- Jul 10, 2016
- 5,459
- 2,199
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Private
Six words...as in 666...
Hell fire - Inquisitions - Crusades - Dark Ages
The Origin and History of the Doctrine of Endless Punishment
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Three words.....
Unitarian Universalist Bahai
Interesting speculation but hardly the opinion of Bible scholars, seminaries, or just about any Christian denomination you can name. How do you account for you being in such a tiny minority and so far out on that limb if it's so obvious as you think?
Universal salvation makes righteousness and obedience meaningless.
Six words...as in 666...
Hell fire - Inquisitions - Crusades - Dark Ages
The Origin and History of the Doctrine of Endless Punishment
Christian Universalists existed among the early church, contributed to Christian thought well throughout the rest of history, and seem (by my unscientific observation) to be a growing number today."
I agree with you that Unitarian Universalists Bahais are growing in numbers, that was always prophesied and expected at the latter times when the anthropos of sin sits in the temple of God, claiming to be God.
That quote you responded to was not mine & said nothing about Bahais.
I wonder how many people have left the church due to the endless hell teaching. Or how many millions decided to reject the gospel because of it.
Of course there are many preachers today in various denominations who seldom if ever speak a word about endless hell. It's like it doesn't even exist, even when it's part of the official denomination doctrine that they haven't yet had the time or inclination to erase.
Why did you think that I was labelling you in particular. For your information, I was labelling Universalism for what it is and the Theologians who push it are from the Liberal Theological circles.
My reply to you was to benefit you, so that I had hoped that you would have understood the position that you are supporting is how this particular theological circle is labelled by other theologians.
Your conclusions or even my conclusions with supporting versus is not what is being contended here, rather what is in contention is between the Orthodox views of the church fathers and the modern age Unitarian Universalism views, which has its roots in the cult of Liberal Theology and is a form of Unitarian faith movement that is diametrically opposed to the church fathers and is inspired by a Persian guru named Bahá'u'lláh.
Unitarian Universalism, and in particular Universalism, is a United States phenomena. American Unitarianism developed and grew out of the liberal college and liberal university influenced area of Boston, and Universalism grew as a grassroots movement, born on the shores of New Jersey.
Baha'i has its roots in the eastern religions and has its origins in the revelations of the prophet Bahá'u'lláh, who Baha'is regard as the most recent in a long line of ancient prophets including: Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, Christ and Muhammad.
So Unitarian Universalism is really a rebadged and repackaged religious product having its origins in the eastern religions, meant for western consumption. When closely scrutinised Unitarian Universalism is really born out of the false eastern religions.
Baha'is recognize a universal God, Unitarian Universalism has members who have various theological positions ranging from atheists to polytheists and pantheists.
This is why Universalism appeals to members who have absolutely no obligations to the blood covenant of Jesus Christ. When I asked the original poster the question of him being obligated to the blood covenant of Jesus Christ, he would reply at first, that he didn't understand what I was asking him, to then proceed to say that such a covenant doesn't exist in the Holy Bible. This means that upon asking the question to whether a religion is obligated to the blood covenant of Jesus Christ, one can determine a cult religious following compared to the Orthodox Church fathers views in regards to the true apostolic faith.
Baha'is rely on the revelations of their prophet and his appointed guardian, while Unitarian Universalists are encouraged to apply their own knowledge and experience into the interpretation of sacred writings and regard religious truth as continuing to grow and evolve.
So Unitarian Universalists in the absence of a deity figure, are the subjective median where their statements of beliefs are derived from , so that they perfectly match progressive liberalist ideas, whilst denying the authority of Jesus Christ. Like Saint Paul said, the people (anthropos) of sin have a form of godliness but deny the power and authority of God altogether, because they sit in place of God by establishing their own subjective moral views and doctrine in the absence of Jesus Christ, without being obligated to the blood covenant of Jesus Christ.
Three questions we all need to answer....
1 Are we obligated to the blood covenant of Jesus Christ?
2 Do we regard Jesus Christ as the final authority in all matters?
3 Do we preach against the sins of the world for the losts sake?
I say Yes Yes Yes in Jesus Christ to all the above.
What do you say to the above questions...
