Universalism VS. Scripture

[Scholar in training]

No universalist claims the "verdict" has changed, or that judgment "isn't final" either.

What we disagree on is the sentencing. There is no crime, in man's law or in God's law, for which the sentence is, "We will set you on fire, and you will remain on fire for all eternity."

As I've repeatedly pointed out, this is a strawman. The doctrine of eternal shame in hell is not the false dichotomy (either fire-and-brimstome or temporal hell) that some would make it out to be.

 

[Charlie V]

As I've repeatedly pointed out, this is a strawman. The doctrine of eternal shame in hell is not the false dichotomy (either fire-and-brimstome or temporal hell) that some would make it out to be.

It's only a strawman for a few. Your interpretation of hell isn't the only one held by non-universalists on these boards. One of the major views of the doctrine of hell is eternal torment by fire.

Another is eternal shame. Same difference.

I find that an odd interpretation. You almost seem to be defending hell by claiming that hell isn't so bad. Just a little bit of shame. No big deal. They're probably having a mighty good time in hell, they're just a little bit ashamed all the time is all.

Charlie

 

[Charlie V]

Then how come the Lord clearly stated that, that was the sentence?

He didn't. He stated Christ is the savior of the world. He said His anger lasts but a moment, but his mercy endures.

Charlie

 

[Scholar in training]

It's only a strawman for a few. Your interpretation of hell isn't the only one held by non-universalists on these boards. One of the major views of the doctrine of hell is eternal torment by fire.

And they would be incorrect. My point is that you were playing the same tune: "either you have people experiencing eternal death burning in the fires of hell or all creation receives salvation!" It sounds eeriely like an appeal to emotion.

Another is eternal shame. Same difference.

Eternal shame and eternal pain are both interpretations of eternal death, but they are not the same animal. To confuse them is to smush together the differences between collectivistic and individualistic societies. Whereas films like The Passion of Christ focuses primarily on the suffering and physical pain Christ experienced, the Bible focuses primarily on the aspect of status degradation in the crucifixion - indeed, in many aspects of Jesus' life.

I find that an odd interpretation. You almost seem to be defending hell by claiming that hell isn't so bad. Just a little bit of shame. No big deal. They're probably having a mighty good time in hell, they're just a little bit ashamed all the time is all.

I never said that they were "a little bit ashamed" or that they were "having a mighty good time" - more strawmen. I actually believe that the shame may be quite strong or quite weak, depending on the person.

 

[loriersea]

The good news is that all have the opp. to serve God and get eternal life w/ Him, but it is clearly shown that not all will get that. God is holy and just and sin won't just get to run rampant w/o any judgement.

A few things about this:

To be frank, it seems to me what you are saying is that the good news = *I'm* not going to hell. Now, if you want to see that as good news, that is fine, but to me, that is terrible, terrible news, unless the rest of humanity is also saved. How on earth could I consider it "good news" to know that even one person I love, out of my best friends, my husband, my children, my parents, my siblings, my coworkers, my neighbors, will be tormented in hell for all eternity? I couldn't, unless I hardened my heart to the suffering of others by dividing the world into "us" (Christians) who I care about and "them" (non-Christians) who I don't.

It is wrong to equate a disbelief in eternal torture/torment with a lack of belief in judgment/consequences. If my son doesn't listen to me and runs into the street, there will be consequences so he can understand the seriousness of that action. However, that doesn't mean I'm going to beat him until he's black and blue.

And, when we are talking about the Christian doctrine of eternal damnation, the fact is that we are not talking about God judging sin; we are talking about God judging belief. Whether or not you are saved or tortured for all eternity has nothing to do with your actions in this life; all it has to do with is whether or not you accepted Jesus as your personal savior. So, hell is not a punishment for sin, but a punishment for not holding the correct beliefs, no matter how much less arbitrary and sadistic it sounds the other way around.

 

[flautist]

"The good news is that all have the opp. to serve God and get eternal life w/ Him, but it is clearly shown that not all will get that. God is holy and just and sin won't just get to run rampant w/o any judgement."

