Universalism...why not?

[Rajni]

Remember the story of doubting Thomas? Knowledge first and then he believed. I suspect God will give the same opportunity to those she didn't call the side of glory. A biblical end of your argument. Faith is the substance of things hoped for. When you know, you don't need to hope .

Exactly.

As I had said previously regarding the no-faith-after-death stance, I don't see how faith being a requirement before death has to mean it's a requirement after death. It would make no sense at that point.

And again, if something is a fact (and placing faith in facts is probably the best course to take), then one could only place their faith in Jesus as their savior if he already was their savior before they did so. Otherwise, they'd be believing a lie, given the teaching that he's not our savior till we believe he is.

 

[Dartman]

Remember the story of doubting Thomas? Knowledge first and then he believed. I suspect God will give the same opportunity to those she didn't call the side of glory. A biblical end of your argument. Faith is the substance of things hoped for. When you know, you don't need to hope .

Yes, God offers evidence first, and will bless those who believe and obey. The dead don't know anything (Eccl 9:5&10), Jesus, and the rest of Scripture, says they are asleep, sleepeth, sleep, etc.
It's when the dead are RESURRECTED ... BACK TO LIFE ... that they know, rather than merely have faith.

 

[JacksBratt]

I was initially just going to comment on how funny your Boy Scout barbecue joke was. it really brightened my morning breakfast at McDonald's. But then I finished reading the rest of your post and now I will also have to comment on it too..

Remember the story of doubting Thomas? Knowledge first and then he believed. I suspect God will give the same opportunity to those she didn't call the side of glory. A biblical end of your argument. Faith is the substance of things hoped for. When you know, you don't need to hope .

Well, I understand where this idea comes from. It would be nice to believe that Uncle Hank, who just didn't get it and was the only one in the family that wasn't "saved", can have his final chance after he dies....Then we can all sit at his funeral and eat the tiny pickles and cut up sandwiches and state "he had a good heart, God will understand"...

But, that's not what Christ said.

The whole thing with Thomas was that Thomas was fortunate... he "saw". He had the opportunity to see and believe... People coming after this time of Christ walking on earth so that His life can be recorded, people of our time....we must believe based on the faith in God's word, where men like Thomas saw and recorded.

Check what Christ says here:

John 20:28-2921st Century King James Version (KJ21)

28 And Thomas answered and said unto Him, “My Lord and my God!”


29 Jesus said unto him, “Thomas, because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed. Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed.”

 

[Rajni]

Well, I understand where this idea comes from.

Logic and common sense?

 

[Dartman]

Logic and common sense?

mmmmm .... no, that isn't the source of universalist thinking. More like wishful thinking, supported by flawed rationalization.

 

[Rajni]

mmmmm .... no, that isn't the source of universalist thinking. More like wishful thinking, supported by flawed rationalization.

And I totally could not conclude the same of partialism!
Not even a little.

 

[JacksBratt]

Logic and common sense?

 

[Kerensa]

And I totally could not conclude the same of partialism!
Not even a little.

Funny, I was just thinking that myself.

 

[Silmarien]

I have to chuckle because you have a way with words, Silmarien. So, was it Dostoyevsky that flanked you, or Tolstoy?

Dostoevsky, haha. I don't think I've read any of Tolstoy's more religious work.

That's an interesting proposition. In what way do you think the judgment passages represented conflict with Rome? (This is a genuine question. I'm not trying to test you or anything.)

This is something I've seen N.T. Wright argue, though I can't find exact quotes offhand. I think it's a matter of people traditionally taking things out of the Jewish context and deciding that every time that judgment showed up, it's a matter of final judgment rather than being intended specifically for an audience that keeps on pushing their luck with periodic revolts against Rome.

This doesn't address every instance where damnation shows up as a threat, but I've seen it argued that some of the apocalyptic imagery in particular is more about final judgment coming upon Jerusalem in specific with Rome serving in the role of proxy. I really need to study the Old Testament Prophets, though, to see just how they play with the theme of judgment.

I'm sorry to hear that. Sounds like a painful time, Silmarien.

