Universalists: How do you explain the "problem passages"?

[chad kincham]

There are difficult scriptures for Damnationists as well.
Since Jesus was sent to be the Savior of the world (all people), did he succeed, or is he an eternal failure?

Jesus is available as savior for all, but His atonement of sins is only applied to those who believe and repent.

There’s no contradiction there.

Jesus also said few will be saved, most will be damned.

 

[Cormack]

I’ve found Christian universalists to be some of the most gentle, kind and good natured people in all of Christendom.

 

[Cormack]

so they can live how they want now, and sin as much as they want.

If you believed everyone was going to eventually be saved, would you then sin as much as you wanted, or would you resist temptation?

Is the only reason you resist temptation now because of a fear over hellfire? Not because of gratitude for the cross, love of your fellow man, love of God.

 

[garee]

Unfortunately "many" in NT Greek often means "all." In Rom 5:19, surely Paul means to say that all were made sinners, particularly when you look at 5:18. So you need to understand the context, and how you do often depends upon what you start out believing. The John quotations obviously do not mean all. Matthew, however, parallels texts in Paul where many clearly means all. I suspect it doesn't for Matthew, because I don't think Matthew is a universalist. With Paul, however, we need fancy exegetical footwork to avoid universalism.

Fortunately many means many, much or often, just as few means little. If not then it would be difficult to understand a division between the word all and all

As many as the Holy Spirt gave power to beleive they alone have believed . Not the all as in the entirety. Like as many as the father gave the Son. They alone can come for no man can come unless the the Holy Father not seen does the work of drawing them

Strong's Concordance
polus: much, many
Original Word: πολύς, πολλή, πολύ
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: polus
Phonetic Spelling: (pol-oos')
Definition: much, many
Usage: much, many; often.

Same with the word atheist . Non believers or fools . They have their own idea what makes up faith using their imagination . Like Cain who refused to get under the hearing of authority of God word .He refused to do that which was required (bring a Lamb). . .believe God. he did not exercise the faith of Christ that worked in him to both will and do the good pleasure of God as did Abe

He as those in Hebrews 6 tasted of it but saw no value in serving a God not seen .It was proved by his pagan foundation "out of sight out of mind" Plowed Abel under the fruit of the field . No favor was bestowed on Cain as it was on Abel .The first recorded martyr and first murder of the father of lies a murdering from that beginning..

It is how the word faith is used throughout the Bible. Faith of Christ the faith of God the. . power of God that works from within new creatures. Mankind is born with none not little none. The true disciples had little faith as a gift .But it was not something they were born with the first time

 

[garee]

The Talmud is, in fact, a historical record. There may be some mythological entries in the Talmud but it is largely an interpretation of the Hebrew scriptures. But you seem to have forgotten that I also quoted the Jewish Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Judaica and I asked to you review the bibliography at the end of each article
Anything you say about historical Jewish faith and practice is pretty much meaningless unless you can quote some Jewish history but I seem to be the only one doing that.

Historical accuracy is needed but without parables needed to teach us how to walk by the faith of Christ. Christ revealing the gospel mysteries hidden from natural man .There would be no way to mix the unseen eternal things of God with the temporal history.

Parables are needed in order to rightfully divide so that we can seek His approval and not that of historians alone .

 

[garee]

What Does the Bible Say About Eternal Damnation In Hell?

The bible reveals hell is the sufferings of a dying corrupted creation.
Sufferings unto death and not dead never to rise to new life for those born again given a new spirit that will never did and the propmise of a new body ..

No suffering for the dead unconverted after they die and their flesh returns to the dust and there temporal spirit returns to the Father who gave it temporally under the letter of the law death .

Living sufferings like that of Jesus and the father working together as one God they made a living sacrifices .They working together as one did not offer a dead sacrifice.

Holiness of the unseen Spirit of Christ that worked in the Son of man, Jesus, the chief apostle and high priest. Not holiness of the flesh the temporal no power comes from the flesh.

 

[hedrick]

If you believed everyone was going to eventually be saved, would you then sin as much as you wanted, or would you resist temptation?

Is the only reason you resist temptation now because of a fear over hellfire? Not because of gratitude for the cross, love of your fellow man, love of God.

Because the way Jesus taught really is better. It’s not bitter medicine we take because otherwise God will torture us forever. At least not when it’s Jesus actual way.

 

[Cormack]

Because the way Jesus taught really is better. It’s not bitter medicine we take because otherwise God will torture us forever.

Who would we be serving if we went to church, prayed and resisted sin only on account of the fear of hell?

We’d only be serving ourselves, not God, we would be serving our own selfish (albeit understandable) desire to avoid pain.

 

[Albion]

Hmm... not the norm?
Let's read it again. Six theological schools...
Four were Universalist, one was Annihilationist, and one was Damnationist.

