Universalism VS. Scripture

[Martinez]

No, under the paradigm I am discussing any punishment in hell is self-inflicted. If you want me to explain further just ask.



Please do.


Your God has jell-o for legs.



No my God is very mighty to the point where can save everyone, even if He must sacrifice himself in my place to do it!
So am I to understand that you equate ones ability to reek vengence on his enemies as strength!


Yes, and applied typologically Hinnom represents the real "place" or "state" known as Gehenna.


More details of this view if you would.


John was applying the word "Hades" to a particular Jewish understanding of the afterlife. So?

true,

the understanding of some of the Jews was that there wasn't one!

 

[Scholar in training]

Please do.

It is somewhat comparable to how C.S. Lewis viewed hell. The unrighteous would try to get away from God's presence (but never actually succeed in doing so), not because of external torment, but because they are shamed to be in the very presence of the God they had denied. Any shame would have resulted from the person's actions and in that sense any torture (mental or otherwise) the person undergoes would be self-inflicted.

Indeed, who is to say that the wicked would not experience God's love and mistake it for vengeance? What if they see hell as a sort of "paradise" because they do not have to experience the direct presence of the God they obviously wouldn't want to be around?

No my God is very mighty to the point where can save everyone, even if He must sacrifice himself in my place to do it!

He is so mighty that he only has to sacrifice our free will to do it, and he apparently "loves" his creation so much that he is unwilling to judge them.

So am I to understand that you equate ones ability to reek vengence on his enemies as strength!

No, and I certainly don't call it bloodlust, if that is what you mean by "vengeance".

More details of this view if you would.

Even though the valley of Ben Hinnom is not literally "hell", it does represent the reality of the "place" or "state" of hell.

the understanding of some of the Jews was that there wasn't one!

Which ones?

 

[Martinez]

It is somewhat comparable to how C.S. Lewis viewed hell. The unrighteous would try to get away from God's presence (but never actually succeed in doing so), not because of external torment, but because they are shamed to be in the very presence of the God they had denied. Any shame would have resulted from the person's actions and in that sense any torture (mental or otherwise) the person undergoes would be self-inflicted.


yeah I've heard that before.



Indeed, who is to say that the wicked would not experience God's love and mistake it for vengeance? What if they see hell as a sort of "paradise" because they do not have to experience the direct presence of the God they obviously wouldn't want to be around?



there's no scripture to back that up!
i'ts pure make believe, along the lines of something like the theory of evolution.




He is so mighty that he only has to sacrifice our free will to do it, and he apparently "loves" his creation so much that he is unwilling to judge them.



so by casting someone into a lake of fire against their will, he is honouring their free will?
and who ever said that God does not judge our sin?
its certainly not me.



No, and I certainly don't call it bloodlust, if that is what you mean by "vengeance".


It is totally irrelivent what we call it, as to what it actually is.






Which ones?

I've have read it, but can't remember.
I'll have to track that down for you.

 

[Mailman Dan]

If you take the lake of fire to be a literal lake of fire, then you must also take everything else in that book literaly aswell, and as you know that would be totally ridiculous.

Such as God is Love? (which doesn't appear in any scripture...btw) God's wrath appears many times in scripture, He began sending judgement after judgement against those who lived in sin. At one point, flooding the whole earth. (though some deny that too)

To answer your question, hell and the lake of fire are two different things. Those in hell will end up in the lake of fire, like the bible says.


However, your saying I don't interperate the words correctly. How do you translate these? (please no stupid cut and paste aguements from blogs, nutty fruit cake sites, or sites that claim the bible is wrong)

Revelation 21:8
But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

Revelation 14:10,11
"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."

Even though there are numerous other verses that describe hell, I want to know why you think these are wrong. Universalism conflicts directly with these two, if in fact everyone would be saved.

Dan~~~>glad the Christmas rush is over

 

[God_of_Mercy]

Minor point

Such as God is Love? (which doesn't appear in any scripture...btw)

1 John 4:8
Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

 

[Charlie V]

1 John 4:8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

"God is Love," of course, appears in the Bible, but apparently it's been removed from some people's Bibles.

The Bible does speak of wrath though. For example:

Romans 5:8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. 10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. 11 And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned-- 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man's offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man's offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.)
18 Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous.
20 Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, 21 so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

[Scholar in training]

there's no scripture to back that up!