Nah, just good old fashioned existential angst. There's a point at which you have to deal with the fact that you're running away from yourself. My methods are less problematic than drugs and alcohol, but it ultimately comes down to the same thing.

Well, ...when one lives in Russia or Eastern European countries, I can see why. (I say this as one who knows some Russian people and some of its history.)

Hmm, I'm not really sure how much of the theology comes from that. I'd assume that most of it was solidified before the fall of Constantinople.

You might be surprised that I have a similar interpretive framework by which I interpret all those nasty bits about “fire” and “worms” and things.

Not surprised at all! You're a little bit hard to pin down theologically. I associate you mostly with the Lutherans hanging around, but mostly because of style.

 

[Hillsage]

Exactly.

As I had said previously regarding the no-faith-after-death stance, I don't see how faith being a requirement before death has to mean it's a requirement after death. It would make no sense at that point.

And again, if something is a fact (and placing faith in facts is probably the best course to take), then one could only place their faith in Jesus as their savior if he already was their savior before they did so. Otherwise, they'd be believing a lie, given the teaching that he's not our savior till we believe he is.

And I'm going to say; "You DO see, but they DON'T see."....the truth IMO.
They simply have no concept of God's 'plan of ages to come'. All stops with orthodoxies myopic vision for the plan of God. Ages back, they are all over it, ages to come....no revelation. Why, even Martin Luther had more hope than the nominal church of today;

Luther writing to Hansen Von Rechenberg 1522

“God forbid that I should limit the time of acquiring faith to the present life. In the depth of the Divine mercy there may be opportunity to win it in the future.
Martin Luther"

'The After Life' by Henry Buckle pg 168

 

[Hillsage]

Yes, God offers evidence first, and will bless those who believe and obey. The dead don't know anything (Eccl 9:5&10), Jesus, and the rest of Scripture, says they are asleep, sleepeth, sleep, etc.
It's when the dead are RESURRECTED ... BACK TO LIFE ... that they know, rather than merely have faith.

Great bunch of opinion, following your correct quote of sleep and death. But, just to humor you, could you now provide me with any proof that Jesus or scripture ever used that 'sleep connotation' in regard to anyone but those in covenant with Him? I'm coming up blank. But if you can GREAT, then you can go one step deeper and help me also understand the story/parable of Lazarus and the rich man. I mean, I kind of thought they both "DIED" and yet seemed to know quite a bit. I guess I'm not tying this all together. But it feels pretty good to not be 'bound' too.

Oh well, I guess this is your chance, and the rope's in your hand cowboy. Tie me up with your answer.

 

[Hillsage]

Well, I understand where this idea comes from. It would be nice to believe that Uncle Hank, who just didn't get it and was the only one in the family that wasn't "saved", can have his final chance after he dies....Then we can all sit at his funeral and eat the tiny pickles and cut up sandwiches and state "he had a good heart, God will understand"...

This is hilarious. Can you honestly tell me you have ever been to a Church funeral where that isn't exactly what 'almost' every preacher says, or at least something similar? I mean the guy hasn't shadowed a church since when, but the 'deceased church family' is present. That's sure been the church sermon stance with all the scuzzballs I've known? "He was baptized as an infant with the holy waters of..." "Lord have MERCY on his soul." WHAT! Isn't it too late for mercy preacher???? Even my sailor cussing, beer drinking, fingernail trimming 'during the sermon' DAD had a glowing eulogy. Oh, wait, I just remembered that's because they asked ME to give it. Bad example sorry sorry.

Oh well, good still came out of it. I wasn't lying like most 'pulpit hirelings' do. AND, dad's death gave me a chance to witness to my Catholic brother who was married to a Jehovah's witness wife. He ended up getting saved (wife also), and I mentored him 1/1 for several years. During which he somberly came to me, in the earlier months, and said; "D.....dad never had what we've got...did he?" To which I said "NO he didn't." So then I got to teach the rest of Dad's eulogy to my brother. The eulogy I'd have loved to share with the whole congregation and family....who 'knew' my dad...or even better, knew 'their dad'. That brother has been an elder for 5-6? years now. And he then stopped being mentored by me, and 'Pastor' took over. I cornered him a while back and asked him where he now stood concerning it. What a disappointment....on the fence. Not enough guts to go with orthdoxy and dad's eternal torture, and not enough guts to stand up for what he still HOPES is awaiting our dad and so many others. He hopes that because he has the heart OF God and not just a heart FOR God.

