Why preach the gospel?

[Oldmantook]

I've never met anyone (speaking of professed believers) that's an all-or-nothing kind of person. What I mean is.....we all have certain blindspots that keep us from being perfect that only God will be able to heal us of (in my belief, anyway). It's not that we can be classified as a "FORMER believer" because of imperfections.

What do you mean by imperfections? Is known habitual sin an imperfection? Is the believer who continues to practice sin and remains unrepentant just imperfect and still saved? I doubt it; certainly not according to the scriptures.
For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live. Rom 8:13
Paul warned the brethren that spiritual death is the consequence of sowing to the flesh instead of the Spirit. I doubt that he saw it as "imperfections."

 

[narrowgateevangelist]

Matthew 28: 17. And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. 18. And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

John 17: 17. Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. 18. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. 19. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. 20. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21. That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23. I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. 24. Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.

The above passages are why I proclaim the Gospel.

 

[ladodgers6]

Even though "hell" is temporary & not eternal, people still need to repent, for God commands all to do so & sinful living harms others & ourselves. People should not live selfishly, but righteously and lovingly toward other human beings, in Jesus' name. Otherwise they will suffer the consequences.

Hell is not temporary and it is eternal. No sin will go unpunished. Jesus spoke more about hell, than any other person in the bible. This plight is so serious that God himself in Christ had to redeem, restore, save his people from their sins, by becoming a curse for them. And by fulfilling the broken Covenant with perfect obedience. So in essence Christ propitiates God's wrath, and reconciles the world to himself! Without any of this, nobody will see the father!

But in your theology, people who get punished for life, is unfair? It's like serial killers, child abusers, pedophiles, rapists, murderers, etc., should not get life sentences or face the death penalty! Because it is not fair or morally wrong? If that is the case, then why have any laws?

Nonsense. I never stated any such thing. Christ is the Saviour of the world. Without Him crucified no one gets saved. With Him all shall be saved.

You remove the sting of death, and all of the broken sanctions of the law for unbelievers. But then you place the yoke of the law on believers.

I've already said: "So why evangelize? Because Christ commanded it." But that doesn't necessarily mean He has commanded "us", you, or me to do so. It only applies to those whom He has made such a command. If that's you, then go for it. Are all evangelists? No.

We share the free gift of Christ to the ungodly! They do not earn it, qualify for it. This is the announcement about who Christ is and what he accomplished on the cross!!!

I disagree with the notion that those who never heard, but would have believed if they had heard, will be sent by Love Omnipotent to suffer eternal tortures.

I am not into these types of questions. Because God has a plan of redemption, to save all of his people. Christ did save his bribe.

I disagree with the notion that God is depending on Christians preaching the gospel in order to save other human beings to such a degree that He is helpless to save them otherwise & they will spend endless eons screaming in fire if some Christian doesn't reach them with the gospel.

Do not be ashamed of the Gospel, because it is the power of God unto salvation!!!

Does this imply that Tyre & Sidon (and at least some of Sodom) will repent of their sins on judgement day:

Mt.11:21“Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had happened in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. 23 And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to heaven? No, you will descend to Hades! For if the miracles that were performed in you had happened in Sodom, it would have remained to this day.

Not so, keep reading:

Come to Me, and I Will Give You Rest​

25At that time Jesus declared, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; 26yes, Father, for such was your gracious will.g 27All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. 28Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

As i stated in the OP:

In 5 point ECT Calvinism what is the urgency to preach the gospel? If all of the elect will be saved no matter what & all of the nonelect will be lost no matter what, then there is no urgency to preach the gospel.

Asked and answered. We do not know who the elect are! And this is what God wants us to do! This Gospel is the calling to his sheep who hear his voice and follow him! This is foolishness to the wise and a stumbling block for the Jews. The argument you make here destroys universalism which you believe in, not Calvinism.

In ECT Arminianism what is the urgency to preach the gospel? Will Love Omnipotent damn to ECT anyone who never heard?

You face the same problem as the Arminian.

Does much evangelizing cause more harm than good? Yes. How many millions reject the Gospel because it is associated with a being who tortures billions forever or annihilates them into endless nonexistence? Hundreds of millions?

