Universalism VS. Scripture

[Mailman Dan]

the Lord is here to save the sinner not the righteous.....

The bible says there are none who are righteous, which is why we all need Christ. It's understanding that which drives one to share their faith.


Take a look at the text in which the verses you menioned are. They are for those who put the hope and faith in God, because they lack goodness. God does offer forgiveness, but only to those who rpeent and turn from sin. The bible warns unless you repent, you will perish.

and there is nothing you can do to change that, except to dig into the word of god not just the gloomy stuff,

The "gloomy stuff" still exist in the text of the bible. It is there for a reason, even if people deny it is the very word of God. It's strange that every time the numerous verses that speak of judgement are brought up, someone thinks it's a translation error, while at the same time thinking the handful of verses they pull out of context mean that there is no hell and judgement.


Dan~~~>finds that very ironic

 

[blessedmomof5]

Yes there is a lot of things in the bible about judgement, and Gods wrath, but my belief is that is for the unsaved......IMHOActs 3:19 Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord




Take a look at the text in which the verses you menioned are. They are for those who put the hope and faith in God, because they lack goodness. God does offer forgiveness, but only to those who rpeent and turn from sin. The bible warns unless you repent, you will perish.

isn't that what acts 3;19 is saying?

of course you need to repent of your sins the bible instructs you to do so.....
thats what i do all the time i am a sinner.

 

[Mailman Dan]

Yes there is a lot of things in the bible about judgement, and Gods wrath, but my belief is that is for the unsaved...

I also believe that. I don't believe you and I are in disagreement with anything. Unless someone repents and trust in Christ, they are not saved.

That is the point to this entire thread. As I quoted from the beginning, the doctrine that all people will go to heaven doesn't fit in scripture. In order for someone to believe that doctrine, one must believe the bible is in error.

Judgement runs through the entire bible. Without Christ, there will be those that face it. Many deny these teachings as "errors" or teachings of men, but they do come from the bible. Too bad so many ignore them.

Galatians 6:8
Those who live only to satisfy their own sinful desires will harvest the consequences of decay and death. But those who live to please the Spirit will harvest everlasting life from the Spirit.

2 Thessalonians 1:9
They will be punished with everlasting destruction, forever separated from the Lord and from his glorious power

Jude 1:13
They are like wild waves of the sea, churning up the dirty foam of their shameful deeds. They are wandering stars, heading for everlasting gloom and darkness.

Matthew 25:46
And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Mark 3:29
but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation”

Hebrews 6 :1-3


Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this we will do if God permits.




Dan~~~>still sticking to the scripture

 

[Chrysalis Kat]

I also believe that. I don't believe you and I are in disagreement with anything. Unless someone repents and trust in Christ, they are not saved.

Therefore, if everyone eventually repents everyone gets saved.
Problem solved.

That is the point to this entire thread. As I quoted from the beginning, the doctrine that all people will go to heaven doesn't fit in scripture. In order for someone to believe that doctrine, one must believe the bible is in error.

Nope. One can accept that the bible contains errors and believe or not believe in Universalism. The two are not related at all.

 

[Scholar in training]

Therefore, if everyone eventually repents everyone gets saved.
Problem solved.

Repentance is expressed through action. What charity can the dead do in that regard?

 

[chokmah]

Unless someone repents and trust in Christ, they are not saved.

That is the point to this entire thread. As I quoted from the beginning, the doctrine that all people will go to heaven doesn't fit in scripture. In order for someone to believe that doctrine, one must believe the bible is in error.

How do you acquiesce the following to fit your ideals above?

Ezekiel 18
27. And when a wicked man repents of his wickedness that he has done, and does justice and righteousness, he will keep his soul alive.
28. He will see and repent of all his transgressions that he has committed-he shall surely live; he shall not die.

Isaiah 45
22. Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth, for I am God, and there is no other.

Furthermore, here are specific events of forgiveness outside of believing in a sacrifice and/or a man:

2 Samuel 12: 13
Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the L-RD " And Nathan said to David, "The L-RD also has taken away your sin; you shall not die.

Jonah 3:10
10When G-d saw their deeds, that they turned from their wicked way, then G-d relented concerning the calamity which He had declared He would bring upon them. And He did not do it.

Lev. 26:40-42
If they confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their forefathers, in their unfaithfulness which they committed against Me, and also in their acting with hostility against Me- 41. . .they then make amends for their iniquity, 42then I will remember My covenant with Jacob, and I will remember also My covenant with Isaac, and My covenant with Abraham as well, and I will remember the land.

Ezek. 18:21-32 (fuller context)
But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 22"All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live. 23"Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the L-rd G-D, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live? 24"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.

Ezekiel 33:14-16
"But when I say to the wicked, 'You will surely die,' and he turns from his sin and practices justice and righteousness, 15if a wicked man restores a pledge, pays back what he has taken by robbery, walks by the statutes which ensure life without committing iniquity, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 16" None of his sins that he has committed will be remembered against him. He has practiced justice and righteousness; he shall surely live.

Numbers 11:2
When the people cried out to Moses, he prayed to the L-RD and the fire died down.