But, that's not what Christ said.

The whole thing with Thomas was that Thomas was fortunate... he "saw". He had the opportunity to see and believe... People coming after this time of Christ walking on earth so that His life can be recorded, people of our time....we must believe based on the faith in God's word, where men like Thomas saw and recorded.

Great 'thought' just no proof of that in bible's not bending over to take one for orthodoxy.

Check what Christ says here:

John 20:28-2921st Century King James Version (KJ21)

28 And Thomas answered and said unto Him, “My Lord and my God!”


29 Jesus said unto him, “Thomas, because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed. Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed.”

Well, I did just what you said...I checked. You're absolutely right, it says BLESSED for believing. Kind of thought you were going to share a verse that said SAVED from the fires of eternal hell given the discussion. Anyway, I also don't see anything here about all others 'cursed for eternity in hell' if you don't believe without faith here in this age. YOU SEE 'that' because those are the orthodox glasses that you choose to see through. I wore those same glasses. Guess what? There's still one out there that can heal spiritual eyes well enough that you don't just "see men as trees walking." But you need to hang around for a 'second touch' from him to see ALL men clearly.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Dostoevsky, haha. I don't think I've read any of Tolstoy's more religious work.

Me neither. I've only read bits and pieces.

This is something I've seen N.T. Wright argue, though I can't find exact quotes offhand. I think it's a matter of people traditionally taking things out of the Jewish context and deciding that every time that judgment showed up, it's a matter of final judgment rather than being intended specifically for an audience that keeps on pushing their luck with periodic revolts against Rome.

This doesn't address every instance where damnation shows up as a threat, but I've seen it argued that some of the apocalyptic imagery in particular is more about final judgment coming upon Jerusalem in specific with Rome serving in the role of proxy. I really need to study the Old Testament Prophets, though, to see just how they play with the theme of judgment.

Yes, I think I'm leaning in this direction of interpretation, too. It seems to make more sense to me.

Nah, just good old fashioned existential angst. There's a point at which you have to deal with the fact that you're running away from yourself. My methods are less problematic than drugs and alcohol, but it ultimately comes down to the same thing.

I have to admire that you've given it the effort to face these skeptical challenges. Not everyone is willing to do that, and for some people, slogging around in mere skepticism seems to be a much more comfortable position to be in. I've visited Skeptic-Ville, and although it's an interesting place to visit, I wouldn't want to live there.

Anyway, if you feel you want to talk philosophy on these theological subjects, let me know. Sometimes its good just to have a 'sounding board' by which to get some additional angles of perspective.

Hmm, I'm not really sure how much of the theology comes from that. I'd assume that most of it was solidified before the fall of Constantinople.

Ok. I think I understand better what you meant; sorry I didn't catch it at first. My bad.

Not surprised at all! You're a little bit hard to pin down theologically. I associate you mostly with the Lutherans hanging around, but mostly because of style.

lol! No, I'm definitely not Lutheran nor any other version of Reformed--not that I hold anything against them particularly. Like I said, I take a much more expansive, philosophical scope to my approach to the Christian faith, one that most denominations can't contain in one brand. Although I do attend a Restorationist type Church, I don't know what I would really label myself, and I'm not going to recommend that anyone attend any specific denomination or movement. So maybe with this mindset, I'm Trans-Denominational? I don't know. I just made that up...but it doesn't have to stick either. Like I said before, I'm just a 'Christian,' although one very interested in the deep contours of epistemology as a field of study.)

Anyway. Good talking to you, Silmarien. Have a good rest of your day, Sister!

