Universalism

[Tissue]

Uni's only believe this is necessary after you die.

That's a rather poorly stated representation of actual Universalist belief. It's weak posts like these that lead us to think that you really don't know what you're talking about.

Salvation is necessary, regardless of when it happens.

 

[timlamb]

This is what I mean by 'ignoring points'. Too often, you make a passing joke (which does double duty as a slight against 'the other side' of the discussion) and leave something as, apparently, self-evidently silly.

This post of your's does not constitute a response to post 961. If you don't want to respond to it, then just say so. Be warned, however, that without at least some sort of a response, such a reply may be considered a concession.

First, I didn't think Chaela was talking to me as the one who didn't respond to post 961.

Second. Chaela is rude sar4castic and has been all the way through, so I have purposely ignored her. And if you take no answer as being right you must love talking to yourself because you are right all the time

 

[Nadiine]

See, this is what they all assume, we don't want everyone saved.

This from a person who calls us haters.

Again, they base truth on FEELING & emotion!

Imagine how atheists feel when they see an all powerful
God ALLOWING little girls to be raped by adult men and
then murdered.

When you give them examples of God allowing mean, hateful
and brutal things being inflicted on people He "LOVES", it
somehow changes perspective.
That truth keeps LOTS of people from salvation becuz they
refuse to or cannot try to understand WHY God allows those
evils upon others--
or WHY God judged some so harshly.....
If God can allow those things, it's very obvious that His definition
of love is not the same as ours and it's up to us to bend our
minds to HIM --
instead, they try to force God to bend and fit into their little
boxes.

The fact is that truth doesn't rely on our feelings, but
on what GOD SAYS.
One of the reasons I refused God in my 'liberal' past when
I was so heavily into animal rights is that I HATED what He
did and allowed to animals. I thought it was heartless.

Today, I submit to why it had to be done, and altho I hate it,
it was necessary and God has purpose/reason.

If they want to consider God's plan
monstrous and evil, then it would be on them if they
view it that way.
But sorry, there's NO other way for God to remove evil from
what He restores without containing their unpaid sin in
Gehenna; He knows why He made such a place.

 

[Tissue]

First, I didn't think Chaela was talking to me as the one who didn't respond to post 961.

Ah, true. I misread. My mistake.

Second. Chaela is rude sar4castic and has been all the way through, so I have purposely ignored her. And if you take no answer as being right you must love talking to yourself because you are right all the time

If you are arguing with someone, that means (ideally) you are trading arguments, and providing counter-arguments in response to the other person's suggestions. If, after providing a counter-argument, your 'opponent' ignores you, then it's not unreasonable to assume that they concede the point.

It's not cut-and-dry, obviously. Sometimes arguments just fizzle out. Sometimes people walk away because they think it's ridiculous. It's a judgment call.

 

[Tissue]

Again, they base truth on FEELING & emotion!

I think you mean to say 'they base their beliefs on feeling and emotion'. We certainly don't base truth on feeling and emotion, as we are not the arbiters, creators, or sustainers of truth (nor do we claim to be).

If you did mean to say 'they base their beliefs on feeling and emotion', I don't have a problem with that, as long as it is also recognized that there are reasons and logical arguments behind our position as well.

If you are saying that we have only taken this stance as a result of a frivolous ecstasy, then you are incorrect. I think my posts that have taken a look at the philosophy of the matter are sufficient enough refutations of this idea.

If you are saying that we are letting emotion cloud our judgment, I'm not sure you're in a proper position to make that call. Feeling and emotion enter in to our beliefs all the time. To remove them entirely would be to operate as mathematical automatons.

Imagine how atheists feel when they see an all powerful
God ALLOWING little girls to be raped by adult men and
then murdered.

I think an atheist that sees an all-powerful God would not remain an atheist for very long.

When you give them examples of God allowing mean, hateful
and brutal things being inflicted on people He "LOVES", it
somehow changes perspective.
That truth keeps LOTS of people from salvation becuz they
refuse to or cannot try to understand WHY God allows those
evils upon others--
or WHY God judged some so harshly.....
If God can allow those things, it's very obvious that His definition
of love is not the same as ours and it's up to us to bend our
minds to HIM --
instead, they try to force God to bend and fit into their little
boxes.

If you actually have a reason to doubt that God is loving, then why isn't the proper to simply conclude that God isn't loving?

How, exactly, has your mind been twisting it about so as to believe that an apparent contradiction actually provides support for your position?

The fact is that truth doesn't rely on our feelings, but
on what GOD SAYS.

This is, technically, not true; there are certain truths that do not rely upon God's definition or speech. Mathematical truths, for example.

One of the reasons I refused God in my 'liberal' past when
I was so heavily into animal rights is that I HATED what He
did and allowed to animals. I thought it was heartless.

Today, I submit to why it had to be done, and altho I hate it,
it was necessary and God has purpose/reason.

If they want to consider God's plan
monstrous and evil, then it would be on them if they
view it that way.
But sorry, there's NO other way for God to remove evil from
what He restores without containing their unpaid sin in
Gehenna; He knows why He made such a place.