Are those who profess Christ only out of fear & for fire insurance really saved?

God will not lower his perfect standard of holiness to let us into heaven. Our holiness is measured against God's holy law. And if we fall short in fulfilling everything in the Law, we're fall under the curse of the law, which is: death, condemnation, bondage to the curse of that law that keeps condemning us because of the knowledge of sin. And to bring this to its conclusion. Jesus in Matthew 11 speaks of Hades, where those who do not repent will go to hell!

 

[ladodgers6]

HELL IS NOT SEPARATION FROM GOD

Michael Horton Thursday, 28 Dec 17

Unquestionably, irresponsible speculation about hell on both sides of the debate have made the discussion considerably more difficult. Whether it is vivid descriptions of Dante's Inferno or revivalist "hellfire and brimstone" sermons, the impression is too often given that we must go beyond biblical description to alert people to avoid such a dreadful place.

The problem here is that hell, rather than God, becomes the object of fear. Think of Jesus' sober warning: "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matt. 10:28). Hell is not horrible because of alleged implements of torture or its temperature. (After all, it is described variously in Scripture as "outer darkness" and a "lake of fire.")

Whatever the exact nature of this everlasting judgment, it is horrible ultimately for one reason only: God is present. This sounds strange to those of us familiar with the definition of hell as "separation from God" and heaven as a place for those who have a "personal relationship with God." But Scripture nowhere speaks in these terms. Quite the contrary, if we read the Bible carefully we conclude that everyone, as a creature made in God's image, has a personal relationship with God. Therefore, God is, after the fall, either in the relationship of a judge or a father to his creatures.

And God, who is present everywhere at all times, will be present forever in hell as the judge. "Hell reigns wherever there is no peace with God," John Calvin wrote, refusing to speculate on its salacious horrors. When our conscience condemns us, "We carry always a hell within us" (Gen. Epp. 167).

Just as heaven is not purely future, but is breaking in on the present through the kingdom of God, hell, too, is breaking in on the present: "The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them." But they are left without excuse (Rom. 1:18-19). Their tortured consciences drive them to expel the thought of God entirely from their horizon, but they cannot evade the revelation of God's wrath.

Hell is not ultimately about fire, but about God. Whatever the exact nature of the physical punishments, the real terror awaiting the unrepentant is God himself and his inescapable presence forever with his face turned against them:

"They will drink the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb" (Rev 14:10).

God's Holy Love​

A measure of our own ongoing sinfulness is that we just don't understand the beauty of God's holiness, righteousness, and justice and the equal ultimacy of these attributes with his love. But one day we will not have a problem with eternal punishment. It will make perfect sense. We are not entitled, much less required, in our present condition to defend the doctrine of eternal punishment in any way that either exceeds Scripture or reflects a perverse delight in damnation.

Since God does not delight in the death of the wicked, neither can we. Hell is both the vindication of God's justice and the prerequisite for his creation's restoration. But it is also a tragedy and will forever memorialize the tragedy of human rebellion.

God justifies the wicked: this is the astonishing and counter-intuitive claim that distinguishes Christianity from every other religion. In any defense of the traditional doctrine, we must let our interlocutor know that, unlike the terrorist's "Allah," God "so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son" for the salvation of every believer. Islam has no concept of the fall, original sin, or the impossibility of attaining righteousness by good works, and consequently, knows nothing of justification, sanctification, and redemptive mediation.

For Islam, it's simple: good people go to heaven, bad people go to hell; it is self-salvation from beginning to end. In sub-Christian versions, the "good news" is that sinners can be partly saved and partly condemned; they can atone for at least some of their sins by their own suffering. But the genuine "good news" of revelation is that God justifies the wicked who place their trust in Christ and find God a reconciled friend now and forever, world without end. Amen.

Adapted from Michael Horton, “Is Hell Separation from God?,” Modern Reformation, May/June 2002. Used by permission.