Just because the sin is not judged eternally doesn't mean it's not judged at all... Do you punish your children forever for hitting their siblings? Or do you figure that if you can't punish them forever that you may as well not punish them at all? No, of course not! You might give them a time out, or ground them for a couple days. The punishment doesn't last forever, but the bad behavior is still judged.

 

[AndreLinoge]

If the torment of hell is actually "shame", then are the people in hell repentent?

 

[Lilly of the Valley]

A few things about this:

To be frank, it seems to me what you are saying is that the good news = *I'm* not going to hell. Now, if you want to see that as good news, that is fine, but to me, that is terrible, terrible news, unless the rest of humanity is also saved. How on earth could I consider it "good news" to know that even one person I love, out of my best friends, my husband, my children, my parents, my siblings, my coworkers, my neighbors, will be tormented in hell for all eternity? I couldn't, unless I hardened my heart to the suffering of others by dividing the world into "us" (Christians) who I care about and "them" (non-Christians) who I don't.

It is wrong to equate a disbelief in eternal torture/torment with a lack of belief in judgment/consequences. If my son doesn't listen to me and runs into the street, there will be consequences so he can understand the seriousness of that action. However, that doesn't mean I'm going to beat him until he's black and blue.

And, when we are talking about the Christian doctrine of eternal damnation, the fact is that we are not talking about God judging sin; we are talking about God judging belief. Whether or not you are saved or tortured for all eternity has nothing to do with your actions in this life; all it has to do with is whether or not you accepted Jesus as your personal savior. So, hell is not a punishment for sin, but a punishment for not holding the correct beliefs, no matter how much less arbitrary and sadistic it sounds the other way around.

Sin has consequences. Heaven is a privilage, since we all deserve hell. All can go to heaven, but if you reject that and forgiveness, then you won't go there. God won't force you into heaven or into serving Him. After judgement, it's done. It's good news that we can go to Heaven, if God didn't die for us, then no one would go to heaven. However, you don't want to obey and trust God and accept His sacrifice, then you automatically forfeit that privilage.

 

[loriersea]

Sin has consequences. Heaven is a privilage, since we all deserve hell. All can go to heaven, but if you reject that and forgiveness, then you won't go there. God won't force you into heaven or into serving Him. After judgement, it's done. It's good news that we can go to Heaven, if God didn't die for us, then no one would go to heaven. However, you don't want to obey and trust God and accept His sacrifice, then you automatically forfeit that privilage.

But when you think about it, that makes no logical sense. If grace is grace, then you don't have to do ANYTHING to receive it. If something is a free gift, then it is yours whether you use it or not. Now, if somebody deposited $5000 into my bank account, that would be a free gift, whether or not I ever spent the money. But, if they said, "I'll deposit $5000 in your bank account IF you convert to my religion," we're in the realm of bribes, not free gifts.

Of course sin has consequences. But, just because we won't be tortured for all eternity doesn't mean we don't face consequences. If your child disobeyed, would you have to torture them eternally for them to understand that their action had consequences? Hopefully not.

I don't think we are all good. But, neither do I think that eternal torture can ever be a fitting punishment for the wrongs committed in a finite human life. I mean, really, if you believe we all deserve hell, you also have to believe that it's God's fault. After all, we are doomed from before birth. We are condemned to hell NOT because of anything we did, but because of what Adam did. How on earth is that fair? How is that just or merciful? We never had a chance. From the moment we are born, we are condemned to hell if we don't accept certain Christian doctrines. How can it be said, in that context, that we deserve hell, when we never had a chance? A God who would create that situation, and then condemn anyone who didn't hold the right religious doctrines, is not a God I would want to spend an afternoon with, much less eternity.

 

[Lilly of the Valley]

But when you think about it, that makes no logical sense. If grace is grace, then you don't have to do ANYTHING to receive it. If something is a free gift, then it is yours whether you use it or not. Now, if somebody deposited $5000 into my bank account, that would be a free gift, whether or not I ever spent the money. But, if they said, "I'll deposit $5000 in your bank account IF you convert to my religion," we're in the realm of bribes, not free gifts.

Of course sin has consequences. But, just because we won't be tortured for all eternity doesn't mean we don't face consequences. If your child disobeyed, would you have to torture them eternally for them to understand that their action had consequences? Hopefully not.