No other way? Why? Is God not powerful enough? Was Jesus' sacrifice not complete?

 

[CaDan]

Uni's only believe this is necessary after you die.

And what is that to you? Does it affect your salvation? Does it mean Christ did not die for you?

 

[CaDan]

Again, they base truth on FEELING & emotion!

Imagine how atheists feel when they see an all powerful
God ALLOWING little girls to be raped by adult men and
then murdered.

When you give them examples of God allowing mean, hateful
and brutal things being inflicted on people He "LOVES", it
somehow changes perspective.
That truth keeps LOTS of people from salvation becuz they
refuse to or cannot try to understand WHY God allows those
evils upon others--
or WHY God judged some so harshly.....
If God can allow those things, it's very obvious that His definition
of love is not the same as ours and it's up to us to bend our
minds to HIM --
instead, they try to force God to bend and fit into their little
boxes.

The fact is that truth doesn't rely on our feelings, but
on what GOD SAYS.
One of the reasons I refused God in my 'liberal' past when
I was so heavily into animal rights is that I HATED what He
did and allowed to animals. I thought it was heartless.

Today, I submit to why it had to be done, and altho I hate it,
it was necessary and God has purpose/reason.

If they want to consider God's plan
monstrous and evil, then it would be on them if they
view it that way.
But sorry, there's NO other way for God to remove evil from
what He restores without containing their unpaid sin in
Gehenna; He knows why He made such a place.

While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Christ died for even the worst people.

 

[timlamb]

That's a rather poorly stated representation of actual Universalist belief. It's weak posts like these that lead us to think that you really don't know what you're talking about.

Salvation is necessary, regardless of when it happens.

It's the fear and trembling part you don't get, and I gave up giving well thought out respnces because of the lame excuses to believe what they wanted to believe. They always end with "A loving God wouldn't do that" regardless of what I say.

THEY JUST DON'T LISTEN!!

 

[timlamb]

While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Christ died for even the worst people.

Yes, He did, BUT...
THEY JUST WON'T LISTEN!!

 

[timlamb]

And what is that to you? Does it affect your salvation? Does it mean Christ did not die for you?

Nope! But it's a lie, and some will believe it and lose their salvation because of it, and that makes me angry.

 

[CaDan]

Yes, He did, BUT...
THEY JUST WON'T LISTEN!!

So?

Does their "not listening" annul the mighty work of God?

Son of Man, can these bones live?

Thou knowest, Lord. Thou knowest.

 

[CaDan]

Nope! But it's a lie, and some will believe it and lose their salvation because of it, and that makes me angry.

Let me get this straight.

Your fear is that people will hear the Gospel and be convinced "Good, Jesus will take care of me."

This is a problem exactly how? How is this not having faith in Jesus Christ?

 

[Tissue]

It's the fear and trembling part you don't get, and I gave up giving well thought out respnces because of the lame excuses to believe what they wanted to believe. They always end with "A loving God wouldn't do that" regardless of what I say.

THEY JUST DON'T LISTEN!!

The statement 'God is loving' means things. It means that God is not destructive. It means that God pours Himself into others. It means that God wants what is best for us.

In all honesty, I see a contradiction between your stance and a loving God. Thus, I believe that a loving God would not do that. Why is this an improper response to what I perceive to be a contradiction?

You should not be upset with me. If you still think that your position is valid, then perhaps you can show how a loving God can eternally damn individuals that he loves. Maybe an analogy?

As for 'fear and trembling', I do not know how to interpret that verse. I do not think it means that we should be afraid of God, in the same way that I am of ghost stories and other things I do not understand.

 

[timlamb]

So?

Does their "not listening" annul the mighty work of God?

Son of Man, can these bones live?

Thou knowest, Lord. Thou knowest.

"He that has an ear, let him hear"

 

[timlamb]

Let me get this straight.

Your fear is that people will hear the Gospel and be convinced "Good, Jesus will take care of me."

This is a problem exactly how? How is this not having faith in Jesus Christ?

Universalism is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

[CaDan]

Universalism is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

So?

What is the practical difference? Remember, you are arguing specifically that people will be deceived. About what regarding their own salvation will they be deceived?

 

[Nadiine]

Shamelessly taken from Danny Coleman:

Just as there are multiple views of what Hell is, there are also multiple views of who goes there. Thomas Talbott explains these different viewpoints by listing three statements which, if given individually, most Christians would agree with and could find scripture to support. But, if given together, these three statements create a contradiction:

1. God is able to accomplish what He desires.
2. God desires that all people be saved.
3. Most people will not be saved.

To believe all three (as many Christians do) is to hold contradictory beliefs.
​

With all due respect, I'd tell Danny to go back to his
drawing board and do some further calculation.

God is able to accomplish what He desires
God desires that all would be saved
God desires to ALLOW PEOPLE TO REJECT THAT SALVATION

There's the correct formula, and we draw that formula
from facts given to us thru scripture.
Cover to cover.

