Universalism...why not?

[mkgal1]

Here is the link.......for your Apostatesis...

That's not what I'd asked for. I'd asked you to support your assertion that Universal Reconciliation is not an accepted belief of the Eastern Orthodox church. That video had nothing to do with apocatastasis (nor can I tell the source it came from).

 

[Rajni]

I'm glad you recognize that God is entirely good and holy, and again, an important part of this is that He is not the source of evil, for He neither tempts, imputes or bestows evil, but rather punishes evil, in accordance with His goodness, holiness and righteousness. Just as it's written in 1 John 2:16: "For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world."

I can't quite say He's not the source of evil, given the reasons I've previously stated. However, I should probably make it more clear that also don't think this means that He's running around wreaking havoc just for kicks and giggles either, like Dennis the Menace on steroids. Besides that, there are things considered "evil" which are subjectively determined as such depending on denomination, religion, culture, etc., so that muddies the waters enough to give the topic a thread of its own elsewhere.

Adam - Well, here again we have to look at what Scripture says. In the beginning it was, and I quote, "very good". What is meant here is that Adam was made righteous before God, and this is a perfect state. Adam (mankind) was made in the image of God and given free will. However, he was also given a warning that if he rebels against God, he would surely die; this is exactly what happened.

Yes, I think you may have explained this already, but I'm still of the mind that if Adam was indeed perfect, if he was made righteous before God, and in a perfect state, he would not have rebelled.

However, I suppose it's quite possible that even in his apparent rebellion, he was still perfect, and what has been historically considered his "messing up" really wasn't a mess-up at all, but just another perfect, righteous act performed by a perfect, righteous being.

But again I ask: If a perfect Adam could ruin a perfect setting with just a flick of his free will, then who's to say this won't happen again in heaven one day (assuming we have free will in heaven)? Maybe that's another heavier topic deserving of its own thread too. It's not a question that has to be answered here unless someone wants to take a stab at it. It's just food for thought.

As it's written in Romans 5:12: "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned" Notice this: Death spread to all men because ALL sinned. However, our Lord Jesus Christ says: "Behold, I am making all things new.", and proclaim that sin, death and evil will be thrown out from God's presence. In other words, God's promise for all who believe in Christ Jesus is eternal life void of sin and rebellion. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

I love Romans 5, because it elaborates on what 1 Corinthians 15:22 puts forth, that the fall and salvation from the fall both follow the same pattern, just in different directions:

Just as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. It's the same all, otherwise the sentence wouldn't make sense. It would be like saying something like "Just as I drove a VW to work as a teen, so also does my daughter eat grapes on Tuesdays."

And Romans 5:15 echoes 1 Corinthians 15:22:

15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. ​

Same "the many". There's a parallel being drawn between the effects on mankind of Adam's single transgression and Christ's single sacrifice. Just as... so also.

Then there's another parallel illustrated in Romans 5:17:

17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
​

Then, as if Paul couldn't make this clear enough (maybe while under the influence of Divine Inspiration he foresaw the endless debates over this that would take place in the future

), we have Romans 5:18:

18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
​

One act of transgression brought condemnation upon all.
One act of righteousness brought justification upon all.
Same all.

Romans 5:19:

19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. ​

One act of disobedience by one individual affected everyone
One act of obedience by one individual affected everyone.

Now, I can see it already: Some will jump in and argue that Romans 5:19 is saying that "the many and not all" are saved, but in order for that to work one would then have to conclude that "the many and not all" were made sinners by Adam's disobedience. It's the same "the many", either way, or else it wouldn't make sense grammatically.

Romans 5:20-21:

20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.​

A clear (to me, anyway) demonstration that God sees your sin and raises you an abundance of grace. Every. Single. Time.

God wins (a statement that potentially inspires the Godwin-posts, ironically enough!

).

There are many important distinguishments to be made with regards to Adam and Christ, but the most noteworthy for this purpose has to do with God's promise. In short, we know that whoever believes in Christ Jesus as savior and Lord will not be hurt by the second death, and neither can they sin and rebel, for they are in Christ. Revelation 20:6

Well, there are a couple ways to look at this.