No, but it is reasoned from the data we do have in Scripture about hell. I am not necessarily saying it is true; it is anecdotal at the least. Do you disagree with the reasoning?

i'ts pure make believe, along the lines of something like the theory of evolution.

That discussion is for another thread, but evolution is certainly not make believe.

so by casting someone into a lake of fire against their will, he is honouring their free will?

Well like I said -- would the unrighteous even want to be in the presence of God? Could they bear it?

and who ever said that God does not judge our sin?
its certainly not me.

If he judges our sin in this life, why would he refrain from doing so in the next? Will God condemn us, or will we condemn ourselves?

It is totally irrelivent what we call it, as to what it actually is.

I agree. But my point was that I don't think it is "bloodlust".

I've have read it, but can't remember.
I'll have to track that down for you.

Ok.

 

[Charlie V]

Your God has jell-o for legs.

I'm not sure who made this claim, of a God with Jell-o for legs, but that's quite impossible.

Just a little bit of research reveals that Jell-o brand geletin was first invented in 1897.

http://www.kraftfoods.com/jello/main.aspx?s=&m=jlo_family_gelatin

Since God is quite a bit older than the year 1897, this false doctrine of the Jell-o leg God is quite impossible.

I've not read the previous posts, so I'm not sure if someone actually claimed this about God, or if this is a straw man argument..

Charlie

 

[ottaia]

I'm not sure who made this claim, of a God with Jell-o for legs, but that's quite impossible.

Just a little bit of research reveals that Jell-o brand geletin was first invented in 1897.

http://www.kraftfoods.com/jello/main.aspx?s=&m=jlo_family_gelatin

Since God is quite a bit older than the year 1897, this false doctrine of the Jell-o leg God is quite impossible.

I've not read the previous posts, so I'm not sure if someone actually claimed this about God, or if this is a straw man argument..

Charlie

So, would God's Jell-o legs have to change with the liturgical season? You know, God would have blueberry legs for Advent and White grape for the Christmas season/

 

[mark53]

However, your saying I don't interperate the words correctly. How do you translate these? (please no stupid cut and paste aguements from blogs, nutty fruit cake sites, or sites that claim the bible is wrong)

Dan~~~>glad the Christmas rush is over

So you only want quotes from places and sites that you agree with! How can one argue or discuss a pont if you only want infor from one side of an arguement!!

 

[Scholar in training]

So you only want quotes from places and sites that you agree with!

When has Dan quoted a lengthy, pre-written response that goes into more detail than is needed?

 

[Martinez]

Such as God is Love? (which doesn't appear in any scripture...btw) God's wrath appears many times in scripture, He began sending judgement after judgement against those who lived in sin. At one point, flooding the whole earth. (though some deny that too)

To answer your question, hell and the lake of fire are two different things. Those in hell will end up in the lake of fire, like the bible says.


However, your saying I don't interperate the words correctly. How do you translate these? (please no stupid cut and paste aguements from blogs, nutty fruit cake sites, or sites that claim the bible is wrong)




Sorry Dan,

I havn't heard anyone say that the Bible is wrong,
just that man is wrong!
would it be the first time in biblical histiory?
it sounds like you put alot of faith in the traditions of Men.
Your right! Hades is the Grave and the lake of fire is where God purifies those who are unclean, and have not died to the flesh.
thus the name the second death!


Revelation 21:8
But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”


Question!

If the lake of fire is not symbolic rather than literal, will there be literal horsemen reeking death and destruction?
and,
if it is literal, why does God have to use brimstone with his fire?
and of corse, I know you probably understand that brimstone is symbolic for purefication as understood by the greeks!
and if anyway if your just going to punish people by burning them alive, then why get all sybolic about it?


Revelation 14:10,11
"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."


Good point Dan!

I thought that blackest darkness was prepared for those who reject Christ.
but talking in terms of night and day, certainly sounds like temperal periods of time to Me or anyone else with any hint of entelligence.
I'm sure you have had the translation issues with "forever and ever" disscused with you before, so I won't bother!



also I could tell you why God doesn't use fear tactics to bring people into the Church, it has alot to do with Knowing who He is!
but that is for another day.



Even though there are numerous other verses that describe hell, I want to know why you think these are wrong. Universalism conflicts directly with these two, if in fact everyone would be saved.

n~~~>glad the Christmas rush is over

Yeah, even though those have been refuted time and time again,
you thought you would hand on to them anyway, just so you could say that youv'e got them.

fortunately Dan,

the "Helll Strawman" (or should I just call it what is, that religous Scarecrow)
is not standing up to the test of fire, and People are starting to see the complete gospel.