"In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa, or Nisibis) were Universalist,

I don't think we can consider six schools in one certain part of an empire that stretched from Britain to Persia to be proof of any norm. If anything, your citation from Schaff shows us that there was a diversity of views on this subject. Important, yes, but I already agreed with that.

 

[Saint Steven]

Universalists can't get by all those verses because Romans 8 and Ephesians 1 are clear that God has chosen believers out of the stream of humanity. The only question in my mind is why? There's no answer in Scripture because no one's worthy of God's rescue.

I think it is slanderous to accuse God of creating humanity with the sole intent of torturing the vast majority for all eternity with no hope of escape. I'm amazed that most Christians have no problem with that whatsoever. Typically just shrug it off.

 

[Saint Steven]

The chance for mercy by repenting of sins and believing in Jesus is only during this mortal life.

That’s the way it is.

Are you familiar with the Harrowing of Hell?
Where was Jesus for three days before his resurrection?
And don't quibble about days. Thank you.

 

[Saint Steven]

You don’t get to quote just the verses you like, and ignore Jesus’ clear words.

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not IS CONDEMNED already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Universalism has no issues with those scriptures. Hopefully you will learn something about Universalism by talking to us Christian brothers. (and sisters)

 

[Saint Steven]

Jesus is available as savior for all, but His atonement of sins is only applied to those who believe and repent.

There’s no contradiction there.

Jesus also said few will be saved, most will be damned.

Where have I heard that before? You are twisting the scripture to make it fit your beliefs.

Try this on for size. See scripture below.
@hedrick brought it up earlier. The "all" and "the many" are the same group in each case. There were results for what Adam did and results for what Christ did. End of story.

Romans 5:18-19
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people,
so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners,
so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

 

[Cormack]

I don't think we can consider six schools in one certain part of an empire that stretched from Britain to Persia to be proof of any norm. If anything, your citation from Schaff shows us that there was a diversity of views on this subject. Important, yes, but I already agreed with that.

The assumption is something like the schools of thought would most likely inform the opinions of the masses. The preponderance of schools teaching Universalism would be an indicator that the majority of people were being taught Universalism.

For example, there are over 300 million people in the United States, but if you took merely the opinion of the big 3 news networks in America, using them to try and explain political viewpoints, you’d cover almost everybody’s view in that enormous 300 million plus number by only a couple of networks.

 

[Saint Steven]

I don't think we can consider six schools in one certain part of an empire that stretched from Britain to Persia to be proof of any norm. If anything, your citation from Schaff shows us that there was a diversity of views on this subject. Important, yes, but I already agreed with that.

This points to the centers, from which everything flowed.
Obviously, the western Latin church dominated eventually. And they gave us our biased Bible translation, which you call the norm, I suppose.

 

[Albion]

The assumption is something like the schools of thought would most likely inform the opinions of the masses. The preponderance of schools teaching Universalism would be an indicator that the majority of people were being taught Universalism.

But they weren't. I hope that was the point. And these schools don't represent a "preponderance" of anything.

 

[Cormack]

And these schools don't represent a "preponderance" of anything.

Preponderance with regards to the information we have. We make choices based upon the things we do know, not the things we don’t know. So if I gave you a room of 30 people, 25 of them saying the world is round, and the remaining 5 saying it’s flat, the preponderance of opinion is that the world is round.

There might be 1000s of people outside of the sample set who believe it’s flat, but we don’t have them to inform us.

I’m writing (so far as I know) we do have those 6 schools from the area to inform us, them and not others.

 

[Albion]

Preponderance with regards to the information we have.

Well, I don't think that it does amount to that.

So if I gave you a room of 30 people, 25 of them saying the world is round, and the remaining 5 saying it’s flat, the preponderance of opinion is that the world is round.

But that isn't what you showed us in any case. Your information showed a diversity of opinion in the early Christian world. And it's not as though these theological schools at that time are analogous to today's seminaries or universities anyway.

 

[Der Alte]

And just what are my assumptions/presuppositions? I doubt that you read anything that I said prior to my rejection of your mythology book.

If you think the Talmud is mythology show me 2-3 examples I won't hold my breath. The Jewish Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Judaica are certainly not "mythology." I find it laughable that you dismiss everything I posted as mythology and you quote some of the writings of an atheist Bart Ehrman.

 

[RickReads]

If you think the Talmud is mythology show me 2-3 examples I won't hold my breath. The Jewish Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Judaica are certainly not "mythology." I find it laughable that you dismiss everything I posted as mythology and you quote some of the writings of an atheist Bart Ehrman.

I just threw that stuff out there. This isn`t something I`m willing to spend my time and energy on. If it was then it would have been at least a day before you heard back from me.

Britannica credible enough for you?

Talmud and Midrash - Legend and folklore