Universalism

[preistsplace]

Jesus did indeed said that His atonement was for all, however, Jesus also said that a person has to believe to receive the atonement. There are a multitude of verses to support this. Here is a couple:

1 Timothy 4:10
10 For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men [potentially], especially [actually] of those who believe. (bracketed words mine)

And why it is potentially:

Romans 5:8-11
8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. 10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. 11 And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation. [Bold mine]

see this kind of logic goes two ways..
IE you see the scriptures that describe "eternal torment" and "partialism and interpret the rest of the Bible based on that beleif
we see the scriptures that speak of the reconcilliation of all unto Christ
and interpret the rest of the bible with this in mind.
Also here you use two verses one to describe the other..
It never ceases to amaze me that when this is done by someone who shares your partialst veiw it is called "rightly dividing the word"
and when I do the same thing you call it "twisting the Word out of context"

We, the believer, are reconciled to God by justification which is by faith through grace. The unfaithful is not justified. Can you find any verses that says that the unfaithful is or will be justified?

we assert that the unfaithful will not be as such forever.

Because universalism is merely an opinion but worse because it has no biblical basis.

Only after you can provide biblical support.

We have provided the support over and over again,
If you don't see it that way well thats fine, however to say that it does not exist in scripture is not doing justice to all of the scriptures that point to it.

 

[preistsplace]

Are your sins before a Holy God worth an eternity in fire? Or are your sins not grievous enough for that?

do you hold that infinite punishm,ent for finite sin is just?
If a man steals a television from Macy's should we torture him every day for the rest of his life....that is of course what you say God will do to the sinners.

 

[Rajni]

Are your sins before a Holy God worth an eternity in fire? Or are your sins not grievous enough for that?

Personally, I don't think so highly of my sins that I would view them as worthy of God's endless, undivided attention in a special location designed for just that purpose.



.

 

[LightSeaker]

Personally, I don't think so highly of my sins that I would view them as worthy of God's endless, undivided attention in a special location designed for just that purpose.



.

Yep....because God Loves us.

.

 

[preistsplace]

Personally, I don't think so highly of my sins that I would view them as worthy of God's endless, undivided attention in a special location designed for just that purpose.



.

and he knew everything we would ever do from the moment he thought of creating us, in fact he has known it from the foundation of the world, and for that very reason He sent Jesus knowing who would accept him here and who would accept him later.God is unsearchable in his wisdom and no one can contend with His Will AMEN

 

[gort]

I know this wasn't addressed to me personally but I'll add my two cents if ok.
The early church didn't garner the present doctrine from the original texts. What is "mainstream" thought in the present day certainly wasn't centuries ago. Prior to Augustine and the early RCC eternal suffering was a minority held view. Do you believe the lake of fire to be literal?

I would question your opinion that eternal wrath held a minority view. Regardless of literal or figurative, the purpose of it still remains the same; an eternal wrath.

Erm, there's been several posted all over the thread...

Tim 4:10 God is the saviour of ALL men, especially of believers

That verse does'nt stand alone and negate faith in Christ. One must also remember that faith is a condition of salvation. Let's not forget about that.

It's usually generally accepted that the majority of the world don't believe, or at least in terms of whats required to be "saved". There may not be the exact details in terms of percentages but it wasn't exactly total rubbish

Well, the glass is usually half full for me.

Ah, justice. The idea that it would be injust for God to do anything other.
Thats a human ideal which actually dictates what God must do.

No, it's a bonafide biblical concept. The alternative would be that God really does'nt have to do what He says He's going to do as if its no big deal. That means the wages of sin really isn't death, and ultimately, Jesus died for the proptitiation of mans sin on a whim.

Except the one sin that supposedly sends people to eternal suffering is the one that couldn't be covered by the sacrifice, unbelief.

Certainly you must concede your statement is a wee bit hyperbolic, yes? I'm quite sure the possibility of more than one sin besides unbelief is in the equation.

In what way? Either mans will is stronger than God's or it isn't.

Because there is a 3rd answer available to your false dilemna. It's not about the will of men pitted against God at all. It's about Gods mercy.

It's the reason they're silent thats under speculation. Many christians believe that it would be injust of God to punish infants for they have no knowledge of good or evil. Others (Such as augustine) believe that they're bound to hell because they haven't done what is required to be saved. the fact that they're unable is irrelevant. It's not actually a problem for the universalist position because if all are reconciled then obviouly this includes infants as well. Furthermore if the bible is correct when it comes to the restoration of all then there would be no need to mention infants.

It should'nt be speculated upon in the first place, whether its Augustine or the universalist. I'm not interested in playing God which is exactly what someone is doing when speaking out on a subject in which the bible is silent. Augustine would be in error just as the universalist is in error when cherry picking verses or making assumptions on a position that is silent in the scriptures.

 

[LightSeaker]

Thomas Berry Dies, June 1st, 2009 [- born November 9th, 1914]

The universe itself is the primary sacred community. All human
religion should be considered as participation in the religious aspect
of the universe itself. It is false to say that humanity is the most
excellent being in the universe. The most excellent being in the
universe is the universe itself.

The basic mood of the future might well be one of confidence in the
continuing revelation that takes place in and through the Earth. If
the dynamics of the Universe from the beginning shaped the course of
the heavens, lighted the Sun, and formed the Earth, if this same
dynamism brought forth the continents and seas and atmosphere, if it
awakened life in the primordial cell and then brought into being the
unnumbered variety of living beings, and finally brought us into being
and guided us safely through the turbulent centuries, there is reason
to believe that this same guiding process is precisely what has
awakened in us our present understanding of ourselves and our relation
to this stupendous process. Sensitized to such guidance from the very
structure and functioning of the Universe, we can have confidence in
the future that awaits the human venture.