1Kings 8-33 "When your people Israel have been defeated by an enemy because they have sinned against you, and when they turn back to you and confess your name, praying and making supplication to you in this temple, 34 then hear from heaven and forgive the sin of your people Israel and bring them back to the land you gave to their fathers.”

What you ascribe to Jesus was never a part of the "job description" for the Jewish Messiah. No where is it set forth that he is to bring about salvation for the world. And these passages above, fly in the face of such a condition. Repentance and salvation are between man and G-d alone; no mediator need apply

 

[Mailman Dan]

Repentance and salvation are between man and G-d alone; no mediator need apply

I know your not a Christian, yet a payment for sin still resides in your fatih. Your still waiting for Him to come. It strange that blood offerings stopped when He died.

Isaiah 7:13-14

Then Isaiah said, "Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of men? Will you try the patience of my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Because your limited in your belief for the Christ, then the rest won't make sence to you.

The forgiveness that is in Jesus Christ is conditional upon "repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 20:21). It is a gift that God offers to everyone, but individuals must receive it by repenting and trusting in Christ, or they will remain dead in their sins. No one has biblical grounds to continue in sin, assuming that they are safe just because Jesus died on the cross. See 1 John 3:4–6.

Dan~~~>hopes you understand it

 

[Chrysalis Kat]

Repentance is expressed through action. What charity can the dead do in that regard?

Life is eternal.

 

[Scholar in training]

Life is eternal.

We'll have the chance to do charity forever? Life will be just like it is now except without adverisity and death?

 

[chokmah]

I know your not a Christian, yet a payment for sin still resides in your fatih.

Repentance.

Your still waiting for Him to come.

Messiah has nothing to do with it.

It strange that blood offerings stopped when He died.

Au contraire. Jesus was crucified in 33 CE. Temple destroyed in 70 CE. Sacrifices kept going another ~40 years. Even your apostles performed them as stated in Acts.

Isaiah 7:13-14

Then Isaiah said, "Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of men? Will you try the patience of my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Because your limited in your belief for the Christ, then the rest won't make sence to you.

Because your limited in your understanding of Hebrew the above won't make sense to you.

The forgiveness that is in Jesus Christ is conditional upon "repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 20:21). It is a gift that God offers to everyone, but individuals must receive it by repenting and trusting in Christ, or they will remain dead in their sins. No one has biblical grounds to continue in sin, assuming that they are safe just because Jesus died on the cross. See 1 John 3:4–6.

Dan~~~>hopes you understand it

I understand it clearly. It's completely without substantiation in the Tanakh. It's a gnostic idea. I have to understand it well in order to disbelieve it completely.

 

[flautist]

We'll have the chance to do charity forever? Life will be just like it is now except without adverisity and death?

What about someone on his deathbed who repents right before he dies. Are you saying that he would not be saved because he didn't do any charity before he died?

What about an atheist who did charity all his life? Would he be saved simply because he volunteered for all kinds of worthy causes and loved his fellow man?

If you answer no to these two cases, then we are obviously not saved by our own measly acts of charity. So, why is it such a leap to say that one can accept Christ in the after-life?

 

[FLANDIDLYANDERS]

The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

ASIDE: The word VIRGIN is a mistranslation... it is actually "YOUNG WOMAN OF MARRYING AGE".

It doesn't change whether or not Jesus was born of a virgin, it's just interesting that God did this not because of some old prophecy, but because that's how it had to be...
It's a bit of a pain, I guess, because it means that Jesus' claim to the throne of King D-v-d is through... MARY! A woman.

CHocky, just wondering: do Jews recognise ancestral claims via women?

 

[chokmah]

CHocky, just wondering: do Jews recognise ancestral claims via women?

No. You'll even note in the geneologies of Jesus in Matthew 1 and Luke 3; the lineages are all male.

What's more, each geneology gives a different father for Joseph. So much for non-contradiction.

 

[Scholar in training]

What about someone on his deathbed who repents right before he dies. Are you saying that he would not be saved because he didn't do any charity before he died?

He would probably be saved.

What about an atheist who did charity all his life? Would he be saved simply because he volunteered for all kinds of worthy causes and loved his fellow man?

Depends.

If you answer no to these two cases, then we are obviously not saved by our own measly acts of charity.

We are saved by our works, in the sense that faith without works is dead. This is not, however, to say that we can earn our way to heaven.

So, why is it such a leap to say that one can accept Christ in the after-life?

Because the above example is the exception (much like the thief on the cross), but there is no indication that it's the rule. For instance, God told Hosea to marry a prostitute to demonstrate the point of his prophecies in a clear and dramatic manner - but this does not mean that we are all called to marry prostitutes. It, like the example of the thief, is an exception.

 

[peepnklown]

No. You'll even note in the geneologies of Jesus in Matthew 1 and Luke 3; the lineages are all male.

In addition; the Tanakh states that tribal affiliation and family genealogy can only be traced through the person’s father.

 

[Scholar in training]

No. You'll even note in the geneologies of Jesus in Matthew 1 and Luke 3; the lineages are all male.

Perhaps.

What's more, each geneology gives a different father for Joseph. So much for non-contradiction.