 

[ClementofA]

I do believe that 1 Cor 3:15 does indeed refer to the LOF though the text itself does not state that. Eternal security types are fond of using that verse as a proof-text for OSAS but they typically never bother to explain what being saved by fire entails. Ironically, I believe it actually means the opposite of eternal security as the sinning believer as evidenced by their works (or lack of) is condemned to spiritual death in the LOF where he reaps what he has sown despite once having a knowledge of the truth. Eventually, after spending an "age" of time in the LOF, he is reconciled back to God thus being saved by fire.

I'd like to learn more about your view on this, OMT. Perhaps you've already explained it in a OSAS discussion. What leads you re 1 Cor.3:15 to "believe it actually means the opposite of eternal security as the sinning believer as evidenced by their works (or lack of) is condemned to spiritual death in the LOF where he reaps what he has sown despite once having a knowledge of the truth. Eventually, after spending an "age" of time in the LOF, he is reconciled back to God thus being saved by fire"?

BTW, if you haven't seen this discussion already, it might be of interest:

https://forum.evangelicaluniversalist.com/t/1-corinthians-3-15-universal-salvation-in/6171

 

[Oldmantook]

I'd like to learn more about your view on this, OMT. Perhaps you've already explained it in a OSAS discussion. What leads you re 1 Cor.3:15 to "believe it actually means the opposite of eternal security as the sinning believer as evidenced by their works (or lack of) is condemned to spiritual death in the LOF where he reaps what he has sown despite once having a knowledge of the truth. Eventually, after spending an "age" of time in the LOF, he is reconciled back to God thus being saved by fire"?

BTW, if you haven't seen this discussion already, it might be of interest:

https://forum.evangelicaluniversalist.com/t/1-corinthians-3-15-universal-salvation-in/6171

Can you break down your questions and be more specific as I don't wish to ramble and presume to know what you are particularly interested in.

 

[ClementofA]

But in your theology, people who get punished for life, is unfair? It's like serial killers, child abusers, pedophiles, rapists, murderers, etc., should not get life sentences or face the death penalty! Because it is not fair or morally wrong? If that is the case, then why have any laws?

You remove the sting of death, and all of the broken sanctions of the law for unbelievers. But then you place the yoke of the law on believers.

Evidently, brother, you are quite misinformed regarding universalism. May i suggest some reading:

statement of faith
http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57

7 myths
https://reforminghell.com/7-myths-about-universalism/
http://evangelicaluniversalist.blogspot.com/2008/04/responses-to-evangelical-objections-to.html

Checkout the orthodox universalism majority in the early church (and a hope for universalism majority in the present day church):

https://www.christianforums.com/thr...niversalism-since-early-church-times.8042013/

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unfund...017/04/indeed-many-universalism-early-church/

If you think the Bible & the early church & the modern church are all wrong, you will have to prove it.

If you think Love Omnipotent's love is finite & expires like a carton of milk so He can torture most of His creatures called human beings in fire with immortal worms eating them for all endless trillions X trillions X trillions of eons, forever and ever and ever, you will have to prove it.

 

[ClementofA]

Can you break down your questions and be more specific as I don't wish to ramble and presume to know what you are particularly interested in.

Okay, do you view 1 Cor.3:15 as referring to sinning believers only, or to all the unsaved?

Who does 1 Cor.3:17 refer to? Are those God destroys (v.17) the same as those who shall be saved (v.15)?

What are wood, hay & stubble (v.12) & gold, silver & precious stones (v.12)?

What is the "reward" (v.14)? Salvation?

 

[Oldmantook]

Okay, do you view 1 Cor.3:15 as referring to sinning believers only, or to all the unsaved?

I think the context of this verse refers to sinning believers only. Notice that in v.1 Paul refers to his audience as "brethren/brothers" although they are fleshly, marked by strife and jealousy (v.3). This is further confirmed later on in v.9 where Paul refers to them as God's field/building and v.16 where he refers to them as the temple of God - terms never descriptive of the unsaved. For these reasons I believe v.15 refers to sinning believers. However having said that, I as a Christian Universalist also believe that the unsaved in the LOF are also eventually saved. 1 Cor 3 though is a passage that deals specifically with the saved believer.

