• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured What Does Universal Salvation Mean?

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by AlexDTX, Jun 21, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mkgal1

    mkgal1 His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33 Supporter

    +4,991
    Anglican
    Married
    It's not "our interpretation" of the Apostle's Creed---as if a few of us have gone rogue and believe something totally out of the boundaries of Christianity--but Der Alter....your posts suggest that YOU interpret the Apostle's Creed differently than the traditional way (the ONLY way I'm even familiar with).

    Do you care to offer YOUR interpretation of this?:

    >>>>I believe in God, the Father almighty,
    creator of heaven and earth;
    I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.
    He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit
    and born of the Virgin Mary.
    He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
    was crucified, died, and was buried.
    He descended to the dead.
    On the third day he rose again.
    He ascended into heaven,
    and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
    He will come again to judge the living and the dead.

    I believe in the Holy Spirit,
    the holy catholic Church,
    the communion of saints,
    the forgiveness of sins
    the resurrection of the body,
    and the life everlasting. Amen.
    (BCP, p. 96)<<<
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2017
  2. Der Alter

    Der Alter This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +2,477
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    Only one of the versions you posted had the name "Jesus," the message, and as I have shown the Greek text does not have Jesus. What I posted conforms to the oldest most reliable manuscripts. There are no textual variations for 1 Peter 4:6 so certainly none that contain the name "Jesus." Please feel free to find any Greek manuscript which includes the name "Jesus." When you can't I suggest you educate yourself before getting in someone else's face about things you apparently know nothing about.
     
  3. mkgal1

    mkgal1 His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33 Supporter

    +4,991
    Anglican
    Married
    Look at v 5.....who is it referring to?

    >>>But they will have to give account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. <<<

    The answer to that is the answer to who v. 6 is ALSO referring to. Sometimes there's no need to spell it out---a lot of the Bible is that way (haven't you noticed?).
     
  4. Der Alter

    Der Alter This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +2,477
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    To what point? I said I prefer the Nicene creed. Jesus did descend to the grave in that sense He descended to the dead. But even that creed does not say Jesus preached to anyone or that anyone was saved when He was in the grave.
     
  5. Der Alter

    Der Alter This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +2,477
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    Ignores everything I posted and repeats your same argument over and over. You"'suppose" that Jesus is the one who preached to those in vs. 6 but you can't "suppose" an answer to my question. Vs. 5 is future and vs. 6 is past. Since you have your conclusion about other things that are not stated, please explain that?
    ETA: Matthew 8:22
    (22) But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.[Luke 9:60]
    Now why did I post this vs? Guess the old dude is losing his mind.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2017
  6. mkgal1

    mkgal1 His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33 Supporter

    +4,991
    Anglican
    Married
    And you're not? You keep posting the following (and stated there's a contradiction there that I've said I don't see)....yet you continue to post:
    So? Is there a problem with that? Because I see none at all.
    I see nothing to explain (other than what I already posted--that Christ's descension is in the past....His judgement is in the future).
    You could be correct about that ;)
     
  7. mkgal1

    mkgal1 His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33 Supporter

    +4,991
    Anglican
    Married
    I did find this about the teaching of 1 Peter 3 and 4:

    >>>>II: I PETER 3:18-20, 4:6 AND PATRISTICS

    18For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, in order to bring you to God. He was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit, 19in which also he went and made a proclamation to the spirits in prison, 20who in former times did not obey, when God waited patiently in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. (1 Peter 3:18-20 NRSV)

    For this is the reason the gospel was proclaimed even to the dead, so that, though they had been judged in the flesh as everyone is judged, they might live in the spirit as God does. (1 Peter 4:6 NRSV)

    Many Early Church fathers taught that Christ descended to hell with the gospel according to 1 Peter 3:18-20, 4:6. Second and Third Century Church fathers teaching the descent to hell with the gospel included Polycarp of Smyrna, Ignatius of Antioch, Hermas, Justin, Melito of Sardis, Hyppolytus of Rome, Irenaeus of Lyons, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen. Fourth Century Eastern Church Fathers teaching the descent to hell with the gospel included Athanasius, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory Nazianzen, John Chrysostom, Jacob Aphrahat, and Ephrem the Syrian. Later Eastern Church Fathers teaching the descent to hell included Cyril of Alexandria, Maximus the confessor, and John Damascene. These patristic authors agreed that Christ delivered the gospel to hell between his death and resurrection. The only dispute among them was if Christ preached the gospel to all the dead or only a particular category of the dead such as those imprisoned from the days of Noah or the Old Testament believers.4

