Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Thank you, Chaela, for that honest answer. I don't think God has made the Bible as cleverly designed Rorshach test, but you are right that it is interpreted in many, many different ways.Well, I originally wasn't looking to be convinced of it and I don't even think I knew at the time that it was a thing. But what started that ball rolling for me was a verse that I'd seen hundreds of times before jumping out at me in a way I couldn't just ignore that time around, 1 Corinthians 15:22. It was the launch-pad that sent me reading up on universal redemption and becoming a believer in it.
Just like any speculation on anything dealing with our post-mortem situation, however, it's not something I can prove beyond faith.
The more I've debated others about it, the more convinced I've become that the bible is a cleverly-designed Rorschach test. Different types of salvation can be read into it, and though I see it clearly promising universal redemption, the next guy will see it clearly promising limited redemption. Years and years and years of debating this has brought me to that conclusion.
At this point, it would be like arguing with someone over an ink-blot test.
If I understand you correctly, you are saying that this verse supports universal salvation? OK. I read it to mean that the covenant to the Jews proved that all were in unbelief by the law, hence the covenant of grace could be given to all mankind. Thank you for letting me know what you believe.No one has done much to be saved, what about this.
Romans chapter 11 verse 32
For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
Thank you for your response. It is not what I am addressing. Just for the record, I disagree with your view, but that will take this thread in another direction that I am not interested in going.The concept of universal salvation is an ancient heresy. No one in the Bible talked about the reality of hell, and its perpetuation, more then Jesus. It's indisputable.
The concept of universal atonement, that Jesus did for everyone, is also a misnomer. Jesus died only for believers as He said in John chapter ten. He laid down His life for His sheep. Read the whole chapter and see how Jesus describes His sheep. They are not the whole world.
If Jesus had died for the whole world, then the whole world would be saved, because that is what an "atonement" does, it saves people.
I certainly agree that rules of biblical hermeneutics are not known by many people and agree to the value of such knowledge. However, hermeneutics are rules for logical interpretation, not spiritual interpretation. Spiritual interpretation comes from a heart understanding of God. Nor am I making a case for spiritual interpretation alone. The two work together and harmonize.I think they embrace this false dichotomy because they do not grasp nor understand the proper art and science of biblical interpretation as it pertains to the historic Christian faith.
Unless Christians learn the art and science of textural criticism themselves, their discernment for the biblical account of reality will forever permit and tolerate the counterfeits that claim themselves to be "Christian," to go undetected.
Clearly if one contradicts essential Christian doctrine, by entertaining such dogmas such as "universalism," or "universal salvation," then you've not only blurred but obliterated the line of demarcation between the Kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of the cults.
No, not good enough. I don't see how you have answered my question.To keep people from suffering in hell, to bring them to the joy of salvation in this lifetime, to save them from the ravages of sin, both on themselves and the world around them, and to make them subjects of the King of kings.
Good enough?
No, I do not believe that is the primary purpose. The primary purpose of the Gospel is the new humanity that Christ began. This is why I don't believe in universal salvation. If a person dies without the new birth, they do not partake in the new humanity. The new humanity are all who become partakers of the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4) are become new creatures in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17). Christianity is biology not religion. This "hope" we have for the future transformation of our bodies (1 Cor. 15) is dependent upon our believing the Gospel before we die.So, you believe the PRIMARY purpose of the Gospel is to keep humanity from going to hell?
From the content of what you wrote, it seems like you are saying that you don't believe in universal salvation, am I right? I agree with what you said: "God's mercy and benevolence should not be mistaken for eternal salvation to all." The rain falling on the just and the unjust, in my view, is merely a statement from Jesus that God is good all the time and his unchanging character is such that all He can do is be good towards all people. That, as you kind of said, should not be mistaken for his condoning sin or evil.God sends the blessings of sunlight and rain to the good and the evil:
Matthew 5 (WEB) 43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy." 44 But I tell you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust.
God's mercy and benevolence should not be mistaken for eternal salvation to all. Some are at war with Yahweh (Psalm 37:20). Like flowers that grow upon Israeli hillsides after the winter rains, they will wither like flowers do during the onset of the Israeli dry summer heat.
Riches do not last forever. You can not take it with you when you go. Forgive who ever you can.
Like a merchant who is looking for the best pearl in the marketplace for a reasonable price, God will be saving a few good people.
Sorry to hear that. This is my intention. I want a respectful and intelligent discussion of the topic. While I don't believe in Universal Salvation, I realize that it is being embraced by those with the new birth. I have not yet talked with someone who believes in US who is not also born again. At least, I am not aware of it. It would be interesting to hear someone who does not know Jesus make the case for US.Anymore people will throw the universalist label out there as a last resort for an indefensible position. Really is sad that we as Christians can't handle discussions like grown ups, like children of God without getting all bent out of shape and resort to name calling.
Happened to me in another thread just today even
I have not yet talked with someone who believes in US who is not also born again. At least, I am not aware of it. It would be interesting to hear someone who does not know Jesus make the case for US.