Who does 1 Cor.3:17 refer to? Are those God destroys (v.17) the same as those who shall be saved (v.15)?

I tend to think so. The Greek word for "destroy" can also mean "corrupt." Believers are the temple of God and we can corrupt our temples in which the Holy Spirit dwells through continued sin and disobedience. The penalty for unrepentant sin is spiritual death/destruction in the lake of fire which at some future age results in their restoration.

What are wood, hay & stubble (v.12) & gold, silver & precious stones (v.12)?

These building materials in v.12 are the believer's works in v.13. The foundation is Jesus Christ (v.11). Our works built upon the foundation of Jesus Christ who is the cornerstone of our faith, will either be worthy using quality building materials such as gold, silver & precious stones which last; or will be unworthy made of wood, hay & stubble and burned up. I believe that this judgment takes
place when Jesus returns at his 2nd Coming. Isaiah 66:15 refers to this: “For behold, the LORD will come in fire, and his chariots like the whirlwind, to render his anger in fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire." In that "Day" (v.13) of the Lord's return, He will test the quality of each man's works and will rebuke with flames of fire those whose works of wood, hay & stubble are judged to be unworthy.

What is the "reward" (v.14)? Salvation?

The "reward" is not one's salvation as he shall suffer loss but still be saved through fire. If he is eventually saved, how can it be said that he suffered the loss of his salvation? That does not make any sense. If one's work is burned up he shall suffer loss (v.15). What loss is that? The loss of his "reward" in v.14. I believe this references a singular reward that Paul elsewhere refers to in Phil 3:11 - the "exanastasis" or out-resurrection. The word exanastasis only occurs this one time in the NT. In Phil 3:12 Paul clearly states that he has not yet attained to the out-resurrection and that it is a goal and prize to be reached (v.14). As a prize to be attained to, I don't think Paul was referring to the gift of salvation. And at this point in his life, I don't think that Paul was doubting his salvation either. I think that the reward spoken of in 1 Cor 3:14 is the same prize that Paul describes in Phil 3:11,14. What is the out-resurrection? It is the first resurrection described in Rev 20:4-6.
4Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.
Paul's goal was to attain to the first resurrection in order to reign with Christ for a thousand years. That is why it is the "better resurrection" spoken of in Heb 11:35. To summarize, the "reward" is the "better resurrection," which is the exanastasis, which is the first resurrection - in order that those who have figuratively and literally sacrificed their lives to follow Christ will get to co-reign with Him during the Millennium as their reward. It is a prize that not all Christians attain to.

 

[Phil 1:21]

Why preach the gospel?

Because God told us to.

 

[Pneuma3]

Why preach the gospel at all?


Without a doubt this is one of the most frequent question asked of me, everywhere I post I come across this question. A lady years ago on tents ask this question.


Here was and still is my answer to this question


For me the reason Jesus was sent and the reason Jesus sends us is to free people through Him from sin and death. Salvation is not complete just because one believes Jesus died for them. Believing is only the starting point on our journey toward full salvation, for we are reconciled by His death, but saved by His life.

All men everywhere are already reconciled by His death, this is a done deal because He died 2000 years ago for all men's reconciliation and mans belief or unbelief CANNOT change this fact. If someone does not believe Jesus died for then simply does not change the fact that He did.

So then all men everywhere have already been reconciled, but not all men are yet saved from sin and death.


Therefore Jesus send us out in order to proclaim His salvation by His LIFE.
His death reconciled all men, but His LIFE is what saves all men, this salvation is not a one time deal as such, but is a long process of walking in His LIFE and forsaking our own. Taking up the cross and following Him and enduring unto the end that we might be saved.


Thus we are told to proclaim His death and therefore His reconciliation for all men as a FACT that cannot be disputed , and we are to do this so that the entire world can have the same hope in His LIFE that we to have. Thus it is not by His death that sin and death are defeated but by His LIFE.

When we witness about that which Jesus done, we are first to tell all men that they have been reconciled because of His death, this fact breathes hope into the world that God does indeed love them. Then after people become aware of the fact of this reconciliation by His death we are to proclaim His resurrection. And it is because of the fact that He was resurrected OUT OF DEATH that the world is given hope of the same resurrection OUT OF DEATH. We are NOT saved from death, we are saved OUT OF DEATH, for it was while we were DEAD in sin that He died and was raised to life again for us.