There was the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 which could account for a lot of that impending-doom-speak people interpret as referring to post-mortem punishment for not believing in Christ.

However, as we've already seen, we are made alive in Christ the same way we were made dead in Adam. So if it was the same way, we didn't have to believe in Adam first before we were made dead in him. The whole being-made-dead-and-alive-again transaction was made waaaaay over our heads, and apparently our vote in the matter has not been required.

What believing does help do is give us a clearer outline of what went down, and what it means for us ultimately. That's why (I believe) that, as 1 Timothy 4:10 states, while God is, indeed, the Savior of all, He's especially the savior of those who believe, because knowing now that one's future is so bright they need to wear shades makes the remainder of life here on earth a heck of a lot more bearable than if one is wandering around thinking there's a good chance it's going to be all doom and gloom for eternity. Especially if one's particular denomination / religion comes with a handy list of "unforgivable" or "mortal" sins for one to constantly fret over possibly having committed.

2 Peter 2 - I think all of this is very relevant for our discussion, and you really need the complete context - however, if you believe that all, including fallen angels will be saved, how do you get around this:

"For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment;"?

Now, we should be mindful of what this judgment is. Look at Matthew 8:29: "And behold, they cried out, “What have you to do with us, O Son of God? Have you come here to torment us before the time?"

The judgment in this verse can be at least a couple of things: The fall in AD 70, or the judgment that Christ took upon himself on the cross. In any case, it would be hasty for me to conclude that "the judgment" can only mean "torture for all eternity". Such a conclusion waters down Christ's sacrifice far too much for my tastes.

Again, your argument using Paul is not addressing my question, but only proves my point, for Paul repented and believed, according to God's grace - just as anyone may find salvation in Christ, for it is a free gift from God.

Well see that's just it: Paul didn't find salvation, it found him. That's as free-gift as it gets, imo.

However, the question is what about people who through their own sin and rebellion reject God's grace and die in sin? Where in Scripture does it say that whoever, through sin, rebellion and unbelief rejects God's grace, namely Jesus Christ, will have life?

Those verses have already been shared.

As I've said before, sin, rebellion, and unbelief are symptoms of being lost. "The lost" is who Christ came to save. To punish the lost for sinning is like punishing a tuberculosis patient for coughing. Especially if salvation from such things is supposedly a gift that God bestows on someone—if someone continues in those things, it's because God refrained from bestowing that transforming gift on them, in which case He's responsible for their condition, either way.

Does Scripture say that man can repent and believe after dying? No. The only reference we have to this is Christ's proclamation to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey - which does not mean universal salvation, for it needs to be understood in context with everything else Scripture speaks regarding judgment, that sinners will not inherit the kingdom of God. e.g. Luke 16:19-31 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Galatians 5:19-21

It's helpful to note that a person can be an inhabitant of a kingdom without actually inheriting it.

Regarding sin - Do you suggest that people can pay for their own sins and then find salvation?

Far from it. Not sure where you're seeing that in my posts.

-

 

[mkgal1]

As I've said before, sin, rebellion, and unbelief are symptoms of being lost. "The lost" is who Christ came to save. To punish the lost for sinning is like punishing a tuberculosis patient for coughing. Especially if salvation from such things is supposedly a gift that God bestows on someone—if someone continues in those things, it's because God refrained from bestowing that transforming gift on them, in which case He's responsible for their condition, either way.

I just had to pull this out and re-quote it for emphasis. This is excellent!

 

[mkgal1]

From: Isaac of Nineveh and Syriac Thought

>>>>>“A handful of sand, thrown into the sea, is what sinning is, when compared to God’s Providence and mercy. Just like an abundant source of water is not impeded by a handful of dust, so is the Creator’s mercy not defeated by the sins of His creations”(Sebastion P. Brock,
The Wisdom of Saint Isaac the Syrian).​

This quote from Isaac shows the strong belief he held in the mercy of God. So fervently did he hold this as a personal tenet of faith, that he can be counted among the minority of Church Fathers who argued for Universal Reconciliation; the theological position that all will be saved.
3


