Why does God need to torture?

[brinny]

I'm sorry, first I've seen this...So, if I can prove this,,,clearly without question,,will you confess UR?

I'll do it anyway....I'll start a thread on it tomorrow.

What is UR?

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by Tavita
LOL!.. I'm not yelling at anyone. Sure you're not imagining things?

I think this person has you confused with someone else

I was directing that comment to Tavita. How did you come up with that conclusion?

 

[brinny]

Geesh,,, we've been through this simple logic before that even ET'ers don't bring it up..

and by the way....who created Satan in the first place?

You don't know?

 

[brinny]

I don't know, man, maybe if you changed your mood...it might help. Confusion is definitly not of God. But then that is the very definitiuon of Babylon aint it? Confusion and mixture. Uncertainty of voices....where even Eternity is brought down to the base concepts of the carnal mind.

Think about...there is still TIME. Eternity: never had a beginning, will never end...which can only be God and His Life. All else is of a "time" element and temporal.

Where in the Bible are you basing that on? You should discuss this further, piece by piece. God is clear as a bell on what the destination for those that say "....did God really say?.."" The Bible speaks of deceivers and the father of lies, the great deceiver himself, who is bound and determined to bring as many of God's created with him to his sure doom.....and it's working, isn't it? My my what a crafty fellow he is.

In Proverbs it speaks of truth crying out....that truth offers life...and yet there are those not listening. They are headed for destruction, partying along the way...laughing all the way to the precipice.....

of
no
return

where
there
is

no
hope.

 

[Rajni]

Oh I see, how dishonest, you can't write any answers for yourself out of the Bible, brinny, but bring up a well known internet site and an article written by a well known very anti, very hostile (against Universalism) person by the name of Matt Slick. I don't know how many times this has happened in this forum in the last year.

I would suppose that Matt Slick took quite awhile to write this article and you expect us to answer all these different aspects of the doctrine in his article in rebuttal in one night. Oh yeah. Get back to you in a couple of weeks, brinny.....

Frankly, since Matt Slick doesn't welcome the universal redemption perspective over there on his forums, I don't find myself inspired to entertain his perspectives here in this one. NEXT!


.

 

[Rajni]

If this person had his way, he would bring back burning people at the stake, boiling people in water, ripping bowels out on a rolling pin, ect...

Sad the attitude eternal torture has created in people. If not for secular law, he would be lighting the flames why praising God....I guess we should be thankful for secular law...we would be on the rack now without it.

but if God is not nice.....we deserve it....

Tav, do you want the stake or to be boiled....I claim beheading, so you can't have that one...If they drown you, you may be dead, but at least
you'll be innocent.

It really shows how sick the concept is and what it does to people.

That's for sure.


.

 

[Rajni]

What is UR?

That's just short for "Universal Redemption" or "Universal Reconciliation".



.

 

[Rajni]

Originally Posted by Tavita Can you show me what you're talking about in reference to Hell?
​

Originally Posted by brinny absolutely. My belief lines up exactly in line with what is written in CARM. Read it.
​

Been there, done that. My beliefs used to line up with theirs as well.

Originally Posted by Tavita Can you also show me where in Genesis God declared that the consequences for sin is an endless torment?

Originally Posted by brinny Did you mean that you don't know about the curse that was imposed on His creation in the Garden of Eden before Adam and Eve, were not politely asked to leave, they were driven out. Death had begun. Separation from God had commenced. They were at satan's mercy now. Only thing is, he ain't got none. Remember what God said about the woman's seed crushing the serpent's head? Did you read Revelations?

It would seem that, since Jesus' sacrifice on the cross, Satan's direct role in dealing with people can itself be an act of mercy unto salvation:

1 Corinthians 5:5 "I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."


​

Originally Posted by Tavita Can you show me anywhere in the OT that He declared this to man?

Originally Posted by brinny Be specific.

She was, in her question just before this one. In other words, can you show us anywhere in the OT (not just Genesis) where God declared that the consequences for sin is an endless torment?

Originally Posted by Tavita What did He say was the consequence for sin? You tell me...

Originally Posted by brinny eternal separation from God and to be put in a prison of sorts with satan and his minions ......it ties into why Jesus the Christ died a death that He sweat as it were, drops of blood in the Garden of Gethsemane about.

Consequences of sin? Are you saying there are none? That Christ died for nought??? That it's not a big deal to a holy God that sin permeates His creation?

It would seem that it is Christian Partialism which has Christ dying for naught, if only a scant few out of all the people who ever existed are effectively saved by His sacrifice on the cross.





.

 

[brinny]

Frankly, since Matt Slick doesn't welcome the universal redemption perspective over there on his forums, I don't find myself inspired to entertain his perspectives here in this one. NEXT!


