love one another as Jesus has loved) The law of Christ however is not just to love one another, otherwise that would be just a reinforcement of the OT law "to love our neighbour" and back to the legalism of the law. Christ is our salvation Acts 4:12 etc, Christ is our righteouness Rom 3:22 etc, Christ is our holiness and our redemption 1 Cor 1:30, Christ is our healer 1 Peter 2:24, Christ is our Lord God. God has come and made His dwelling among men by His Holy Spirit and His word Eph 2 & 3.

Christ came so that all men might know Him and live through Him. They might but they dont, He can't be the life truth and way for us if we reject Him and He cant dwell in us if we dont let Him.