Among the Fathers of the Church - Origen, St. Gregory of Nysa, and Isaac of Nineveh stand out as defenders of universal salvation. Each in their own way offers a theological reflection in which the eternal mercy and plan of God is for them made manifest. Origen held the view known as “apocatastasis”, meaning the ultimate restoration of all things and all persons with God. St. Gregory of Nyssa, (also called Gregory the Theologian) abandoned the idea of pre-existent souls which Origen had attached to his doctrine, and affirms that within the mystery of the Divine Incarnation is held the ultimate restoration and reconciliation of all with God. Isaac of Nineveh took the position that hell is a scourging of love, where those in hell have chosen through their lives on earth to be separated from God; but in his thought the doors of hell are locked from the inside. This makes the possibility of repentance and forgiveness being offered to those in hell.

Conclusion
“The entire purpose of our Lord’s death was not to redeem us from sins, or for any other reason, but solely in order that the world might become aware of the love which God has for creation” (Sebastion P. Brock,The Wisdom of Saint Isaac the Syrian). This quote reflects the foundation of Isaac’s program of thought and prayer,that God made us to be transformed by his love. Through prayer and repentance our hearts will be transformed to be hearts of love, so that we will truly be the
image and likeness of God, as was intended in Creation and reached its eternal stature in the Incarnation, Cross, and Resurrection of Christ.

~Rev. David A. Fisher
4

 

[claninja]

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.

Who are the righteous? Matthew 25:37
Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink? 38 And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee? 39 And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?’

Seems like they didn't even know they were righteous or doing things for Christ. They were humble.
Romans 9:30
What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, righteousness through faith;
Romans 10:20
Then Isaiah is so bold as to say,
“I have been found by those who did not seek me;
I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.”



Who are the wicked? Matthew 25:44
Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?’

Seems like they were pursing righteousness, but did not obtain it. They were not humble.
Romans 9:31
but that Israel who pursued the righteousness which is based on law did not succeed in fulfilling that law.
Romans 10:21
But of Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.”


When Jesus preached death to the wicked, it was typically about disobedient Israel.

 

[Rajni]

From: Isaac of Nineveh and Syriac Thought

>>>>>“A handful of sand, thrown into the sea, is what sinning is, when compared to God’s Providence and mercy. Just like an abundant source of water is not impeded by a handful of dust, so is the Creator’s mercy not defeated by the sins of His creations”(Sebastion P. Brock,
The Wisdom of Saint Isaac the Syrian).​

Well put!

It seems that human ego makes sin out to be this huge, imposing entity that even God Himself can't obliterate entirely.

“The entire purpose of our Lord’s death was not to redeem us from sins, or for any other reason, but solely in order that the world might become aware of the love which God has for creation” (Sebastion P. Brock,The Wisdom of Saint Isaac the Syrian). This quote reflects the foundation of Isaac’s program of thought and prayer,that God made us to be transformed by his love. Through prayer and repentance our hearts will be transformed to be hearts of love, so that we will truly be the
image and likeness of God, as was intended in Creation and reached its eternal stature in the Incarnation, Cross, and Resurrection of Christ.

~Rev. David A. Fisher

The Lord's simple message: "I would die for you". That's how much He loves you.

(Now that [rather aptly worded] Prince song ["I Would Die 4 U"] is stuck in my head).



-

 

[mkgal1]

(Now that [rather aptly worded] Prince song ["I Would Die 4 U"] is stuck in my head).

now I do as well......LOL (although...not a horrible thing ).

 

[The Times]

You may want to go back and re-read my posts.....that's not what I wrote.

All I'm saying is enough with this finger pointing, because I believe that most of us are here to dialogue with one another respectfully.

 

[The Times]

That's not what I'd asked for. I'd asked you to support your assertion that Universal Reconciliation is not an accepted belief of the Eastern Orthodox church. That video had nothing to do with apocatastasis (nor can I tell the source it came from).

The same doctrine of Universal Reconciliation is being applied in the video that I have provided the link for. The source is a well documented event.

What you see is the meeting of the heads of all religious organisations and the masses and rituals that are performed in churches around the Vatican in the meet.