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

 

[Der Alte]

Of course;
Eccl 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
Eccl 9:10 Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.

Eccles is often quoted out-of-context as a proof text trying to disprove the Biblical teaching of Hell.
Note the same writer did not know what happened to a man's spirit when he dies, Eccl. 3:21.

Ecclesiastes 3:21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth? ​

Eccl 9:5 is often cited as a proof text to support various heterodox beliefs. The phrase "under the sun" occurs 29 times In Eccl. Seven times in chap.9.

Ecclesiastes 9:3-11
(3) This is an evil among all things that are done under the sun, that there is one event unto all: yea, also the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead.
(4) For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion.
(5) For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
(6) Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.
(7) Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; for God now accepteth thy works.
(8) Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment.
(9) Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labour which thou takest under the sun.
(10) Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.
(11) I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.
. . .
(13) This wisdom have I seen also under the sun, and it seemed great unto me:​

Verse 3, two vss, before vs. 5 refers to "things that are done under the sun." Verse 6, immediately after vs. 5 refers to "any thing that is done under the sun." If the understanding that some have is true then even the righteous do not have any reward after death, vs. reads 5 "but the dead ...neither have they any more a reward."
.....Verse 5 is best understood as "but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.[under the sun]"

The parable of the rich man (the 2 tribes called "Jews"), their 5 brethren (the lost 10 tribes) and Lazarus (Gentiles) is an analogy, making the same point as

...
It's not about literal death at all. Jesus concludes the parable of the rich man and Lazarus with this;
Luke 16:29-31 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Jesus did not introduce the account of Lazarus and the rich man as a parable and Jesus does not explain it as a parable later to His disciples. All of the accepted parables involve real world things and situations which Jesus uses to introduce or explain a misunderstood or unknown Biblical.
.....Some time in history widows have lost coins, virgins forgot to buy oil, sheep are lost, wayward sons leave home and squander their money, land tenants rebel against their landlord etc. Thus Jesus could use anonymous events like this to illustrate a Bible truth. What are the real world things or events in the Lazarus account that Jesus' audience would have knowledge of and what is the Bible truth that they illustrate? Nobody in Jesus' audience had any knowledge of anything that happens after death.
.....Two of the persons in the Lazarus account are named, Lazarus, who could possibly be fictional, but Abraham was an actual, historical person. If Abraham was not literally in the place Jesus described and did not literally speak the words Jesus quoted, Jesus is a liar.
.....All of the ECF who quoted or referred to Lazarus and the rich man considered it to be factual.

• Irenaeus Against Heresies Book II Chapter XXXIV.-Souls Can Be Recognised in the Separate State, and are Immortal Although They Once Had a Beginning.
Ireneaeus, 120-202 AD, was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John.
1. The Lord has taught with very great fulness, that souls not only continue to exist, not by passing from body to body, but that they preserve the same form [in their separate state] as the body had to which they were adapted, and that they remember the deeds which they did in this state of existence, and from which they have now ceased,-in that narrative which is recorded respecting the rich man and that Lazarus who found repose in the bosom of Abraham. In this account He states that Dives [=Latin for rich] knew Lazarus after death, and Abraham in like manner, and that each one of these persons continued in his own proper position , and that [Dives] requested Lazarus to be sent to relieve him-[Lazarus], on whom he did not [formerly] bestow even the crumbs [which fell] from his table.
ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
• Clement of Alexandria [A.D. 153-193-217] The Instructor [Paedagogus] Book 1
On the Resurrection.
This was the day. “And a certain poor man named Lazarus was laid at the rich man’s gate, full of sores, desiring to be filled with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table.” This is the grass. Well, the rich man was punished in Hades, being made partaker of the fire; while the other flourished again in the Father’s bosom.
• Tertullian A Treatise On The Soul [A.D. 145-220.]
In hell the soul of a certain man is in torment, punished in flames, suffering excruciating thirst, and imploring from the finger of a happier soul, for his tongue, the solace of a drop of water. Do you suppose that this end of the blessed poor man and the miserable rich man is only imaginary? Then why the name of Lazarus in this narrative, if the circumstance is not in (the category of) a real occurrence? But even if it is to be regarded as imaginary, it will still be a testimony to truth and reality . For unless the soul possessed corporeality, the image of a soul could not possibly contain a finger of a bodily substance; nor would the Scripture feign a statement about the limbs of a body, if these had no existence.
• Tertullian Part First [A.D. 145-220.]
9. A Treatise On The Soul Chapter 57
Moreover, the fact that Hades is not in any case opened for (the escape of) any soul , has been firmly established by the Lord in the person of Abraham, in His representation of the poor man at rest and the rich man in torment.
• The Epistles Of Cyprian [A.D. 200-258] Epistle 54 To Cornelius, Concerning Fortunatus And Felicissimus, Or Against The Heretics
Whence also that rich sinner who implores help from Lazarus, then laid in Abraham’s bosom, and established in a place of comfort, while he, writhing in torments, is consumed by the heats of burning flame, suffers most punishment of all parts of his body in his mouth and his tongue, because doubtless in his mouth and his tongue he had most sinned.
• Methodius Fragments On The History Of Jonah [A.D. 260-312]
But souls, being rational bodies, are arranged by the Maker and Father of all things into members which are visible to reason, having received this impression. Whence, also, in Hades, as in the case of Lazarus and the rich man, they are spoken of as having a tongue, and a finger, and the other members; not as though they had with them another invisible body, but that the souls themselves, naturally, when entirely stripped of their covering, are such according to their essence. ​

