Universalism

[Tissue]

Tissue, Philosophy you say? And what is the purpose of philosophy? Is it to attempt to make sense of life, a hobby of sharing of ideas and why we are here on this earth?

Kinda, though I would hardly call it a 'hobby'.

Discuss what happens when we die, and discuss Is life worth living? Is it a bit over-indugence of self and what self thinks?

Over-indulgence? That depends on the person. Philosophy need not be overindulgence.

Does it comfort the dying, heal the sick, lift up the oppressed, feed the hungry, encourage the defeated, offer hope to the hopeless, offer love to the love-less?

There are a ton of very useful things that don't do that. Mathematics, for instance.

What is the purpose of it?

To better understand our world in ways that science cannot speak of.

By the way, the words you asked about are mine.

Just wondering why you're so determined to hate philosophy.

 

[brinny]

Kinda, though I would hardly call it a 'hobby'.



Over-indulgence? That depends on the person. Philosophy need not be overindulgence.



There are a ton of very useful things that don't do that. Mathematics, for instance.



To better understand our world in ways that science cannot speak of.



Just wondering why you're so determined to hate philosophy.

i don't hate it. It is only possible to think on things because our Maker, our Creator, has given the ability to think, reason, wonder, use our imagination, and we need to give credit where it's due. Philosophy is limited and it is brought into play by fallible man. It lacks the depth of what's needed when for instance someone is in intensive care unit, near death after having been brutally maimed, raped, and traumatized to the point of being rendered speechless. And the instance where a female friend of a woman with a chimpanzee was attacked, losing her hands, eyes, jaw......or the situation of someone who just lost a loved one suddenly in a pointless death involving violence. What does philosophy have to offer?

 

[Tissue]

i don't hate it. It is only possible to think on things because our Maker, our Creator, has given the ability to think, reason, wonder, use our imagination, and we need to give credit where it's due. Philosophy is limited and it is brought into play by fallible man.

Again, all thought is fallible, including our thoughts about God. That's hardly a criticism of just philosophy.

It lacks the depth of what's needed when for instance someone is in intensive care unit, near death after having been brutally maimed, raped, and traumatized to the point of being rendered speechless.

Entirely untrue. One's philosophical outlook will have huge implications for how they handle that trauma.

But if you mean it is practically useless in those situations, then should we also chuck out mathematics, and art, and literature, and music?

And the instance where a female friend of a woman with a chimpanzee was attacked, losing her hands, eyes, jaw......or the situation of someone who just lost a loved one suddenly in a pointless death involving violence. What does philosophy have to offer?

Tons. Read some before you judge it.

 

[brinny]

Tissue, share anything from philosophy that would address a traumatized person's needs at such a fragile point in their life.

Originally Posted by brinny
i don't hate it. It is only possible to think on things because our Maker, our Creator, has given the ability to think, reason, wonder, use our imagination, and we need to give credit where it's due. Philosophy is limited and it is brought into play by fallible man.

Tissue: Again, all thought is fallible, including our thoughts about God. That's hardly a criticism of just philosophy.

our thoughts are indeed fallible. God isn't.

 

[2 King]

How does copying and pasting something negate any of the arguments? For the most part it's subjectural opinion and little else. Can you answer my earlier point in regards to the greek words 'aionian' and 'aidios'? Why is aidios used at all in the bible if aion and derivatives were sufficient to denote eternal? What were the authors thinking of? There'd be no question with 'aidios' so why isn't that strict term used overall?

allow me to translate it the "universalist way" (good to know you have thick skin unfortunately that means you are less open to ideas, opinions and thoughts.)

The universalists are fond of translating Bible verses and transliterating a particular word. So, I will use their style in the following translation:

And these will go away into aionion punishment,
but the righteous into aionion life.
​

(with this type of translation, it is easy to confuse what the text is really saying because the reader is not familiar with the Greek word "aionion." The Universalists often do this: partially translate a verse leaving a transliterated Greek word or two in place of English words. They can then tell you what the word "really means." This can be misleading.)