You will discern that Universal Reconciliation is being applied here. Watch and tell me if you can see that this is nothing more than Unitarianism, which has been incorrectly applied to the Christians faith, which has invited devil worshippers and witch doctors releasing demonic spirits of the dead as smoke before the mainstream church leaders, with them openly being heard clapping in the background every time the American witch doctor releases a demonic spirit, watch from 27:40.

This is the unveiled true picture of Universal Reconciliation, as being applied within the modern ecumenical context. Easter Orthodox and Orthodox fathers would never allow such practice.

Hervis the link and please do watch and learn the background to where this Universalist teaching is pushing Christianity towards.

 

[Kerensa]

I am very sad that the blood covenant of Jesus Christ is being trampled on by those who are undermining the gospel of Jesus Christ and in addition I am sad for the unsuspecting Christians who are continually being brainwashed into a doctrine of worldly reconciliation, through Universalist Unitarian teachings, that is the antithesis to the Christian religion.

I know I said I'd had enough — glutton for punishment, I guess (just not the everlasting sort ) — but just wanted to clear up a few things.

I am NOT a Unitarian Universalist. Neither, as far as I can make out, is anyone else who's contributed to this discussion. We are CHRISTIAN Universalists. (Of various sorts, I would guess, with a few differences in what exactly we believe, but for some reason, differences of human opinion aren't scary and threatening when you worship a God who is much bigger than any of that.)

I agree absolutely that ONLY Christ can save from sin. I simply understand that EVERYONE will — eventually (here or hereafter, perhaps after who-knows-how-many-ages and how much struggle and suffering until their sins are truly purged) — find salvation in Him. This does not make His sacrifice on the cross count for nothing. It makes it count for EVERYTHING.

If others can't see any logic or goodness or attraction at all in this kind of understanding, that's fair enough. But please — if you're going to argue against it, kindly stop blatantly misrepresenting everything Christian Universalists believe and then attacking those misrepresentations (as per the claims above that we are Unitarian Universalists, that we're looking for "worldly reconciliation" (whatever that is), that we deny the cross of Christ, etc. etc.). That's not honest discussion; it's a diversionary tactic.

I'm so grateful for all our Christian brothers and sisters everywhere who are seeing the GOOD News for what it is and sharing it fearlessly — even with those of our brethren who don't want to hear it.

 

[The Times]

I am NOT a Unitarian Universalist. Neither, as far as I can make out, is anyone else who's contributed to this discussion. We are CHRISTIAN Universalists. (Of various sorts, I would guess, with a few differences in what exactly we believe, but for some reason, differences of human opinion aren't scary and threatening when you worship a God who is much bigger than any of that.)

You see once you know your God, God doesn't become a mystery or above and beyond your understanding of what is required and expected of you, for Jesus said knock and the door shall be opened and ask and it shall be answered. So God is not bigger within the context of those who know their God, otherwise God would be no different to the unknowable god of the Gnostics. Just like someone who travels the world over, the saying is that the world is not that big at all, because one becomes familiar with how it connects and works. The relationship connection that a born again believer has with God, through his Christ is no different than gaining the knowledge and wisdom to understand God and what God expects of us.

There is absolutely no merit to make assertions that all will be saved, because no one can be above the authority of Jesus who clearly and unambiguously states that many that be, will not find their way and will be lost forever. For a doctrine or people pushing a doctrine to say confidently that the feet of mercy extends to others, even beyond the grave is a preposterious and invalid opinion, that should be dismissed immediately.

I agree absolutely that ONLY Christ can save from sin. I simply understand that EVERYONE will — eventually (here or hereafter, perhaps after who-knows-how-many-ages and how much struggle and suffering until their sins are truly purged) — find salvation in Him. This does not make His sacrifice on the cross count for nothing. It makes it count for EVERYTHING

This is all here say and no shred of facts to back up this wishy washy opinion, that flatly goes against what Jesus taught. In fact your asking people to believe the opinions of man in favour of Jesus Christ had instructed and taught and that is not going to happen by any stretch of the imagination.

If others can't see any logic or goodness or attraction at all in this kind of understanding, that's fair enough. But please — if you're going to argue against it, kindly stop blatantly misrepresenting everything Christian Universalists believe and then attacking those misrepresentations (as per the claims above that we are Unitarian Universalists, that we believe in "worldly" reconciliation (whatever that is), that we make Christ count for nothing, etc. etc.). That's not genuine debate; it's a diversionary tactic.