    Augustine wrote extensively on the topic. For example, in Letter 164, he opposed a common Christian doctrine of his time by saying that it is absurd to think that anybody who rejected Christ in life would get a chance at salvation in hell. And he proposed that 1 Peter 3:18-20 teaches that the preexistent Christ preached through Noah.
    __________
    4Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev, "Christ the Conqueror of Hell: The Descent of Christ into Hades in Eastern and Western Theological Traditions", (A lecture delivered at St Mary’s Cathedral, Minneapolis, USA, 2002), Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: Christ the Conqueror of Hell » Theology and Spirituality » Articles in English » OrthodoxEurope.org.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2017
  8. mkgal1

    mkgal1 His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33 Supporter

    +4,991
    Anglican
    Married
    Back to 1 Peter 3:18-20

    “For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.”
    I wasn't aware of all three of these interpretations (I've always only heard of position number 2):

    Position One

    This position asserts that this passage refers Jesus who went by the Spirit, and preached through Noah to those that did not obey God and would be destroyed in the flood. Saint Augustine and Thomas Aquinas are a few formidable theologians who espoused this view. To make this view work, however, a bit of finagling with the Greek wordage is necessary. “In which” in verse 19 must be translated “in whom” as the Greek pronoun “ᾧ” (hō) used there can mean who, what, which, etc. The “whom” in this interpretation must obviously refer to “Holy Spirit” and not just the “spirit” of Christ mentioned in verse 18. They also suggest that the “because” at the start of verse 20 should be “when” because of similar Greek situation there. The reading is different then. Now we have “Jesus being made alive in the Holy Spirit (Hard stop) This is the Spirit in whom Jesus went and preached to the spirits in prison… when they formerly did not obey in the days of Noah.” The sum of this view being that it was Jesus, by the Holy Spirit, who was preaching through Noah to the unbelievers of his own day.

    [​IMG]
    “He Descended into Hell”

    Position Two

    This position suggests that the language remains the same as you probably have it and that Jesus literally descended into Hades between his crucifixion and resurrection. They assert that Old Testament saints were not yet in heaven as the New Covenant had not been fulfilled in the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ. In this view then; Jesus visits the Old Testament saints in Hades or Sheol, preaches the gospel to them and raises them to heaven upon his resurrection and ascension. This was adopted by a large portion of early Christians as is evidenced by the addition of the “harrowing of Hell” clause in the Apostle’s Creed in the middle of the third-century. This clause notes that Jesus “descended into Hell” after his crucifixion.

    Many in the Roman Catholic and Orthodox traditions still assert some part of this position though there are differences as to the actual identity of “Hell,” whether it be Hades, Sheol, or even Purgatory in the Roman Catholic understanding.

    This view is also popular in many Dispensational circles of evangelicalism because of the ultra-hard line they see between the Old Covenant (Law) and the New (Grace). According to this view, Old Testament saints were not “saved” in the same way that Christians are (by faith in Christ) because he had not yet come and redeemed them through his blood on the cross. They therefore understand “Sheol,” “Hades,” “Paradise,” and “the bosom of Abraham,” to be distinct from “Heaven” as a restful, peaceful resting place for the righteous before Christ’s work on the cross allowed them to enter into heaven.

    Position Three

    This view asserts that the “spirits” being mentioned here are neither the humans of Noah’s day nor the humans awaiting the gospel in Hades; but that they refer to fallen angels or demons, who are now in chains awaiting the coming judgment.
    ***********

    ....but it seems, Der Alter, that you're of a whole other position than these above. Is that so?