I'll also say that since God hates evil and will's that we
do not do evil, God WILLS to allow evil to prevail on this
earth for a time - until He eradicates it once and for all.
God uses evil for His ultimate purposes as well.
We saw that in the book of Kings where He sends a lying
spirit to do His bidding.
1 Kings 22:23
Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit
in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath
spoken evil concerning thee.

According to your theory that we hold contrary beliefs due
to what God does, we have to deny 1 Kings 22 altogether
and many other facts we know about God and evil.

So obviously it's false that they're contrary beliefs, the truth
is that God is God and we use the bible to understand His
will and His attributes more fully.
The contradiction is by people who refuse to accept what they're
given in scripture to hold onto humanistic views; most often
based on human emotion, reasoning and feelings....

God hates sin/evil, yet used it to accomplish His purpose.
God knew BEFORE He laid the foundations of the earth
that Adam and Eve would fall - yet He created them anyway
and allowed their actions to take place; KNOWING the horrible
attrocities it would end up bringing with it.

The issue becomes His Will not being what our will would
be. We have to honor and respect that God has a Will
and purpose that we don't see or understand which is
why He allows the horrific things we see & hear about.

Since God can and does Will to allow the most heinous
of things which He clearly says He HATES with a passion,
then we know that God can and will allow people to
die in their sins and be responsible to carry their own
sin debt instead of having it removed by His Blood shed
at the cross.

God has done all He can do to provide that removal and
forgiveness - our part is to recieve it thru faith; repenting
of our evil ways.

​

 

[preistsplace]

Universalism is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Here we would be disagreeing hence this discussion that has over 1000 replies

 

[preistsplace]

Nadine said:

God knew BEFORE He laid the foundations of the earth
that Adam and Eve would fall - yet He created anyway
and allowed that event to take place.

the percentage of his creation destined for eternal flames(figurative or literal) is somewhere between 90 and 98 percent. We did not exist before but were created with the foreknowledge that most all of us would suffer eternally,yet the bible clearly says that "his mercies are over all of his works"

 

[Nadiine]

Nadine said:

the percentage of his creation destined for eternal flames(figurative or literal) is somewhere between 90 and 98 percent. We did not exist before but were created with the foreknowledge that most all of us would suffer eternally,yet the bible clearly says that "his mercies are over all of his works"

Again this is all about your emotions and feeling of dislike.

Let me start out by saying this, I have the SAME opportunity
in my life to accept or reject God's truth just like the next
person has. What makes Believers different from Non???
WE ACCEPTED! God has clearly said that we will reap what
we sow! He will not be mocked. Sow to the flesh, reap
corruption. Sow to the Spirit, reap LIFE.

Anyways, I dislike and HATE the amount of animals God has allowed
to be tortured, mistreated, abused, mutilated for science and killed -
including the entire sacrificial system....

Your analysis then is that if people don't end up in heaven,
then God shouldn't have created them at all? If so,
then the bottom line of your reasoning probly goes something like this:

God is love, therefore God HAS to create us to be happy forever,
or else He's evil.
If so, it's flawed due to this faulty idealism of His attribute of Love.
HE IS LOVE - but in that Love, He allows evil and He even blinds
people to the truth if they harden to it, as we saw He did with
Pharaoh, and those He spoke parables to in the gospel accounts.
Luke 10:21
At that very time He rejoiced greatly in the Holy Spirit, and said,
"I praise You, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth,
that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent
and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father,
for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight.

Matthew 13:13
13"Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing
they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.
14"In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says,
'YOU WILL KEEP ON HEARING, BUT WILL NOT UNDERSTAND;
YOU WILL KEEP ON SEEING, BUT WILL NOT PERCEIVE;​

Veiled truth

Yes God is Merciful too. But in applying mercy to God, people
[purposely seem to] bypass the verses which define that mercy.
He is NOT merciful with all - it tells you that in 3 separate places.
4 actually! Read the parable of the unforgiving servant:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt%2018:21-35;&version=49;

His mercy is based on His assessment of facts - people are basing it
on a general principle as if no other factors weigh in on this
attribute.

It would actually be UNJUST for God to be merciful to one who
shows no mercy to others. God would have to violate His attributes
of justice and righteousness in order to carry out what several of
you are claiming here.
God doesn't operate that way; ALL His attributes are perfect and
He does not shut one of them down to uphold another; they all
work in perfect harmony and unity to accomplish His will.

**One major flaw with people's ideal of Mercy, is that they ONLY
attribute it to God pardoning people's evil and letting them into
heaven despite their rejection of Christ.
What they SHOULD be doing is seeing that people are guilty before
God for the sins they kept (by refusing removal thru Christs blood)
and GOD CAN BE MERCIFUL IN HIS PENALTY PHASE FOR THEIR ETERNAL
SENTENCING.
This is what judges do with the guilty - a man is found guilty, but he
looks at other aspects in order to determine lenience IN THE PUNISHMENT
phase.
God can and will be merciful in His sentencing, based on their works and motives.
They will not suffer as much due to His love and mercy!


... cont. in next post...