 

[Dartman]

And I totally could not conclude the same of partialism!
Not even a little.

The difference being:

A) The "righteous=life/wicked=death" doctrine is ubiquitous in Scripture, is the REPEATED message of Jesus, and is expressed in a multitude of words and phrases, AND is the ONLY destiny EVER preached in ANY sermon EVER found in Scripture.
B) Universalist theories are NEVER .... EVER preached, in ANY sermon EVER found in Scripture, AND are NEVER explicitly stated, or explained in Scripture.

 

[Dartman]

Great bunch of opinion, following your correct quote of sleep and death. But, just to humor you, could you now provide me with any proof that Jesus or scripture ever used that 'sleep connotation' in regard to anyone but those in covenant with Him?

I am not sure what you mean by "those in covenant with him". So, could you please clarify?

But, I THINK you MIGHT mean, those who Jesus would judge as righteous .... which would indicate you are asking for verses that use "sleep" regarding a wicked dead person. That's EASY!

1 Kings 14:20 And the days which Jeroboam reigned were two and twenty years: and he slept with this fathers, and Nadab his son reigned in his stead.

1 Kings 16:1-6 Then the word of the Lord came to Jehu the son of Hanani against Baasha, saying,
2 Forasmuch as I exalted thee out of the dust, and made thee prince over my people Israel; and thou hast walked in the way of Jeroboam, and hast made my people Israel to sin, to provoke me to anger with their sins; ... 6 So Baasha slept with his fathers, and was buried in Tirzah:

1 Kings 16:25,28 But Omri wrought evil in the eyes of the Lord, and did worse than all that were before him... 28 So Omri slept with his fathers, and was buried in Samaria:

In case you didn't notice, these are ALL wicked kings. And, this list could go on, and on ....

Jehovah told Adam;
Gen 3:19 in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

This EXACT concept is expressed in these passages, calling death "sleep";

Job 7:21 And why dost thou not pardon my transgression, and take away mine iniquity? for now shall I sleep in the dust; and thou shalt seek me in the morning, but I shall not be.

Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

... then you can go one step deeper and help me also understand the story/parable of Lazarus and the rich man. I mean, I kind of thought they both "DIED" and yet seemed to know quite a bit. I guess I'm not tying this all together. But it feels pretty good to not be 'bound' too.

Oh well, I guess this is your chance, and the rope's in your hand cowboy. Tie me up with your answer.

The parable of the rich man (the 2 tribes called "Jews"), their 5 brethren (the lost 10 tribes) and Lazarus (Gentiles) is an analogy, making the same point as

Matt 21:42-46 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? 43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. 44 And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. 45 And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. 46 But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet.