So the resurrection is a moving from DEATH to LIFE, so as He died for all men, so to did He rise for all men, and this is the gospel of the good new toward ALL MEN EVERYWHERE.

If one believes Jesus died for all men, should it not go without saying that when He rose again that it was for all men also? Can we really separate His death from His resurrection? If so, how then can DEATH be swallowed up of LIFE?

God bless


I wrote this in response to a lady who asked the question if all are saved why preach the gospel at all?


After reading my answer this was her reply back to me.



Dear Pneuma,

I totally agree with your description of the gospel. Yes, we are not only dead in Christ but now alive in Christ, praise God. You are right, Christ's death cannot be separated from His resurrection. It was His resurrection that the disciples preached, you are right. It is His resurrection that is the hope for all mankind. The full gospel is the death and resurrection. I agree He died for all, all are reconciled through His death and all are given life through His resurrection, out of death, as you say. I can't however, get past the point of faith (which is given to us by God in His grace anyway, all have the capacity to believe, or reject) and personal response to accepting this truth for ourselves, as revealed by the Spirit to us. I heard John Bevere give a definition of the word 'believe' in as meaning 'to follow'. Believing (in our terms) is first yes, and then taking up our cross daily and living following Christ, I agree is the full walk of salvation. Again, we can only do any of this by God's grace through faith hey.
I feel the Spirit of God on what you have written and thank you.

 

[mkgal1]

What do you mean by imperfections? Is known habitual sin an imperfection? Is the believer who continues to practice sin and remains unrepentant just imperfect and still saved? I doubt it; certainly not according to the scriptures.

What do I mean by "imperfections"? Simply not being perfect. There are still interactions I have with people where, no matter how much as I try -and pray- to remain faithful to God and to others, I still am not perfect. ISTM that's demonstrated in the Bible as well....that people like Peter still had their moments as well (and I don't believe we'd call Peter a "former believer".....right?).

For example:

Paul Confronts Peter
11 But when Peter came to Antioch, I had to oppose him to his face, for what he did was very wrong. 12 When he first arrived, he ate with the Gentile believers, who were not circumcised. But afterward, when some friends of James came, Peter wouldn’t eat with the Gentiles anymore. He was afraid of criticism from these people who insisted on the necessity of circumcision. 13 As a result, other Jewish believers followed Peter’s hypocrisy, and even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. ~ Galatians 2:11-13​

 

[dhh712]

In 5 point ECT Calvinism what is the urgency to preach the gospel? If all of the elect will be saved no matter what & all of the nonelect will be lost no matter what, then there is no urgency to preach the gospel.

Because you don't know who is saved and who isn't. God may use you as a secondary means of saving another person.

Do you think those who never heard the Gospel will go to this "Hell" you speak of? If so, for how long? Will those who never heard be better off than those who heard & rejected the Gospel?

I'm not sure. The Gospel is the ordinary means of salvation. Yet it is Christ alone who saves, not our acceptance of the Gospel. That is how I conjecture that infants and people with mental deficiencies are saved--they obviously do not have the ability to "accept" the Gospel.

Does much evangelizing cause more harm than good? Yes. How many millions reject the Gospel because it is associated with a being who tortures billions forever or annihilates them into endless nonexistence? Hundreds of millions?

That reason for the rejection of the Gospel happens when people believe they are morally superior than God. The "good news" isn't all that great to everyone: to some it's a savor of death.

In my opinion however some evangelizing can be at an inappropriate time or not done very well. That is when I think it is good to realize where one's gifts lie. Some people are better at evangelizing with their actions rather than speech.

Are those who profess Christ only out of fear & for fire insurance really saved?

If it is not a genuine dependence upon Jesus than I'm afraid they're not. Only the Lord can know that. This can indeed happen out of fear. I don't think that's the best way to know the Lord, but better that than nothing I suppose. For "fire insurance"? If it's just doing lip service to God, then no I'm afraid that won't cut it.