     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2017
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  9. mkgal1

    mkgal1 His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33 Supporter

    +4,991
    Anglican
    Married
    Is this the disconnect? When you read, "Christ proclaimed the Gospel"....do you take that to mean something like, "He gave the Gospel message so they may be saved"? In no case was Peter suggesting that Christ offered deceased unbelievers an opportunity to receive the gospel and thus be saved. That's not what I'm suggesting. The point is that just as Jesus was dead but then alive, so will humanity being dead in Adam be alive through Christ.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2017
  10. Der Alter

    Der Alter This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +2,477
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    Where does scripture say "Jesus proclaimed the gospel" to the dead?
    1 Peter 4:5-6
    (5) Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead.
    (6) For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.
    Jamieson, Faussett, Brown commentary
    The Gospel, substantially, was “preached” to the Old Testament Church; though not so fully as to the New Testament Church. It is no valid objection that the Gospel has not been preached to all that shall be found dead at Christ’s coming. For Peter is plainly referring only to those within reach of the Gospel, or who might have known God through His ministers in Old and New Testament times. Peter, like Paul, argues that those found living at Christ’s coming shall have no advantage above the dead who shall then be raised, inasmuch as the latter live unto, or “according to,” God, even already in His purpose. Alford’s explanation is wrong, “that they might be judged according to men as regards the flesh,” that is, be in the state of the completed sentence on sin, which is death after the flesh. For “judged” cannot have a different meaning in this verse from what “judge” bears in 1Pe_4:5. “Live according to God” means, live a life with God, such as God lives, divine; as contrasted with “according to men in the flesh,” that is, a life such as men live in the flesh.
    John Gill Commentary on the Whole Bible
    to them that are dead;
    not in a figurative sense, dead in trespasses and sins; … but the word "dead" is used in the same sense as in the preceding verse, where it manifestly signifies such who had been alive, but were now dead in a natural sense, whom Christ would judge as well as those that will be found alive when he comes; wherefore the Gospel has been preached also to them that are already dead, as well as to those who are now alive.…
    And by these are meant, not the dead, whose souls are in hell, for to them, there, the Gospel never was, nor never will be preached, nor they saved, as Origen, and his followers, have vainly thought: nor the deceased patriarchs, before the coming of Christ, …whither Christ, they say, went upon his death, and preached to them, and delivered them; but these never were in any such place, but in peace and rest; nor did Christ, in his human soul, descend thither, but went to paradise:
    live according to God in the Spirit;
    while they were here on earth, the Gospel preached to them had such an effect upon them, as to cause them to live spiritually, to live by faith on Christ, to live a life of holiness from him, and communion with him, and to live according to the will of God, in righteousness and true holiness; and now, though dead in their bodies, they live in their spirits or souls an eternal life of comfort, peace, pleasure, and happiness with God, according to his eternal purpose, unchangeable covenant, promise, grace, and love.
    NET 1 Peter 4:5-6
    (5) They will face a reckoning before12 Jesus Christ13 who stands ready to judge the living and the dead.
    (6) Now it was for this very purpose14 that the gospel was preached to those who are now dead,15 so that though16 they were judged in the flesh17 by human standards18 they may live spiritually19 by God’s standards.20

    15sn In context the phrase those who are dead refers to those now dead who had accepted the gospel while they were still living and had suffered persecution for their faith. Though they “suffered judgment” in this earthly life (i.e., they died, in the midst of physical abuse from the ungodly), they will enjoy life from God in the spiritual, heavenly realm because of the gospel (v. 6b). It clearly does not assume a second chance for conversion offered to unbelievers who had died; why would Peter urge people to suffer in this life for the sake of the gospel if he believed that mercy would be extended to all the dead in the hereafter (cf. 2:7-8; 4:1-5, 12-19)?
    16tn Grk “so that they may be judged…but may live.” Greek emphasizes the contrast between these two clauses more than can be easily expressed in English.


     
  11. Radrook

    Radrook Well-Known Member

    +2,676
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    Some conveniently understand that universal salvation means that they can sin as much as they want in any manner way or form that they choose and that their salvation is now guaranteed. Now why would anyone understand the gospel that way? I wonder.
     
  12. mkgal1

    mkgal1 His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33 Supporter

    +4,991
    Anglican
    Married
    Correction.....I'm referring to this passage:
    .....I'm just wondering if you're "hearing" that as an assertion (one that you don't agree with) that "the gospel was proclaimed".
     
  13. mkgal1

    mkgal1 His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33 Supporter

    +4,991
    Anglican
    Married
    .....and some misunderstand that to be what universal reconciliation is.
     
  14. AlexDTX

    AlexDTX Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,531
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Others
    I have been thinking long and hard on all that has been said in this thread. I genuinely wanted to know why people believe in universal salvation. I knew I would get a Scripture debate where the pros and cons would cite their scriptural proof for their position. I am not interested in such debate. My interest is in the motivating factors that lead people to one position or the other.