It's not about literal death at all. Jesus concludes the parable of the rich man and Lazarus with this;

Luke 16:29-31 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

 

[ClementofA]

The difference being:

A) The "righteous=life/wicked=death" doctrine is ubiquitous in Scripture, is the REPEATED message of Jesus, and is expressed in a multitude of words and phrases, AND is the ONLY destiny EVER preached in ANY sermon EVER found in Scripture.
B) Universalist theories are NEVER .... EVER preached, in ANY sermon EVER found in Scripture, AND are NEVER explicitly stated, or explained in Scripture.

All three viewpoints make similar claims. This won't convince anyone.

BTW do you have a response to my post # 757 re 1 Corinthians 15:22-28?

 

[Dartman]

Eccles is often quoted out-of-context as a proof text trying to disprove the Biblical teaching of Hell.

Not out-of-context at all. And Ecclesiastes is CONSISTENT with the Biblical teaching of Hell..... it is the MAINSTREAM teaching of "Hell" that is heavily influenced by pagan theories.

Note the same writer did not know what happened to a man's spirit when he dies, Eccl. 3:21.

Ecclesiastes 3:21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?​

Your comment is a Classic example of "out-of-context".
You didn't start early enough in the context;
Eccl 3:18-21 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts. 19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. 20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.

After Solomon has succinctly, and accurately, summarized Scripture, including Jehovah/YHVH God's OWN statements that mankind is dust, and returns to dust ... Solomon then ridicules the pagan superstitions surrounding the nation of Israel;
21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

​

Jesus did not introduce the account of Lazarus and the rich man as a parable and Jesus does not explain it as a parable later to His disciples.

1) Jesus doesn't introduce MANY of his parables as such, but we KNOW they are! (Matt 13:34 and Mark 4:34)
2) The parable of the rich man and Lazarus starts EXACTLY like the previous parable;
Luke 16:1 There was a certain rich man, which had a steward ...
Luke 16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen ...

 

[Dartman]

"...Will rule, authority, and power still be present on the
New Earth?

Righteousness will be present, which is obedience to God. God says He will be "their God", and the righteous will be His people;
Rev 21:3 .. Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself shall be with them, and be their God.

If so, death has not yet been abolished.

This claim is illogical, and contradicts Scripture. Pure obedience is LOVE, it isn't fear.
1 John 4:18-19 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love. 19 We love him, because he first loved us.

1 John 5:2-3 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments: and His commandments are not grievous.

Let us see: "The throne of God and of the Lamb shall
be therein" (Rev. 22:3). "And his servants shall serve
him" and "they shall reign for the ages of the ages"
(Rev. 22:3-5). "The Kings of the earth bring their
glory into the New Jerusalem" (Rev. 21:23, 24). Yes,
rule, authority, and power are still present on the New
Earth. The Lord Jesus is still reigning,

Yes. Jesus has turned the kingdom over to his Father, and his Father is sharing His throne with Jesus, reigning over the immortal righteous.

the saints are still reigning,

No. Not any more.

and there are still kings on the earth.

The immortal, righteous subjects are no longer ruling ... but they WERE kings of the earth;
Rev 5:9-10 ... for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; 10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

 

[Dartman]

The difference being:

A) The "righteous=life/wicked=death" doctrine is ubiquitous in Scripture, is the REPEATED message of Jesus, and is expressed in a multitude of words and phrases, AND is the ONLY destiny EVER preached in ANY sermon EVER found in Scripture.
B) Universalist theories are NEVER .... EVER preached, in ANY sermon EVER found in Scripture, AND are NEVER explicitly stated, or explained in Scripture.

All three viewpoints make similar claims.

I have yet to see ANY universalist who is so dishonest they would attempt to claim their theory is supported like "partialism"!

I have NEVER found one who would attempt to support their theory by providing a single Biblical sermon presenting their theory, or any explicit statement or explanation OF their theory!!

You will have to do better than mere bluster to be persuasive.