I don't think we are all good. But, neither do I think that eternal torture can ever be a fitting punishment for the wrongs committed in a finite human life. I mean, really, if you believe we all deserve hell, you also have to believe that it's God's fault. After all, we are doomed from before birth. We are condemned to hell NOT because of anything we did, but because of what Adam did. How on earth is that fair? How is that just or merciful? We never had a chance. From the moment we are born, we are condemned to hell if we don't accept certain Christian doctrines. How can it be said, in that context, that we deserve hell, when we never had a chance? A God who would create that situation, and then condemn anyone who didn't hold the right religious doctrines, is not a God I would want to spend an afternoon with, much less eternity.

You must accept grace. If you reject grace...then you won't get it. If someone offers you a gift, but you reject it, then you won't get it. Also, grace is also what helps us to obey God. Obedience is important. You can't earn heaven, but that's not an excuse to live a sinful life.

 

[ottaia]

You must accept grace. If you reject grace...then you won't get it. If someone offers you a gift, but you reject it, then you won't get it. Also, grace is also what helps us to obey God. Obedience is important. You can't earn heaven, but that's not an excuse to live a sinful life.

If someone offers you a gift and you reject it, you still get the gift. If someone gives me a car and I reject it, then it just sits in the driveway. That is different than the gift being taken away.

 

[Lilly of the Valley]

If someone offers you a gift and you reject it, you still get the gift. If someone gives me a car and I reject it, then it just sits in the driveway. That is different than the gift being taken away.

No, because someone won't force you to have something you don't want. If you say you don't want it, then will they then give you the thing you despise?

Lets say it is in the driveway, you aren't using it and haven't truly recieved it, it might be there, but you haven't recieved it. God won't force you to accept or recieve something you don't want.

 

[loriersea]

No, because someone won't force you to have something you don't want. If you say you don't want it, then will they then give you the thing you despise?

Lets say it is in the driveway, you aren't using it and haven't truly recieved it, it might be there, but you haven't recieved it. God won't force you to accept or recieve something you don't want.

But nobody rejects Christianity because they hate the idea of going to heaven. They reject Christianity on other grounds. If the "gift" is God's love, then nobody rejects God's love or God's grace; what they reject are other proprositions that they think Christianity requires one to accept.

 

[Charlie V]

You must accept grace.

If this is true, then grace is not grace, because you can boast of your great works of acceptance.

Charlie

 

[Charlie V]

Sin has consequences.

Of course it does! No universalist believes it doesn't!

Heaven is a privilage, since we all deserve hell.

Utter nonsense. And not Biblical. No Bible verse says "we all deserve hell."

Nobody deserves "hell," whether it's eternal pain or eternal shame. Our sins are finite, so the chastisement must also be finite, or God is not just.

Charlie

 

[Charlie V]

But nobody rejects Christianity because they hate the idea of going to heaven. They reject Christianity on other grounds. If the "gift" is God's love, then nobody rejects God's love or God's grace; what they reject are other proprositions that they think Christianity requires one to accept.

Great post, very well expressed!

Charlie

 

[Lilly of the Valley]

If this is true, then grace is not grace, because you can boast of your great works of acceptance.

Charlie

How is accepting grace a work? You can't boast in that because God gives you the grace, you merely accept it.

 

[flautist]

By "accepting" the grace, you are performing an action. An action is a work.

Grace is something like love. If you love your enemy, and your enemy does not accept that love, does that change the fact that your enemy HAS your love?

 

[loriersea]

How is accepting grace a work? You can't boast in that because God gives you the grace, you merely accept it.

Lilly, I'm sure you've seen the boasting that goes along with the idea of "accepting" God's grace. It's the boasting that comes when you claim that others don't accept God's grace because they love sin, they don't want to obey God, they are under Satan's power. What does that mean? It means *you*, the one who did "accept" God's grace, hate sin, want to obey God, and are free from the lure of Satan. I'd say that's boasting.

 

[ahab]

Hi Flautist,

Grace is something like love. If you love your enemy, and your enemy does not accept that love, does that change the fact that your enemy HAS your love?

I think thats excellent.

I would say God's grace is His unmerrited favour.

peace