The logic or goodness you claim is unverifiable opinion, that stands diametrically opposed to the teachings of Christ. You and others are attacking the Christian faith by promoting another antithesis gospel that is highly suggestive of Unitarianism, though you do well to deny it. I don't totally believe you, when you say you are not peddling Unitarian Universalism, because when I confront you and others on the issue of John 3:5, you and others don't have an answer in reply, I wonder why?

There can not be salvation to the physically dead spiritually dead once they pass from this life, otherwise you are unwittingly undermining the justifying works of the cross of Christ, because that is only available in this life, while a witness lives and you are also denying the sanctifying works of the Holy Ghost, where he sanctifies a justified faithful before they die, to then be reunited with their lord and saviour.

You are against the Orthodox salvation message and even though you think that this is a threat to your new age fellowship with the bread of malice who know not Christ nor are indwelled by the Holy Ghost, you continue in your ways by attacking the true Christian faith.

I'm so grateful for all our Christian brothers and sisters everywhere who are seeing the GOOD News for what it is and sharing it fearlessly — even with those of our brethren who don't want to hear it

It is not that I am not hearing you, I am hearing you loud and clear, though this news you call good, when scrutinised under the authority of what Jesus taught, doesn't stand up as good news at all. To me I see this news as a threat to Christainity as a whole, without exception.

 

[Kerensa]

What's the issue with John 3:5? If you're thinking being "born of water and of the Spirit" means one must officially join a Christian church and be physically baptised with water in order to be saved, well, Jesus said to the crucified thief next to him, "Today you shall be with me in Paradise." That man hadn't been baptised or gone through any other outward rituals or confessions in order to be recognised as a follower of Christ. But he somehow (even in the agony of crucifixion) recognised who and what the man next to him was and was clearly counted as saved.

Again, brother, I don't think you're hearing me at all; you're just hearing your own absolute terror of an idea that undermines what you sincerely believe (and the exclusive club you honestly believe Christianity to be). I feel sorry for you, but it's only your own fear you're imprisoned in (even as you scream no, no, it's just that you have the truth and people like me don't). But don't worry. God loves you unendingly too. He'll break you out of it in the end. Whether you want Him to or not.

 

[mkgal1]

All I'm saying is enough with this finger pointing, because I believe that most of us are here to dialogue with one another respectfully.

I agree....enough.

 

[mkgal1]

The same doctrine of Universal Reconciliation is being applied in the video that I have provided the link for. The source is a well documented event.

No.....you are clearly confused as to what Universal reconciliation is. It's not about people of different groups joining together---it's what only God can do to bring His creation back to Himself.

This is all heresay and no shred of facts to back up this wishy washy opinion, that flatly goes against what Jesus taught. In fact your asking people to believe the opinions of man in favour of Jesus Christ and that is not going to happen by any stretch of the imagination.

In your opinion (we were not going to point accusing fingers.....remember?).

All three major stances of afterlife (annihilationism; eternal torment; and Christian universalism) have always been accepted. The only form that's been declared heretical was Origen's version that included soul pre-existence. The Bible supports all three stances (it just depends on our own belief system and how one perceives God).

 

[The Times]

What's the issue with John 3:5? If you're thinking being "born of water and of the Spirit" means one must officially join a Christian church and be physically baptised with water in order to be saved, well, Jesus said to the crucified thief next to him, "Today you shall be with me in Paradise." That man hadn't been baptised or gone through any other outward rituals or confessions in order to be recognised as a follower of Christ. But he somehow (even in the agony of crucifixion) recognised who and what the man next to him was and was clearly counted as saved.

The issue with John 3:5 is this....

5Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit (John 3:5)

John 3:5 has its context as follows..

15that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.” (John 3:15)

Highlight the words NO ONE, UNLESS, BELIEVES, MAY.

Nothing is suggestive of what your Universalist ideology claims. If we were to consider your ideology, then it would use diemtertically opposite words like this.....

EVERYONE, REGARDLESS, UNBELIEF, WILL

Every instant the words that Universalist would apply in their exegesis to the words of Jesus are the complete opposites of the highlighted words.