So why evangelize? Because Christ commanded it. Which is the same answer a Calvinist gave me.

That is a good answer too. I like to throw some logic in there, but that the Lord says is sufficient whether it makes sense to our limited minds or not.

 

[Oldmantook]

What do I mean by "imperfections"? Simply not being perfect. There are still interactions I have with people where, no matter how much as I try -and pray- to remain faithful to God and to others, I still am not perfect. ISTM that's demonstrated in the Bible as well....that people like Peter still had their moments as well (and I don't believe we'd call Peter a "former believer".....right?).

For example:

Paul Confronts Peter
11 But when Peter came to Antioch, I had to oppose him to his face, for what he did was very wrong. 12 When he first arrived, he ate with the Gentile believers, who were not circumcised. But afterward, when some friends of James came, Peter wouldn’t eat with the Gentiles anymore. He was afraid of criticism from these people who insisted on the necessity of circumcision. 13 As a result, other Jewish believers followed Peter’s hypocrisy, and even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. ~ Galatians 2:11-13​

You didn't answer my questions. A believer who engages in habitual sin is certainly not perfect by any standard of measure. Is such a person still saved?

 

[mkgal1]

You didn't answer my questions. A believer who engages in habitual sin is certainly not perfect by any standard of measure. Is such a person still saved?

Yes I did (I even gave an example of Peter - whom I would guess you would still consider him a "saved believer"). He was -like I'm sure I am- sinning (missing the mark of perfection) repeatedly. You'd asked what I meant about "imperfections" and that's the best example I can think of. I wasn't speaking of people that present themselves one way (pious and holy) but then, when those backs are turned, their behavior tells a whole other story. That's a different topic.

The phrase "habitual sin" is sort of subjective and vague. You've posted that you believe in the early church doctrine of "apokatastasis" so I'm confused as to why you're asking about certain people being "saved" or not. Apokatastasis asserts that ALL are "saved" from Adam forward (through Christ).

Apocatastasis or apokatastasis (from Greek: ἀποκατάστασις; literally, "restoration" or "return") is the teaching that everyone will, in the end, be saved. It looks toward the ultimate reconciliation of good and evil; all creatures endowed with reason, angels and humans, will eventually come to a harmony in God's kingdom. It is based on, among other things, St. Peter's speech in Acts 3.21 ("Christ Jesus who must remain in heaven until the time of the final restoration of all things χρόνων ἀποκαταστάσεως πάντων") and St. Paul's letter to Timothy in which he says that it is God's will that all men should be saved (1 Timothy 2.4). ~ https://orthodoxwiki.org/Apocatastasis

 

[Oldmantook]

Yes I did (I even gave an example of Peter - whom I would guess you would still consider him a "saved believer"). He was -like I'm sure I am- sinning (missing the mark of perfection) repeatedly.

The phrase "habitual sin" is sort of subjective and vague. You've posted that you believe in the early church doctrine of "apokatastasis" so I'm confused as to why you're asking about certain people being "saved" or not. Apokatastasis asserts that ALL are "saved" from Adam forward through Christ.

Peter made a mistake when he ate with the gentiles. For you to compare compare his mistake with the example of a believer who knowingly and continually chooses to engage in the practice of sin is like comparing apples with oranges.
Habitual sin is not subjective and vague. Does a believer who practices watching inappropriate contentography engaged in habitual sin? Is such a believer still saved? Does that believer live according to the flesh and will experience spiritual death according to Rom 8:13?
All are saved but many will have to go through the lake of fire first which seems to be an important little detail that you have missed.

 

[mkgal1]

Peter made a mistake when he ate with the gentiles. For you to compare compare his mistake with the example of a believer who knowingly and continually chooses to engage in the practice of sin is like comparing apples with oranges.Habitual sin is not subjective and vague. Does a believer who practices watching inappropriate contentography engaged in habitual sin? Is such a believer still saved?

So you downplay sin or rate it? You seem to be saying that when Peter sinned....it was a "mistake"....but someone that views inappropriate contentography (don't get this twisted...I see that as spiritually deadly...I'm not suggesting it's okay) isn't truly saved.....even if that person is faithful in many other areas and are only struggling in this one particular area?