Or, to take a little liberty, it could be translated as,

And these will go away into non "aionion" punishment,
but the righteous into "aionion" life."
​

I inserted the word "non" here to reflect what the universalists intend the word "aionion" to mean when describing punishment -- but not life. Notice it isn't there when describing life because the Universalist believes that the life of the righteous is without end: eternal. This is the kind of thing the universalist must do in order to justify his position. It is clearly false and demonstrates an intrusion into the text of a theological perspective. This is something Jehovah's Witnesses do when they "translated" the Bible. They changed words to make them agree with their theology.
Nevertheless, another translation according to universalist presuppositions might be:

"And these will go away into non-eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
​

But, the universalists state that "aionion" is an age, a period of time that can have a finish. They would then answer this objection and say that punishment is for a time and so is life, but that both of these are for an "aionion" period and after each period is another. In the case of the aionion punishment, it would end and then after that, they would have eternal life. Likewise those possessing eternal life already in the aionion "age" will continue to have it in the next age. The only problem is that that isn't what the text is saying. Jesus isn't setting up a time duration argument. He is telling us that there is eternal life and eternal death.
The universalists have constructed a multi-age scenario to fit their perspective. In so doing, they have allowed for the occurrence of salvation after death, another teaching that is unbiblical. Heb. 9:27 says, "And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment," (NASB). The judgment comes from God and is upon the sinner. The universalist would have some sort of a judgment that leads to punishment that ends and then there is eternal salvation in the afterlife. In so teaching, they have ignored the translations of countless scholars and adopted those interpretations that agree with them in order to suit their theological bias. This is something they do very frequently, and with a vengence since they often turn a harsh tone towards those who do not agree with them.

I hope you can see the inconsistency of translating and interpreting Matt. 25:46 any other way than stating that the punishment is eternal as is the life of the righteous.

 

[Tissue]

Tissue, share anything from philosophy that would address a traumatized person's needs at such a fragile point in their life.

Thoughts on eschatology, thoughts on the nature of death, thoughts on the nature of the soul, thoughts on the workings of the world, thoughts on the way in which death interacts with societal mechanisms, etc etc etc

Each of these has a philosophical root.

If you're trying to make the point that only Christianity can address a traumatized person's needs, then I would point out that theology is built upon philosophy.

our thoughts are indeed fallible. God isn't.

I never said God isn't fallible. What does this have to do with philosophy?

 

[Ave Maria]

Universalism is false and heretical theology and many people have gone to Hell because they believed they were saved when in fact they were not.

 

[Tissue]

Universalism is false and heretical theology and many people have gone to Hell because they believed they were saved when in fact they were not.

Yeah? Who?

 

[Rajni]

allow me to translate it the "universalist way" (good to know you have thick skin unfortunately that means you are not open to ideas.)

If we weren't open to ideas, we wouldn't be Christian universalists.

The universalists have constructed a multi-age scenario to fit their perspective.

Actually, the multi-age scenario is Scriptural. There will be more
than one age.

Joel 2:2
a day of darkness and gloom, a day of clouds and blackness. Like
dawn spreading across the mountains a large and mighty army
comes, such as never was of old nor ever will be in ages to come.

Ephesians 2:7
in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable
riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus.

In so doing, they have allowed for the occurrence of salvation after death, another teaching that is unbiblical. Heb. 9:27 says, "And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment," (NASB).

What kind of death does man die only once, though? If one were to
say "physical", that can't be right, because people have been known
to die more than once (John 11 speaks of one instance with
Lazarus). So, Hebrews 9:27 has to be referring to Spiritual death.
That only happens once, and it happened in Adam ("in Adam all die",
1 Corinthians 15:22a). As for judgment, Jesus said in John 12:31,
"Now judgment is upon this world; now the ruler of this world will be
cast out." "Now" meaning when He was there saying this, in that
timeframe, pending His soon-to-occur crucifixion. He then goes on
to say in John 12:32 "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw
all [men] to Myself." Judgment was placed upon Him for us through
the cross. So I see Heb 9:27 as speaking about the overall history
of events, rather than speaking of each individual person seperately
dying once and facing judgement.

The judgment comes from God and is upon the sinner.

Jesus took the judgment upon Himself at the cross for sinners.
(Isaiah 53:6, 2 Corinthians 5:21)

The universalist would have some sort of a judgment that leads to punishment that ends and then there is eternal salvation in the afterlife. In so teaching, they have ignored the translations of countless scholars and adopted those interpretations that agree with them in order to suit their theological bias.

I hate to say this, but not even scholars (where are they, anyway 1
Corinthians 1:20?) are uniform in their theological musings. And
wouldn't one have to be an anointed scholar themselves to be be
able to judge which scholar to listen to? And, if they are anointed
themselves, why do they need to listen to other scholars in the first
place? As you can see, appealing to scholarly authority leaves one
chasing one's tail. Best not to even go there, LOL! (Acts 4:13)

This is something they do very frequently, and with a vengence since they often turn a harsh tone towards those who do not agree with them.