    God made life user friendly. It is not hard to function in life. Sin and death did not come from God, and that makes life seem harder than it is. It is not necessary for us to know how life works, only how to live life. Jesus Christ came so we may have life more abundantly.

    When I read the arguments pro and con on this subject, I have no sense of life in the discussion. Only academic, natural mind thinking. Only once did anyone give an indication that God prompted them in this direction, and that was Rayjeena saying that 1 Cor. 15:22 jumped out at her. This clearly was a rhema from God. However, just because we get a rhema does not mean we automatically understand the significance of the rhema. She said that she began a research through various books to pursue the subject. That verse states:

    1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.​

    It is understandable how that verse by its self would lead one to think that all will be saved. But it is not by itself. The next verse qualifies what it means:

    1Co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.​

    That does not say all people. It says “they that are Christ's at his coming”.

    Reading the many responses from those who embrace the doctrine, I find this common thread. Many became convinced, not all, of their position because of reading books by authors arguing for that position. And they went back to the Scriptures to see if this is so. Sounds like the noble Bereans to me. Except for one thing: they went looking to find the doctrine. It was not as though through reading the Scriptures for themselves that they found the doctrine through a leading of the Spirit. They were biased by the books to see the doctrine.

    I find two other commonalities in the pro responses. Their backgrounds in understanding salvation were either one or the other, and often a blend of both: salvation by grace and works, or having a Calvinst upbringing and their reaction to Calvinism. And in those two commonalities is the one issue of Hell and the Lake of Fire.

    If one believes that your salvation is based upon your faith in Christ plus your works of faith, then the possibility of failure to do enough and still go to Hell then the Lake of Fire is terrifying. I get that. I am 63 and my brother recently passed away. So I think often of my own day of demise. Occasionally, I wonder if my life in Christ has been good enough? But I can not accept such thoughts. I know Jesus. I know the Bible. I am convinced, not because of Scriptural arguments, but by my 30 year conscious walk with Christ, and my realizing in hindsight how good God has been to me my entire life, that my salvation is secure because of my faith in the grace of God given me through Jesus Christ. I am not a Calvinist. I do believe that one can lose your salvation. But that is not on God's side. It is on our side. We can walk away from God and believe that God is evil and that Satan is good. But, brothers, that is extremely hard to do. I do not need to believe in universal salvation to be confident in my own salvation.

    But what about my brother who recently died? I want to believe that he is in Heaven, but I have no just reason to believe so. My brother had a New Age faith in Christ. As far as I know, he was never born again. That does not mean he was not. It simply means, I don't know. So I completely understand the desire to want to believe all are saved in the end. But a plain reading of the Scriptures do not reveal that to me. The arguments I read for the doctrine required making Hebrew and Greek words be re-translated to fit the argument.

    I am not against Hebrew and Greek word studies. They can add light and clarity to a passage. But as I said, I believe God made life user friendly, and I believe the Lord can speak clearly to our hearts through the English translations we have. Frankly, I believe that theology is the devil's tool that began in the Garden of Eden when the serpent said to Eve, “Has God surely said?” Before that time, they had a simple faith in the Word that God gave them. The question brought doubt and confusion on them, plunging them into the fall of mankind. One does not need to read the Hebrew and Greek to understand the Bible. There is no life in the Bible, the Life moves through the Bible. A carnal mind will get nothing out of the Bible, only those open to the Holy Spirit gain life through the Bible. Understanding the Spirit's communication through the Bible means understanding why something was said and the point it is making. That can be understood in English.

    This brings me to the theology of Calvinism. I do not believe it. I think it is a demonic doctrine that has infiltrated all of Christian thinking. And Calvinism is based upon one theological doctrine that is assumed to be true, yet is never directly stated and another theological doctrine that is stated but is twisted by Calvinism. Those two doctrines are omniscience and omnipotence. Before I address these, I am not saying there is no truth in these doctrines, I am saying the way these doctrines are generally viewed creates logical conclusions that misunderstand God.

    If God knew that Adam would sin, why didn't he prevent that possibility? This question assumes the omniscience of God. God did not know that he would sin, but he knew he could sin, thus was prepared for that possibility. The same question is asked regarding Lucifer. If he knew he would rebel, why make him in the first place? Again, omniscience is assumed.