.

ok. thanks for sharing your opinion. I don't agree with you. I have something else i'm going to share. I found it edifying and the message is an ageless one. It's the Holy Spirit, speaking through God's servants. And as i stated earlier, the truth doth cry out for all those with ears to hear. So be it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwbps9k5Dj0

 

[brinny]

Been there, done that. My beliefs used to line up with theirs as well.

​

It would seem that, since Jesus' sacrifice on the cross, Satan's direct role in dealing with people can itself be an act of mercy unto salvation:

1 Corinthians 5:5 "I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."


​

​

She was, in her question just before this one. In other words, can you show us anywhere in the OT (not just Genesis) where God declared that the consequences for sin is an endless torment?

​

It would seem that it is Christian Partialism which has Christ dying for naught, if only a scant few out of all the people who ever existed are effectively saved by His sacrifice on the cross.





.

Read Hunter's signature again. You realize what you are saying, do you not?

 

[brinny]

That's just short for "Universal Redemption" or "Universal Reconciliation".



.

Why do you believe that?

 

[Rajni]

Read Hunter's signature again. You realize what you are saying, do you not?

Who's Hunter?


.

 

[Rajni]

Why do you believe that?

Because the "U" is for "Universal", and the "R" is for "Reconciliation".

.

 

[brinny]

Frankly, since Matt Slick doesn't welcome the universal redemption perspective over there on his forums, I don't find myself inspired to entertain his perspectives here in this one. NEXT!


.

Universal Redemption? What does that mean? When i see that, it draws my atttention to Hunter's signature again.....and the dangers of cheapening and mis-representing Jesus the Christ's death on the cross and what it was for. And mocking God, as if He's not holy, and it's not necessary to take Him tooo seriously....

do you realize what Universal Redemption sounds like??

 

[brinny]

Because the "U" is for "Universal", and the "R" is for "Reconciliation".

.

No, back to my question. Why do you believe in Universal Redemption? What is is exactly?

 

[Rajni]

Universal Redemption? What does that mean? When i see that, it draws my atttention to Hunter's signature again.....and the dangers of cheapening and mis-representing Jesus the Christ's death on the cross and what it was for. And mocking God, as if He's not holy, and it's not necessary to take Him tooo seriously....

do you realize what Universal Redemption sounds like??

First I'd like to know who Hunter is. Who's Hunter?


.

 

[brinny]

Who's Hunter?


.

my bad, i mean HuntingMan...sorry HuntingMan.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
Universal Redemption? What does that mean? When i see that, it draws my atttention to Hunter's signature again.....and the dangers of cheapening and mis-representing Jesus the Christ's death on the cross and what it was for. And mocking God, as if He's not holy, and it's not necessary to take Him tooo seriously....

do you realize what Universal Redemption sounds like??

First I'd like to know who Hunter is. Who's Hunter?


.

Just answered that. Now you're free to answer the question.

 

[Rajni]

Universal Redemption? What does that mean? When i see that, it draws my atttention to Hunter's signature again.....and the dangers of cheapening and mis-representing Jesus the Christ's death on the cross and what it was for. And mocking God, as if He's not holy, and it's not necessary to take Him tooo seriously....

do you realize what Universal Redemption sounds like??

Wait.. Got it ... you meant Hunting Man. I need more coffee.

Okay, now to your question:

Yes, I used to have a signature that responded to HuntingMan's (and many others') notion of what they call "cheap grace". God's grace isn't to be called "cheap" just because He winds up 100% successful in His intended mission (shock of all shockers... He's only God after all, lol!) to save the entire world. If Adam, in his feeble humanity, could impute sin and death on all of us, why would anyone dare to think that God, in His Divine power, can't do just as well in reconciling the entire world back to Him again?!

Now: Do you, as a partialist, realize what you're saying, by essentially suggesting that Adam was better at imputing sin and death onto the world than God will be in redeeming it?
.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
Universal Redemption? What does that mean? When i see that, it draws my atttention to Hunter's signature again.....and the dangers of cheapening and mis-representing Jesus the Christ's death on the cross and what it was for. And mocking God, as if He's not holy, and it's not necessary to take Him tooo seriously....

do you realize what Universal Redemption sounds like??

Wait.. Got it ... you meant Hunting Man. I need more coffee.

Okay, now to your question:

Yes, I used to have a signature that responded to HuntingMan's (and many others') notion of what they call "cheap grace". God's grace isn't to be called "cheap" just because He winds up 100% successful in His intended mission (shock of all shockers... He's only God after all, lol!) to save the entire world. If Adam, in his feeble humanity, could impute sin and death on all of us, why would anyone dare to think that God, in His Divine power, can't do just as well in reconciling the entire world back to Him again?!

Now: Do you, as a partialist, realize what you're saying, by essentially suggesting that Adam was better at imputing sin and death onto the world than God will be in redeeming it?
.

Why did Jesus the Christ die on the cross?...we're not connecting here possibly...let's start with that. We can hone in our conversation if that helps...Jesus the Christ is the Bridge back to God our Creator. Do you agree with this?