I've actually seen the reverse -- the partialists tend to get quite
ornery, much like the righteous brother in the story of the prodigal
son, and for very much the same reasons. Or so it seems -- that's
just my personal take on it.

A good rule of thumb I have found to avoid getting snarky in my
posts is to never post when my blood-sugar is down. If I'm hungry, I
should eat something first, then post. Otherwise it's a recipe for
disaster, LOL!

​

​

​

 

[PT Calvinist]

http://www.christianforums.com/users/143521/




LOL!

 

[PT Calvinist]

There's plenty people who think Catholicism is 'false and heretical theology'. Other's think the Pentecostals are doomed and so on ad nauseam...
Jesus was considered a heretic 2000+ years ago so what men deem 'heretical' doesn't always count for all that much.

Nice defense, Greek mythology hinduism, mormonism, JW, New age, Oneness, etc. use the same back up

 

[PT Calvinist]

Hi Universalists, I appriciate your tenacity. I wish you'd use it for the right reason though.

"Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide, and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter by it. 14"For the gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those who find it," (Matt. 7:13-14).
Notice the "Only Few" part. This objects to the teaching of "Everyone is going to be saved"

"For many are called, but few are chosen," (Matt. 22:14)

We can just stop here, I mean after all, this is good stuff.

"And He was passing through from one city and village to another, teaching, and proceeding on His way to Jerusalem. 23And someone said to Him, "Lord, are there just a few who are being saved?" And He said to them, 24"Strive to enter by the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. 25"Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, and you begin to stand outside and knock on the door, saying, ‘Lord, open up to us!’ then He will answer and say to you, ‘I do not know where you are from.’ 26"Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in Your presence, and You taught in our streets’; 27and He will say, ‘I tell you, I do not know where you are from; depart from Me, all you evildoers,'" (Luke 13:22-27).

I'm glad you all are open minded as Chaela stated.

"And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel, "Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, it is the remnant that will be saved; 28for the Lord will execute His word upon the earth, thoroughly and quickly," (Rom. 9:27)

Shall we go home? that's an honest to goodness question.

These verses are plain and clear. Not all are saved; in fact, few are. Whether or not we think this makes God a failure, or that it makes us sad, or upsets us, isn't really that important. If the Bible says it, that settles it. What is left is to make adjustments in our understanding and feelings in order to bring our thinking more in line with what God has stated.

After all, we do not know the mind of God. His ways are higher than our ways. I prefer to accept what it says than feel my way through theology.

 

[PT Calvinist]

I'll bet you wouldn't laugh if you were face to face with ^



That being said it doesn't exactly reflect me as such...

LOL! good to know.

ther is another church? which?

 

[Tissue]

These verses are plain and clear.

They are not.

Not all are saved;

Right; some must go through the remedial, purifying fire of hell.

in fact, few are. Whether or not we think this makes God a failure, or that it makes us sad, or upsets us, isn't really that important.

It absolutely is. What if an individual concludes that a God who would damn people to hell is not worthy of adoration or love?

'Taste and see that I am good' -God

What if, by tasting this doctrine of eternal hell, an individual concludes that God is NOT good? Surely that's imaginable. The fact that theodicies are notoriously difficult to create and defend testifies to that possibility.

If the Bible says it, that settles it.

As always, the trick is figuring out what the Bible is actually saying.

'Holy Banana says it, that settles it,' doesn't fly.

What is left is to make adjustments in our understanding and feelings in order to bring our thinking more in line with what God has stated.

Pardon me, but screw that. I cannot call 'evil' 'good' for the sake of God.

 

[ShermanN]

I AM A CONVINCED UNIVERSALIST
by William Barclay

I am a convinced universalist. I believe that in the end all men will be gathered into the love of God. In the early days Origen was the great name connected with universalism. I would believe with Origen that universalism is no easy thing. Origen believed that after death there were many who would need prolonged instruction, the sternest discipline, even the severest punishment before they were fit for the presence of God. Origen did not eliminate hell; he believed that some people would have to go to heaven via hell. He believed that even at the end of the day there would be some on whom the scars remained. He did not believe in eternal punishment, but he did see the possibility of eternal penalty. And so the choice is whether we accept God's offer and invitation willingly, or take the long and terrible way round through ages of purification.