Thomas Berry

Thomas Berry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36YyNsDfqbY

 

[gort]

I would have to say no to that one....

God is way too Holy and Loving and Forgiving and Compassionate to stoop that low.

.

I don't think so, nor those of anyone else. Nobody deserves to be in agonizing unending pain that goes on ad finitum. There's certainly no love in such a scenario which is apparently what God IS.

What about satan and the fallen angels? Are their sins not worthy enough either?

 

[LJSGM]

Do you believe the lake of fire to be literal?

whether literal or spiritual, I think the message is the same. What is thrown into a fire is destroyed by that fire.

Jude 1:7
In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire

 

[gort]

It isn't true at all. It isn't a question of "not liking it". Anyone can say that people 'cherry pick' verses or take them out of context but the fact is you haven't even shown how this is supposedly being done. How is anything being taken out of context in the verses that testify to the reconciliation and restoration of all things? You explain that and you might have a debate thats worth addressing



As others have since pointed out love doesn't work in the kind of forced manner which you depict. Do you honestly think that all atheists and agnostics etc would rebel against love and the truth of existence once it was there in front of them. Is the love and power of God too weak to change people from within? I wonder whether Saul would have been able to continue his 'merry old way' after the road to Damascus

Reconciliation does'nt necessarily mean all things will balance out on the double plus good side.

 

[red77]

What about satan and the fallen angels? Are their sins not worthy enough either?

I don't believe in a literal satan. It doesn't make any sense. How can a creation of God suddenly decide to rebel knowing full well that God could have destroyed him and any of his followers in a nanosecond if God wished? Are we seriously expected to believe that Satan thought he could win some rebellion against an almighty omnipotent creator? It's metaphor that I see. What caused satan to stumble if he's literal? Where did his temptation come from if he was created perfect?

 

[gort]

do you hold that infinite punishm,ent for finite sin is just?
If a man steals a television from Macy's should we torture him every day for the rest of his life....that is of course what you say God will do to the sinners.

I think there's more to sin than stealing a television, so that's really not what I would say that God will do to the sinners. However, God has made an allowance where Justice can be served and that is through Jesus. That is what God has done for sinners.

Personally, I don't think so highly of my sins that I would view them as worthy of God's endless, undivided attention in a special location designed for just that purpose.



.

But you must think of them highly enough to where your sins really don't merit an eternal wrath.

 

[red77]

Reconciliation does'nt necessarily mean all things will balance out on the double plus good side.

How else can you argue the passages that say that all things will be reconciled to God? You need to explain in detail why these passages don't actually mean what they say before we can debate with any meaning.

 

[red77]

I think there's more to sin than stealing a television, so that's really not what I would say that God will do to the sinners. However, God has made an allowance where Justice can be served and that is through Jesus. That is what God has done for sinners.



But you must think of them highly enough to where your sins really don't merit an eternal wrath.

Whats 'thinking highly of sin' got to do with anything? It's not a condoning of sin to be of the view that people don't deserve to be in eternal torment because of it.

 

[Rajni]

But you must think of them highly enough to where your sins really don't merit an eternal wrath.

No, that's just it. My sin isn't so powerful that Christ was unable to deal with it completely in His first (and only necessary) attempt to do so, on the cross.


.

.

 

[LightSeaker]

What about satan and the fallen angels? Are their sins not worthy enough either?

I know nothing about Satan or Fallen Angels. That's all speculation built upon mental images. What I do know and experience in Jesus Christ is His Forgiving Love and Compassion.

.

 

[gort]

I don't believe in a literal satan. It doesn't make any sense. How can a creation of God suddenly decide to rebel knowing full well that God could have destroyed him and any of his followers in a nanosecond if God wished? Are we seriously expected to believe that Satan thought he could win some rebellion against an almighty omnipotent creator?

There must be a literal satan. It's difficult to imagine how a metaphor will be eternally tormented. After all, why torment a metaphor? (Rev 20:10)

It's metaphor that I see. What caused satan to stumble if he's literal? Where did his temptation come from if he was created perfect?

Perhaps sin runs in deeper waters than we might think or can imagine, yes?

 

[LightSeaker]

Do you believe the lake of fire to be literal?

whether literal or spiritual, I think the message is the same. What is thrown into a fire is destroyed by that fire.

Jude 1:7
In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire

I'd say that True reality is God. All of the rest of this physical world is not true reality. And as long as we cling to this physical reality, as reality...we ARE, right now, IN the lake of fire.

We need to go through our own Sodom and Gomorrah experience to burn our ego away so that all that remains with in us is our true Self, that which is an activity of God with in our soul.

.

 

[red77]

There must be a literal satan. It's difficult to imagine how a metaphor will be eternally tormented. After all, why torment a metaphor? (Rev 20:10)

Once you can accept that eternal torment doesn't exist it becomes easier. After all, you can't answer any of my points as how a literal satan makes any sense can you? Why would such a being possibly rebel when it had absolutely no chance? did it somehow think it could overthrow an ALL POWERFUL God? How does that make sense?

Perhaps sin runs in deeper waters than we might think or can imagine, yes?

That still isn't answering the question is it? If satan is the tempter then what on earth tempted satan if he was created perfect?

 

[LJSGM]

I'd say that True reality is God. All of the rest of this physical world is not true reality. And as long as we cling to this physical reality, as reality...we ARE, right now, IN the lake of fire.

We need to go through our own Sodom and Gomorrah experience to burn our ego away so that all that remains with in us is our true Self, that which is an activity of God with in our soul.

.

We do not truely exist without our physcial bodies, that is why we need to be physically ressurrected, both the wicked and the righteous to be judged. That is our reality.

That is why it's termed "the second death" because we would have already died and been resurrected "physcially"