So in this respect, Universalists take every word of Jesus as an Antonym.

Now as concerning the two thieves, how convenient of you to draw upon your Antonyms of highlighted words above, whilst completely neglecting the other thief who did not go to paradise.

So the words NO ONE, UNLESS, BELIEVES AND MAY as far as salvation is concerned, are the words for the correct application of context, whilst your antonyms are just that complete opposites of what Jesus said.

 

[The Times]

No.....you are clearly confused as to what Universal reconciliation is. It's not about people of different groups joining together---it's what only God can do to bring His creation back to Himself.




In your opinion (we were not going to point accusing fingers.....remember?).

All three major stances of afterlife (annihilationism; eternal torment; and Christian universalism) have always been accepted. The only form that's been declared heretical was Origen's version that included soul pre-incarnation. The Bible supports all three stances (it just depends on our own belief system and how one perceives God).

What did Jesus preach?

 

[The Times]

No.....you are clearly confused as to what Universal reconciliation is. It's not about people of different groups joining together---it's what only God can do to bring His creation back to Himself

God did do it through His only begotten Son Christ Jesus, that who ever BELIEVES MAY have eternal life. The words highlighted is BELIEVE and MAY. Jesus came in the flesh to those in the body who needed a savour. God also provided the Holy Ghost as the sanctifier and guarantor to a justified in Christ faithful, before the witness dies (Hebrews 9).

they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. 16For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. 17For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

This means that God has within this earthly life provided the only path through his Son and his Holy Spirit to bring man back to himself.

There is absolutely no path outside of this life for none believers who are not indwelled and sealed by the Holy Ghost, for the sealing happens in this earthly life and NOT the afterlife, upon BELIEF IN THE SON.

Universalists claim that God has provided a myriads of paths, in particular in the afterlife for unbelievers who have not Christ and had not washed thier robes in the blood of the Lamb of God and were not sealed by the Pentecostal Holy Ghost before they died. This Universalist ideology completely violates John 3:5 and is a teaching that promotes a broad path to salvation for those without Christ and without the Holy Ghost. Universalism in that instant is an antigospel message and a diversion and perversion to the authority of Jesus Christ.

Universalism is invented by man and NOT God and is leading many to the broad path to destruction. God has NOT sanctified a path outside of this lifetime, otherwise the cross of Christ and the daily sacrifice of the Lamb of God is rendered not necessary and this teaching is an attack on our Lord and saviour and an outright disobedience to God the Father.

 

[The Times]

I agree....enough.

Second

 

[mkgal1]

What did Jesus preach?

"Your kingdom come, Thy will be done....." (Matt 6:10).

What's His will? Look at 1st Timothy 2:3-4 (for example):

This is good and acceptable before God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

[The Times]

"Your kingdom come, Thy will be done....." (Matt 6:10).

What's His will? Look at 1st Timothy 2:3-4 (for example):

What did Jesus say? and to whom? and in what context?

Before you use Matthew 6:10 out of context, hear at least what Jesus said and to whom he said it and in what context he said it.

Instruction about Giving

(Deuteronomy 15:7-11)
1Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.

2Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 3But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: 4That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

Luke 11:1-4)
5And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

Everything that Jesus taught and instructed was to the obedient believers, who followed his words to the jot and tittle.

What is the will of the Father, within the discipleship of Christ Jesus?

To bring other sheep to the fold within this lifetime, for this is the great commission calling to preach the gospel and to make disciples of all the world.

This is the will of the Father.

However Universalists are not indifferent to those who open their arms to men, specifically unbelievers, so that they be seen by unbelievers. Jesus said that these particular individuals have their own reward. You see Universalists boast their own glory by blowing their trumpets in the street to make friends with the world, regardless of the unbelievers obedience to Jesus Christ and regardless of their faith in Jesus Christ. Have I not said something truthful here. Do Universalists not aline themselves with none believers and don't even bother to make disciples of the world, by advocating another gospel outside of the cross of Christ, by embracing others against the will of the Father.

So what is the will of the Father in this regard. Are you abiding by it through his Son Christ Jesus? Are you proclaiming salvation to unbelievers only through Christ Jesus?