    Again, I am not discounting His supreme intelligence. I know his thoughts are higher than mine (although the context is not God's intelligence but his morality); I know He knows the number of hairs on my head and has named every star in the sky. I know that he knew Cyrus by name 500 years before Cyrus was born. I completely trust the wisdom of God and believe that Father knows best. Jesus told us to have a simple faith like a child towards God. But that does not mean He knows which choices we will make.

    This is the essence of being alive. Our free will. I believe He knows all the possible choices we can make and their outcomes, but until we actually make those choices, I don't think He knows. I think He knows the probability of what choices we make, but, again, until we make them, He does not know. Even the choice that Jesus had to make as to whether he would go to the cross and die for our sins was still unknown until he made the choice. Otherwise his temptations are meaningless for him to be our High Priest.

    In the T.U.L.I.P. acronym [Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and the Perseverance of the Saints] of Calvinism this point of assuming God's omniscience is found in the letter L: Limited Atonement. It is this doctrine that says only the Elect will be saved. It assumes that God chooses those to be saved and those to be damned. ( I believe that God knows who will accept or reject salvation, this is still by probability but is not fore ordained.) It is this, that I think, the adherents to universal salvation are rejecting. They still believe that God knows those who accept them in this life, but they twist the Scriptures to say that Hell and the Lake of Fire is a purging device that will cause people to repent and accept the salvation of Christ in the end. This is not much different than the Catholic belief in Purgatory. I completely disagree with that idea. The place of purging is the cross of Christ, not Hell or the Lake of Fire. If a person dies today without the Holy Spirit already in them, they will not be resurrected into the glorified bodies that are Christs. As 1 Cor. 15:23 said, “those that are Christ's at his coming” not after their death.

    The other aspect of Calvinism that seems to be at the root of the doctrine is the letter I: Irresistible Grace. This doctrine is clearly founded upon the other doctrine of omnipotence. The assumption made by Christians is that since God is all powerful He can do anything, including making it impossible for the Elect He has chosen to resist salvation. This is also the basis of the sovereignty belief that as the sovereign Lord He can do what ever He wants. For the believers in universal salvation that means since He is love, He is also able to bring everyone to repentance, even after death. This is simply not true.

    God can not violate His own character. He is Truth and can not lie. He can, however, be discreet and withhold information. Nor can He contradict nor disregard His own Word. When He says something it stands. The gifts and the callings of God are without repentance. He gave us freedom to choose, and He will never violate our free wills. If we choose to reject Him, He will call and woo us, but He will never force us to accept Him. That is contrary to the meaning of agape love.

    Which brings me to the reason I do not believe that a person can be saved after he dies. As I said before, the point of purging happens on the cross, not Hell or the Lake of Fire. When Paul says “to be absent from the body is to be present from the Lord” we are only present with the Lord if we are already saved before we die because we have already died with Christ and have been raised with Christ. We are in the presence of the Lord now.

    Cultural ideas of Heaven and Hell also interfere with our understanding of what the Scriptures say. When we read the Old Testament we a see a wrathful, vengeful God. I believe the statement, “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” is a way of saying justice requires equal payment. This was made on the cross by the perfect sinless human who took our sins upon himself. But the writers of the Old Testament were unregenerate. They had a temporary experience of the Holy Spirit coming upon them, but they understood and spoke from hardened hearts that were uncircumcised. So this view of a wrathful God spills into the New Testament, even though all that Jesus said and did showed the opposite. Consequently, Hell and the Lake of Fire have been viewed as places of punishment. I don't believe that at all.

    I see Hell as a prison until the trial of the White Throne Judgment, and the Lake of Fire as the choice of those who rejected the salvation of Christ. God is not putting them there, they made the choice in their physical life. I think the expression of where “the worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched” is a picture of decomposition. We are born spiritually dead in our transgressions and sins. All of our life is the gradual decomposition of the body unto death we call aging. Rejecting Christ in this life is to hold fast to the living death which is already our existence. This is why the Lake of Fire is called the Second Death. The Lake of Fire is simply where all the angels and people are contained that reject God.