 

[Martinez]

When has Dan quoted a lengthy, pre-written response that goes into more detail than is needed?

Why are you rushing to Dan's defence?


would He rush to your's regarding your belief in evolution?

 

[Martinez]

No, but it is reasoned from the data we do have in Scripture about hell. I am not necessarily saying it is true; it is anecdotal at the least. Do you disagree with the reasoning?




Yes,
obviously!




That discussion is for another thread, but evolution is certainly not make believe.




so then,
which other parts of the bible do you not believe then,
Hhmmmmm?





Well like I said -- would the unrighteous even want to be in the presence of God? Could they bear it?




oh but I thought they were Cast into the lake fire!





If he judges our sin in this life, why would he refrain from doing so in the next? Will God condemn us, or will we condemn ourselves?




Agreed.

He wouldn't, and that's not what universal restoration teaches.






I agree. But my point was that I don't think it is "bloodlust".






Vengece is bloodlust!
pure and simple.

 

[Scholar in training]

Yes, obviously!

Do you care to explain why?

so then, which other parts of the bible do you not believe then, Hhmmmmm?

It's not a matter of unbelief. If anything your God is deceptive to make the earth 10,000 years ago or less even though it appears old when we test the earth's age.

oh but I thought they were Cast into the lake fire!

That doesn't say anything about whether they would want to be in the presence of God.

He wouldn't, and that's not what universal restoration teaches.

Then tell me what your God does to the unrighteous after death.

Vengece is bloodlust!
pure and simple.

Micah 5:15
I will take vengeance in anger and wrath upon the nations that have not obeyed me."

Your God must be very unpredictable. At one moment he is all-loving and the next he desires vengeance, what you define as the torture of his creation.

Why are you rushing to Dan's defence?

It's not about defending Dan, but it is about defending truth, wherever one finds it.

would He rush to your's regarding your belief in evolution?

Irrelevant, and the theory of evolution is not a belief. I accept the theory of evolution.

 

[Charlie V]

That doesn't say anything about whether they would want to be in the presence of God.

Isn't God omnipresent?

Psa 139:7 Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? Or whither shall I flee from thy presence?
Psa 139:8 If I ascend to heaven, thou art there! If I make my bed in Sheol, thou art there!

Also, what if they want to be joyous in the presence of the Buddah?

What if they want to be back on Earth, alive in their Earthly bodies?

What if a person doesn't believe God exists, but wants to be in the arms of his beloved wife who died last year (and unknown to that person, went to heaven?)

If they get what they choose by free will, what about those things?

Is it really about what we want? May be, when I die, I want to be in Metropolis under the names "Clark Kent" and "Superman."

How about this one..

What if a person believes in the orthodox Christian God, but wants to continue living on Earth because he doesn't want to leave his wife a sorrowful widow? Will God repair his body and keep him alive, because of his free will?

Also..

oh but I thought they were Cast into the lake fire!

That doesn't say anything about whether they would want to be in the presence of God.

True. It also doesn't say anything about whether they would want to be in the lake of fire. It would be most logical to assume they do not want to be in the lake of fire, unless of course the lake of fire is a wonderful place to be. Assuming the lake of fire is a terrible place to be, they probably do not want to be there, unless, of course, they are insane or ignorant of what the lake of fire is.

Charlie

 

[Charlie V]

(please no stupid cut and paste aguements from blogs, nutty fruit cake sites, or sites that claim the bible is wrong)

I, myself, have never done that, posting a copy and paste (note: When retrieving from a website, it's generally copy and paste, not cut and paste.) from a nutty fruit cake site, but just for fun, I thought I would..

http://www.nutiva.com/nutrition/recipes/fruitcake.php

Nutty Fruit Cake Ingredients:

1 cup sweet butter
1 to 1 1/2 cups sugar
4 eggs
salt
2 teaspoons baking powder
1 2/3 cups whole wheat
1 1/4 cups hemp flour
1/2 cup milk
1 cup raisins
1 cup candied ginger
1 cup dried fruit (cherries, blueberries, or apricots)
1 cup nuts (walnuts, hazelnuts, or pecan)
1/2 cup toasted hulled hempseeds

Directions:

Slowly melt butter in pan and mix with sugar.