Thank you Lazarus. As I suspected, those who embrace this position are often intelligent and well thought out believers. I do not want to be disrespectful to you or others who have come to this conclusion as though they are merely people who don't want to believe that there will be eternal torment.As I think I have related on other threads here, I was raised as a Southern Baptist, joined the SDA church for a few years, and eventually came across the Salvation of All. It was a trilemma: Heaven & Hell, Heaven & annihilation or Heaven for all? In time, I decided to treat the three positions as theories, and see which one fit the data (Biblical text) best. I did find points (data points?) for theories one and two, but overall, to me at least, the Salvation of All (I have leaned to avoid "Universalism" because it brings up the Unitarian-Universalists) best explained what I found in the Bible - WITH THE FOLLOWING CAVEAT. To see what was really going on, I had to pay attention to my Bible's center-column references, look things up in my Concordances, look up words in my Oxford English Dictionary, consult interlinear texts, and on and on. I took notes too, which have become a 217-page book. I'm not fond of "proof texts," preferring the whole Word of God, and thus my conclusions depend on having read every book, every chapter and every verse of the Bible. I will share my first clue, Genesis 1:1. You all know it, but have you noticed that God never claimed to have created Hell? Not there, not in the first chapter of John's Gospel, not in the many places where "heaven and earth" are paired together - without Hell.
My observation is that believers in ECT have much more to overlook in the Bible than believers in the Salvation of All. I have much more that I can say on the subject, but this will do for now.
Yes, that could happen. As I said, I am just now exploring the topic, so I don't know if there are any who believe in universal salvation without also believing in Jesus.It would be, but wouldn't that be taking this discussion into the realms of other religions and out of the context of Christian theology?
Thank you Lazarus. As I suspected, those who embrace this position are often intelligent and well thought out believers. I do not want to be disrespectful to you or others who have come to this conclusion as though they are merely people who don't want to believe that there will be eternal torment.
I personally believe this view is worth noting because The bible states that It is God's will that none be lost and that it is God's will that all come to repentance. The religious always say "If it's the lord's will" after almost every statement....and also when they discuss asking God for things or the reason we dont get what we ask for (We asked outside of the will....). So If God's will is so important in those cases....why isnt His will about the lost, important? If you say "It is God's will, but man messes it up" then you shouldn't mention "if it's God's will" ever again.....because man's will can usurp God's...........so "If it's Mans will (or My will)" would be more appropriate.
Also.....we believe that a single action of one man Adam, affected all mankind after whether they wanted it to or not. It is hard (for me at least) to say that the single action of Jesus was less affective.
I don't know of Pope John Paul II would be considered "born again", but I would rather not presume to know who is and who is not a Christian. But he spoke quite a bit of what he, at one point, termed as "the invincible guarantee universal salvation". I've got a collection of his statements on the subject here: Pope John Paul II and Universal Salvation | Christian ForumsSorry to hear that. This is my intention. I want a respectful and intelligent discussion of the topic. While I don't believe in Universal Salvation, I realize that it is being embraced by those with the new birth. I have not yet talked with someone who believes in US who is not also born again. At least, I am not aware of it. It would be interesting to hear someone who does not know Jesus make the case for US.
You are welcome. I hope this conversation will remain respectful and intelligent throughout the thread.Thank you, brother. I can't help noticing the huge contrast between this attitude and that shown on the other universal salvation thread I linked to earlier, in which those who put forward any reasons and explanations for the belief in universal salvation have been repeatedly countered with complete (and contemptuous) misreadings of what we believe. For example, that we're Unitarian Universalists; that there's no Biblical or patristic support whatsoever for universal salvation; that we don't believe there's any need for Christ, or that we deny the whole meaning of the crucifixion; that we don't believe in any kind of punishment for sin; or that universal salvation means a sort of fluffy "la la la, it doesn't matter what anyone believes or does because we're all going straight to heaven" kind of outlook.
I've never yet met a Christian Universalist who believes any of those things (I certainly don't!), yet we seem to be constantly fighting the assumption (or the accusation) that we do. So a friendly and mutually respectful discussion, even when we may not agree with each other on all points, is so very welcome. Many thanks again.
Thank you for the link. I will try to look at it when I have more time.I don't know of Pope John Paul II would be considered "born again", but I would rather not presume to know who is and who is not a Christian. But he spoke quite a bit of what he, at one point, termed as "the invincible guarantee universal salvation". I've got a collection of his statements on the subject here: Pope John Paul II and Universal Salvation | Christian Forums
Scripture states in Romans 5:18 that Christ's death gives salvation to all, just as Adam's sin gave death to all. You need to jump over that one.
Thank you Lazarus. As I suspected, those who embrace this position are often intelligent and well thought out believers. I do not want to be disrespectful to you or others who have come to this conclusion as though they are merely people who don't want to believe that there will be eternal torment.
Several supporters of "salvation for all" also say that they actively share the Gospel. As Paul said to the Philippians:
Php 1:15 Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:
Php 1:16 The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
Php 1:17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
Php 1:18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.
As I have seen of yet by those who believe in universal salvation, the fundamentals of the Gospel remain intact. God became the man Christ Jesus, died for our sins and rose from the dead 3 days later. If we recognize our sins and need for a Savior, Christ will come into our hearts bringing the Holy Spirit into our lives transforming us.
Am I wrong in this assumption?
Universal redemption is actually the one thing that I would think puts Christianity over and above any other of the main religions. The threat of punitive measures in the after life is so typical of religions. Christianity has, in Jesus, something that makes it stand out, so to factor post-mortem punishments into the mix simply brings it down to the same level as any other religion, at which point one has to wonder what Christianity has to offer that any other religion doesn't. I might as well be Muslim or Zoroastrian in that case.It would be, but wouldn't that be taking this discussion into the realms of other religions and out of the context of Christian theology?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?