Is it Yes Yes Yes in Christ Jesus?
"Church Fathers" are not to be trusted (Acts 20:28-31, 2 Thess 2:1-12), only Jesus, his apostles, and the prophet are trust worthy:A number of the Early Church Fathers didn't think so:
That hasn't been my experience. I mean, if one approaches God as simply 'fire insurance', then it I can certainly see how it would seem that way.Universal salvation makes righteousness and obedience meaningless.
Human experience doesn't overrule Scripture;That hasn't been my experience. I mean, if one approaches God as simply 'fire insurance', then it I can certainly see how it would seem that way.Dartman said:Universal salvation makes righteousness and obedience meaningless.
If my child became a wayward soul, as any loving parent I would do everything I could to woo him back to a healthy and restorative place. I would never give up on him. I would put no time limits on my love and patience towards him.
If our Father desires all men to be saved, why can't he continue to work on their souls postmortem?
I cannot see someone who approaches God as "fire insurance" as being saved.That hasn't been my experience. I mean, if one approaches God as simply 'fire insurance', then it I can certainly see how it would seem that way.
Scripture has to agree with reality, however, correct? Otherwise it would be just a fairy tale, and I'm sure no one here would want that. And the truth of the matter is, your claim that Universal salvation makes righteousness and obedience meaningless clashes with the reality of the situation.Human experience doesn't overrule Scripture;
Ps 145:20 Jehovah preserveth all them that love him; but all the wicked will he destroy.
Matt 13:49-50 So shall it be in the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the righteous, 50 and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.
Amen!Scripture has to agree with reality, however, correct? Otherwise it would be just a fairy tale, and I'm sure no one here would want that. And the truth of the matter is, your claim that Universal salvation makes righteousness and obedience meaningless clashes with the reality of the situation.
Let's face it, there are those who really don't want everyone to make it. Therefore, they'll gravitate towards those passages that seem to coincide with that wish. The bible acts as something of a mirror like that. We tend to read into it what's already in our hearts. Sometimes I wonder if the bible is like that by design (actually, that's a little unsettling to consider, so yeah... back to my main point).
Given that there are other verses that, unlike Psalms 145:20, point toward a God whose ways are actually higher than man's ways, the punitive, petty god-as-fire-insurance model doesn't quite hold water. Any frail human can love those who love them back—that's man's way. God can do better than that (go higher than that) and love everyone. Of course, in His case, it helps to be Love itself, which He, fortunately, is.
[By the way, on the non-related technical front, you might want to fix your post, #231, since the quote feature is inaccurately attributing to me your statement about Universalism making righteousness and obedience meaningless.]
'One historical answer'; And one which survives the Church of Rome's attempts to destroy the evidence you now so willingly accept, but obviously wasn't complete enough.Three words.....
And, One biblical answer;Three words....
Unitarian Universalist Bahai
This thread has been about twisting 'the truth' of the gospel just enough to cause those, not qualified to discern the 'truth from the deception', to throw the baby out with the bath water IMO.Eastern religious flavour that is rebaged, repackaged and remodelled for western consumption.
Sorry, but this thread isn't about being our own subjective authority, where we think that we sit in the temple of God having a form of godliness, but denying the authority of Jesus Christ altogether.
Three questions for you......
1 Do you believe that if Jesus said something, then he is the final authority in all matters?
2 Are you obligated completely to the blood covenant of Jesus Christ?
3 Do you forsake the progressive liberal ways of this sinful world, by denouncing the sins thereof?
Tiny minority? Can you cite any polls in support of that claim?
Not a thing in that paragraph comes close to refuting the statement that Universalists are a tiny minority."Yes, there are Christian Universalists– and they’re not a new thing. Christian Universalists existed among the early church, contributed to Christian thought well throughout the rest of history, and seem (by my unscientific observation) to be a growing number today."
Thank you for the clarification, but I don't "get" the connection between Baha'i and UU - maybe it's one of those deep level things. However that may be, I have no connection with either party. I find UU repellent, and Baha'i a religion for simpletons. You know, besides the Salvation of All, my Christianity is fairly ordinary. Thanks again for the gracious, informative reply!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?