Mix in eggs and milk and add salt.

Combine wheat and hemp flours with baking powder and slowly add into butter/sugar/milk/egg mixture.

Stir until smooth and mix in other ingredients.

Spread in greased bread pan and bake at 350 F (180 C) for one hour.


PS:
Note that not once in this recipe does it call for casting the fruit cake into a lake of fire! Nor does the recipe call for baking it at 350 F for all eternity.

Charlie

 

[Martinez]

Do you care to explain why?



Tell me why you believe it, and then I will tell you why I don't!
I wan't scripture verses too.





It's not a matter of unbelief. If anything your God is deceptive to make the earth 10,000 years ago or less even though it appears old when we test the earth's age.




God is not deceptive,
Man is just stupid!
Carbon dating is extreamly unreliable and inaccurate!
I once heard from a friend how a mollusc was carbon dated at being 3000 years old.
it was still alive!

another story I heard from one of my favourites, Winkey Pratney,
There was a group of people of Rota Ruia, in NZ.
Its a town built around volcanic activity.
there was a group of people going on a tour of the park, and the guide asked the group if anyone could tell him old a certain group of rocks were.
everyone in the group stated guessing the age of the rocks.
1000000, 2000000, 6000000 years old they were saying, but an old lady who was there said, I was hear last year while those rocks were being formed.

as it is written, let God be true and every man a liar!

Why is God deceptive?
Man only started to try and check the age of the earth because he didn't believe God!



That doesn't say anything about whether they would want to be in the presence of God.






indeed,
that would put that theory into the realm of pure speculation then.








Then tell me what your God does to the unrighteous after death.





Easy!
He makes them righteous in the lake of fire where they are prurified.
thier flesh must be crucified before they can enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
that is why the lake of fire is called the second death!

I'd rather accept Christs death thank you very much!





Micah 5:15
I will take vengeance in anger and wrath upon the nations that have not obeyed me."

Your God must be very unpredictable. At one moment he is all-loving and the next he desires vengeance, what you define as the torture of his creation.




actually Scolar in trainig,

it is your God who is unpredictable.
one moment He is telling us not to let the sun go down on our anger, the next moment He is letting the sun go down of His for all eternity!

one moment He is the same today, yesterday and tomorrow, and then He changers after death!

one moment He is telling us to love our enimies, and do good to those who pursercute you, and then the next He frying His enimies and pursercuting them for all eternity!


The truth of the matter is that, the God you propose we worship, is unstable and needs to force to people into worshipping Him or else to serve His fragile ego!
He is full of contradictions and can't make up His mind wheather He's coming of going!
My God Makes perfect sence, and any one who knows Him can see that yours is an Idol made in mans image!
and not the other way around.









It's not about defending Dan, but it is about defending truth, wherever one finds it.








well I don't know what truth your defending but its not the one found in the bible.
I just though Dan would find it interesting that someone who He's fighting along side of, doesnt' believe everything thats written in the Bible.

He's very big on that you know!











Irrelevant, and the theory of evolution is not a belief. I accept the theory of evolution.

Point: to beleave in evolution, you also have to believe that God Made man in some sort of fallen state of Being.
ie. in another image other than His own.




note to Dan and Scholar,

in the past I said some things on this thread that were or could be taken as being nasty an unloving,

please accept My apologies!

 

[mark53]

When has Dan quoted a lengthy, pre-written response that goes into more detail than is needed?

I was referring to "sites that claim the bible is wrong" as being a Liberal page there are many different views on the standing of the Bible.

 

[Mailman Dan]

So you only want quotes from places and sites that you agree with! How can one argue or discuss a pont if you only want infor from one side of an arguement!!

I said I did not care weither or not a web site sided with me, but I hate cut and paste post. Those are straw man arguements, and I could post just as many as anyone else can. Its just plain annoying....

I perfer to here in someones own words their beliefs. I want to know why a person thinks exactly they was they do, in thier own words, not in the writtings of others.

I suspect even those who disagree with my point of view about the existance of hell wouldn't believe me creditable if I posted from Christian sites that write about the reasons it exist. I wouldn't expect them to read other peoples arguements, that we not even mine.

I will be taking my time going through the last few responces that were thoughts on the subject.



Dan~~~>been abit busy getting ready for tax season (if not one season its another)