Gregory of Nyssa offered three reasons why he believed in universalism. First, he believed in it because of the character of God. "Being good, God entertains pity for fallen man; being wise, he is not ignorant of the means for his recovery." Second, he believed in it because of the nature of evil. Evil must in the end be moved out of existence, "so that the absolutely non-existent should cease to be at all." Evil is essentially negative and doomed to non-existence. Third, he believed in it because of the purpose of punishment. The purpose of punishment is always remedial. Its aim is "to get the good separated from the evil and to attract it into the communion of blessedness." Punishment will hurt, but it is like the fire which separates the alloy from the gold; it is like the surgery which removes the diseased thing; it is like the cautery which burns out that which cannot be removed any other way.

But I want to set down not the arguments of others but the thoughts which have persuaded me personally of universal salvation.

First, there is the fact that there are things in the New Testament which more than justify this belief. Jesus said: "I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself" (John 12:32). Paul writes to the Romans: "God has consigned all men to disobedience that he may have mercy on all" (Rom. 11:32). He writes to the Corinthians: "As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 Cor. 15:22); and he looks to the final total triumph when God will be everything to everyone (1 Cor. 15:28). In the First Letter to Timothy we read of God "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth," and of Christ Jesus "who gave himself as a ransom for all" (1 Tim 2:4-6). The New Testament itself is not in the least afraid of the word all.

Second, one of the key passages is Matthew 25:46 where it is said that the rejected go away to eternal punishment, and the righteous to eternal life. The Greek word for punishment is kolasis, which was not originally an ethical word at all. It originally meant the pruning of trees to make them grow better. I think it is true to say that in all Greek secular literature kolasis is never used of anything but remedial punishment. The word for eternal is aionios. It means more than everlasting, for Plato - who may have invented the word - plainly says that a thing may be everlasting and still not be aionios. The simplest way to put it is that aionios cannot be used properly of anyone but God; it is the word uniquely, as Plato saw it, of God. Eternal punishment is then literally that kind of remedial punishment which it befits God to give and which only God can give.

Third, I believe that it is impossible to set limits to the grace of God. I believe that not only in this world, but in any other world there may be, the grace of God is still effective, still operative, still at work. I do not believe that the operation of the grace of God is limited to this world. I believe that the grace of God is as wide as the universe.

Fourth, I believe implicitly in the ultimate and complete triumph of God, the time when all things will be subject to him, and when God will be everything to everyone (1 Cor. 15:24-28). For me this has certain consequences. If one man remains outside the love of God at the end of time, it means that that one man has defeated the love of God - and that is impossible. Further, there is only one way in which we can think of the triumph of God. If God was no more than a King or Judge, then it would be possible to speak of his triumph, if his enemies were agonizing in hell or were totally and completely obliterated and wiped out. But God is not only King and Judge, God is Father - he is indeed Father more than anything else. No father could be happy while there were members of his family for ever in agony. No father would count it a triumph to obliterate the disobedient members of his family. The only triumph a father can know is to have all his family back home. The only victory love can enjoy is the day when its offer of love is answered by the return of love. The only possible final triumph is a universe loved by and in love with God.

[Quoted from William Barclay: A Spiritual Autobiography, pg 65-67, William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, 1977.]

 

[ShermanN]

Clement of Alexandria (150 - 220 A.D.)

"There are very few of the Christian fathers whose fundamental conceptions are better suited to correct the narrowness, the rigidity and the formalism of Latin theology. It is his lofty and wholesome doctrine that man is made in the image of God; that man's will is free; that he is redeemed from sin by a divine education and a corrective discipline; that fear and punishment are but remedial instruments in man's training; that Justice is but another aspect of perfect Love; that the physical world is good and not evil; that Christ is a Living not a Dead Christ; that all mankind from one great brotherhood in him; that salvation is an ethical process, not an external reward; that the atonement was not the pacification of wrath, but the revelation of God's eternal mercy. That judgment is a continuous process, not a single sentence; that God works all things up to what is better; that souls may be purified beyond the grave." –F.W. Farrar commenting on Clement of Alexandria

Clement of Alexandria wrote:

“And how is He Saviour and Lord, if not the Saviour and Lord of all? But He is the Saviour of those who have believed, because of their wishing to know; and the Lord of those who have not believed, till, being enabled to confess him, they obtain the peculiar and appropriate boon which comes by Him.