It's not that simple. This issue is not good ammunion for either you or I, because while it is not an impossible "contradiction" to solve, it is still somewhat inconclusive.

 

[chokmah]

Perhaps.

How is gender of a person a "perhaps"?

It's not that simple. This issue is not good ammunion for either you or I, because while it is not an impossible "contradiction" to solve, it is still somewhat inconclusive.

Yet, SiT, correct me if I'm wrong, but you (as a Christian) have the burden of proof to make it fit right. Similar to a trial, my job is to present reasonable doubt. You, with your Testament, have the weight to present it beyond doubt. Yes?

 

[chokmah]

In addition; the Tanakh states that tribal affiliation and family genealogy can only be traced through the person’s father. [/color]

Correct-a-mundo!

 

[Scholar in training]

How is gender of a person a "perhaps"?

Most (but not all) scholars accept that one of Luke's geneaological line comes from Mary's family, and Matthew's from Joseph's. Not that that puts a damper on my case. David's line is usually traced through Mary, whereby Joseph "stepped into" her lineage. You can read more on that here.

Yet, SiT, correct me if I'm wrong, but you (as a Christian) have the burden of proof to make it fit right. Similar to a trial, my job is to present reasonable doubt. You, with your Testament, have the weight to present it beyond doubt. Yes?

There are reasonable ways to solve the "problem", though there is a little debate about which is right. I thought I made that clear enough when I said "it is not an impossible 'contradiction' to solve". The point is that this is not a "crushing blow" victory for either of us. I gave you the link to a page detailing some of the arguments; you may pick the ones you disagree with and present your case here. Perhaps the page was too long to search through? Try this one, then. Telescoping geneaologies was not uncommon in either the biblical or pagan world, as their main purpose was to trace one's lineage to an important family group or ancestor, and they were condensed to be easily memorable (since Judea's culture was mainly oral).

 

[chokmah]

Most (but not all) scholars accept that one of Luke's geneaological line comes from Mary's family, and Matthew's from Joseph's. Not that that puts a damper on my case. David's line is usually traced through Mary, whereby Joseph "stepped into" her lineage. You can read more on that here.

I will present a post I had in another thread:

Just for kicks, I figured that I would show the two lineages of Matthew and Luke.


Matthew:

1) Abraham:
2) Isaac,
3) Jacob,
4) Judah
5) Perez
6) Hezron,
7) Ram.
8) Amminadab,
9) Nahshon,
10) Salmon.
11) Boaz by Rahab, Boaz was the father of
12) Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of
13) Jesse.
14) David the king. David (D)was the father of
15) Solomon by [b]Bathsheba
16) Rehoboam,
17) Abijah,
18) Asa.
19) Jehoshaphat,
20) Joram,
21) Uzziah.
22) Jotham,
23) Ahaz,
24) Hezekiah.
25) Manasseh,
26) Amon,
27) Josiah.
28) Jeconiah
29) Shealtiel,
30) Zerubbabel.
31) Abihud,
32) Eliakim,
33) Azor.
34) Zadok,
35) Achim,
36) Eliud.
37) Eleazar,
38) Matthan,
39) Jacob.
40) Joseph

Luke (from Abraham on):

1) Abraham
2) Isaac
3) Jacob
4) Judah
5) Perez
6) Hezron
7) Ram
8) Admin
9) Amminidab
10) Nahshon
11) Salmon
12) Boaz
13) Obed
14) Jesse
15) David
16) Nathan
17) Mattatha
18) Menna
19) Melea
20) Eliakim
21) Jonam
22) Joseph
23) Judah
24) Simeon
25) Levi
26) Matthat
27) Jorum
28) Eliezer
29) Joshua
30) Er
31) Elmadam
32) Cosam
33) Addi
34) Melchi
35) Neri
36) Shealtiel
37) Zerubbabel
38) Rhesa
39) Joannan
40) Joda
41) Josech
42) Semien
43) Mattathias
44) Maath
45) Naggai
46) Hesli
47) Nahum
48) Amos
49) Mattathias
50) Joseph
51) Jannai
52) Melchi
53) Levi
54) Matthat
55) Eli
56) Joseph

This is more for future reference, but I wanted to ask you a question regarding your statement above: Where do you get the substantiation that anything, in Judaism, is traced through the line of the women; let alone Mary. It's a fanciful thing to mention, but there's not substance to it. I'm sincerely asking, because I presume that you have something sound to bring forth on it.

There are reasonable ways to solve the "problem", though there is a little debate about which is right. I thought I made that clear enough when I said "it is not an impossible 'contradiction' to solve". The point is that this is not a "crushing blow" victory for either of us. I gave you the link to a page detailing some of the arguments; you may pick the ones you disagree with and present your case here. Perhaps the page was too long to search through? Try this one, then. Telescoping geneaologies was not uncommon in either the biblical or pagan world, as their main purpose was to trace one's lineage to an important family group or ancestor, and they were condensed to be easily memorable (since Judea's culture was mainly oral).

I'm sorry. I didn't realize that the "orange text" was a link in the previous post.

I should preface future discussions on this topic with you by asking: do you believe that your testament is inerrant?