    Lastly, the idea that a person can repent after they die does not fly with me. Even though the story of Lazarus and the rich man is an illustration that gaining riches in this life is useless in the next life, one take away from the story is the reply of Abraham to the rich man's request to send someone from the dead to warn them: “They have Moses and the Prophets. If they do not believe them, then neither will they believe someone who comes back from the dead.” I am convinced that when Jesus preached the Gospel in Hades, only those who died in faith believed him and came out of the grave with him at his resurrection. Consider Esau. After he sold his birthright (to be in the line of the Messiah) the Scriptures say,

    Heb 12:16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.
    Heb 12:17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.​

    Being sorry for what you did is not the same as repentance.

    2Co_7:10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.​

    Those that are in the Lake of Fire will only have the sorrow of the world that works death, not a godly sorrow.

    As a final thought. The believers in universal salvation are our brothers and sisters in Christ. This doctrine has no cause for separating them or ostracizing them. I have no doubt, that many things in this final comment will be called heresy, so I stand with them for their right to believe what they do. They believe in the basics of Christianity like the rest of us. I said earlier that I believe Calvinism is a demonic doctrine, yet Calvinists who know the Lord are still my family in Christ.

    God allows every man to be fully persuaded in their own minds. If they trust Jesus in the basics, shouldn't we love them as our family? Who are we to judge another man's servant, God will defend and protect his own.
     
  15. ClementofA

    ClementofA Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,153
    Non-Denom
    Private

    "AS in Adam ALL die
    SO ALSO in Christ shall ALL be made alive.
    BUT each in his own order:

    1. Christ the Firstfruit;

    2. Then they that are Christ's, at His coming;

    3. Then cometh the end [order], WHEN He shall deliver
    up the kingdom to God, even the Father; WHEN He shall
    have abolished ALL rule and ALL authority and power.
    For He must reign. TILL He hath put all His enemies
    under His feet. THE LAST ENEMY THAT SHALL BE ABOLISHED
    IS DEATH. (1 Cor. 15:22-26, R.V.)."

    "...But each in his own order. Not a "but" of exception,
    rather a "but" of order. ALL are to be made alive but at
    different times. "Each in his own order." Three orders
    are enumerated and located in relation to other events:

    1. Christ the Firstfruit — Three days alter His death.

    2. Then those who are Christ's — At His coming.

    3. Then the end [order] — WHEN He shall deliver up the
    kingdom."

    "It is the third or "end" order that many overlook. A
    thoughtful reading of this passage will enable most be-
    lievers to see clearly that the words "then cometh the
    end" refer to this end order to be made alive. The sub-
    ject the apostle is elucidating is: The order in which
    all who die in Adam will be made alive in Christ (vs. 22-
    24). Christ the firstfruit (order one) and those who
    are Christ's at His coming (order two) comprise only
    a small part of the all who die in Adam. A third order
    is necessary to make all alive. To refer the "end" to
    anything else is to ignore the context and to introduce
    something foreign to the subject. It cannot possibly
    refer to an end of the kingdom, for though the kingdom
    will be "delivered up" to the Father (1 Cor. 15:24), it
    will never end (Luke 1:33)."

    "
    Four statements in this passage indicate that the
    words "then cometh the end" refer to the making alive
    of an end order.

    1. "As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made
    alive. But each in his own order" (vs. 22. 23).

    2. "The last enemy that shall be abolished is death" (vs. 26).
    It is the making alive of ALL that will abolish death. As long
    as any remain dead, death has not been abolished.

    3. "When all things have been subjected unto the Son" (vs.
    27, 28). The dead must ALL be made alive if all are to be sub-
    jected unto the Son. The only exception in this subjection is
    God the Father.

    4. "That God may be All in all" (vs. 28). This requires that
    all be made alive. As long as any remain dead God cannot be
    ALL in ALL, for He is not the God of the dead (Luke 20:37, 38)."

    As in Adam all die


    https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

    *******************************************************


    "...it doesn't say what most evangelizers of hopelessness want it to say in that regard either."

    "It is false, he maintained, to translate that phrase as "everlasting punishment," introducing into the New Testament the concept found in the
    Islamic Quran that God is going to torture the wicked forever."
     
  16. JCFantasy23

    JCFantasy23 In a Kingdom by the Sea. Staff Member Administrator Supporter CF Senior Ambassador Angels Team

    +5,813
    United States
    Methodist
    Single
    US-Others
    MOD HAT ON

    Thread closed at OP Request

    MOD HAT OFF
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...