"..all things are arranged with a view to the salvation of the universe by the Lord of the universe, both generally and particularly. It is then the function of the righteousness of salvation to improve everything as far as practicable. For even minor matters are arranged with a view to the salvation of that which is better, and for an abode suitable for people’s character. Now everything that is virtuous changes for the better; having as the proper cause of change the free choice of knowledge, which the soul has in its own power. But necessary corrections, through the goodness of the great overseeing Judge, both by the attendant angels, and by various acts of anticipative judgment, and by the perfect judgment, compel egregious sinners to repent." --Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, Book 7, Chapter 2, ANF, Vol 2

"1 John 2:2. 'And not only for our sins,'--that is for those of the faithful, - is the Lord the propitiator, does he say, “but also for the whole world.” He, indeed, saves all; but some [He saves], converting them by punishments; others, however, who follow voluntarily [He saves] with dignity of honour; so “that every knee should bow to Him, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth;” that is, angels, men, and souls that before His advent have departed from this temporal life. " --Clement of Alexandria, Commentary on 1 John 2.2, Fragments from the Latin Translation of Cassiodorus, ANF, Vol 2

 

[Rajni]

Universalism is false and heretical theology and many people have gone to Hell because they believed they were saved when in fact they were not.

Do you have a list of people who have gone to hell because they
believed they were saved when in fact they were not? That would be
very helpful in elevating your statement from mere speculation to solid
fact.

Thanks in advance!

 

[PT Calvinist]

They are not.

your problem not mine

Right; some must go through the remedial, purifying fire of hell.

what is hell then? what is Satan? what is Mormonism mor importantly.
How long must they go through purity rituals?
'

Taste and see that I am good' -God

What if, by tasting this doctrine of eternal hell, an individual concludes that God is NOT good? Surely that's imaginable. The fact that theodicies are notoriously difficult to create and defend testifies to that possibility.

It absolutely is. What if an individual concludes that a God who would damn people to hell is not worthy of adoration or love?

are you God? No.

'my thoughts are not your thoughts, your ways are not my ways, I tell you to do things and you do them' - God

we are free to think of our own accord.

As always, the trick is figuring out what the Bible is actually saying.

'Holy Banana says it, that settles it,' doesn't fly.

'Tissue says it, that settles it,' dosen't fly either,

'Universalists say it, that settles it,' dosen't fly either.

'Bible says it, that settles it,' that flys very well.
"all scripture is God-breathed"

Pardon me, but screw that. I cannot call 'evil' 'good' for the sake of God

you are not calling good evil for the sake of God, you are being led by faith rather than your mere human understanding.

 

[Rajni]

"Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide, and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter by it. 14"For the gate is small, and the way is narrow that leads to life, and few are those who find it," (Matt. 7:13-14).
Notice the "Only Few" part. This objects to the teaching of "Everyone is going to be saved"

Is our salvation actually based on a literal "good work", on our part,
of finding a literal gateway or walking along a rugged road located
somewhere? Or do you think Jesus was speaking in figurative
terms here?

The most likely answer to these questions (depending on what
flavor of Christianity one hails from of course) would be that it's
figurative, that the gate is Jesus and the road is obeying His
commandments.

Okay, then, few there be that find Jesus. Is this not much of a
shocker, when we read in Romans 3:9-12:

"What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already
charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; as it is
written, 'There is none righteous, not even one; there is none
who understands, there is no one who seeks for God; all have
turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who
does good, there is not even one.'"

Not even one. Wow! So, yeah, to say that "few" either find Jesus or
obey His commandments seems to be a very nice way of saying
that nobody finds or obeys Him.

But here is where it gets interesting: How many does He find? The
parables that deal with looking for a lost sheep or item until it is
found says it all. Jesus came to do the seeking and the saving, and
as the Good Shepherd He won't stop until the last lost individual is
safe with Him.

The "few chosen" aren't chosen for salvation as in heaven-one-day,
but also for the specific purpose of serving Him in this life. The
apostles were the chosen few in that regard, at that time.

"For many are called, but few are chosen," (Matt. 22:14) We can just stop here, I mean after all, this is good stuff.

Same explanation I gave above goes for this.

These verses are plain and clear. Not all are saved; in fact, few are.

Not as plain and clear as verses that say all are saved. (See Bible
Verses that Support the Redemption of All Things )

After all, we do not know the mind of God. His ways are higher than our ways.

Which is precisely why the eternal torment scenario would be
inaccurate. That's a human's solution to the problem of sin. God's
ways are higher than that. Mercy triumphs over judgment, after all.
God tells us to be merciful as He is -- not more merciful than He
is.

I prefer to accept what it says than feel my way through theology.

That's good to hear! Hopefully, we'll be able to help you with that.
There's no time like the present!



.



.

 

[PT Calvinist]

so let me get this straight. Mormons go to heaven? Mormonism teaches God came from another world, has a goddess wife, and that we can become gods of our own worlds.