I don't believe that we are immediately restored. I believe it's a process. Some people have more baggage to shed than others (and I *do* believe that our Christian community ought to help by gently coming together to restore those that are harming others -and themselves- with their behavior). Our spiritual transformations are dependent upon our emotional transformations (I believe)....and there're different degrees of healing that needs to take place. I don't want to get too far off topic, but this video may bring to light what I'm referring to. I just don't believe it's healthy for us to take the stance that "sin" is what those people over-------------------------------------------------------> there do (distancing ourselves as if we don't have any sin of our own to be concerned about).

If you aren't interested in viewing that video (although I really believe it's worth the 6 minutes).....here is an article about another pastor that struggled with inappropriate content and how his community came along side him in order to restore him:

From the Wichita Eagle newspaper: Ulven is among a growing number of pastors — and men in general — who have been ensnared by an addiction to inappropriate contentography. In a 2001 "Christianity Today" poll, 53 percent of pastors said Internet inappropriate content was a temptation and 37 percent called it a current struggle.​

The addiction may seem solitary, but in fact is messy, inflicting distress on the spouse, children, ministry and others.

Ulven and his wife found help and a renewed faith, but it wasn't easy.

"I was in torment," Ulven said. "I had this major problem, and I knew it was a major problem, but I didn't want to admit it. But I had to admit it.

"I remember taking my boys down to the park. They wanted to try riding a bike without training wheels for the first time. And they did it. As I ran alongside them, I remember thinking this should be my proudest moment at the time, but it wasn't because I was a hypocritical pastor, and I was living a lie."

A few nights later, Ulven couldn't sleep. One fleeting thought was that he still had a key to the church, so he could go and retrieve his computer from the senior pastor's office.

"But I was not a criminal, and I knew it was just time to come clean," he said.

He wrote one letter to the senior pastor, admitting everything, and one to his wife, Jill. Up until that time, he said, "I was still deceiving her."

Grace and discipline

The Covenant denomination put Ulven under "discipline" and took away his pastoral license. They said the family should attend a different church to protect those hurt by his addiction, a consequence that deeply affected Ulven's wife and children.

Local church leaders agreed on a plan: They would pay for an intensive four-day workshop in Tennessee on sexual addictions for the Ulvens and for counseling beyond that. They agreed to continue to pay Ulven's salary for three months.

Ulven said it was an offer full of grace, one he knew he didn't deserve.

His first step in his road to recovery was joining a newly formed support group in Modesto that worked with men addicted to inappropriate contentography. Three pastors, including one with a story similar to Ulven's, and four other men met weekly and agreed to be accountable to each other.

"For the first time, I felt like this was a God thing, that getting caught was something God had initiated," Ulven said. ~ https://www.kansas.com/living/religion/article1059712.html​

 

[mkgal1]

All are saved but many will have to go through the lake of fire first which seems to be an important little detail that you have missed.

Let me try going at this a different way.

I've said that I believe ALL of us will have to be "tried by fire" because ALL of us have imperfections that only God can heal.

You've posted:

A believer who remains disobedient/unrepentant and continues to sin ends up in the lake of fire. This FORMER believer will eventually be redeemed but he will saved only through the fire (1 Cor 3:15). On the other hand, believers who remain faithful and obedient NEVER suffer torment/fire.

So....you believe you (personally) have "no rough edges" that God has to refine?

 

[mkgal1]

Okay.....I thought of an example of what I'd call "unrepentant and habitual sin " (although I'm not particularly a fan of using that word - and I'm sure that will get me accusations of being "easy on sin", which isn't true).

Anyway....this kind of situation seems to come up often in the Married sub-forum. Let's say there's a person that repeatedly (but not all the time) doesn't give thought to others needs/schedules/feelings....they just go on about their life making plans without really communicating them to others. When their plans bump up against other's plans/schedules/feelings.....they just make light of it and say it's no big deal ....things will work out (or even cause the other person to feel guilty for being upset). Their spouse/friends/children mention it often...but they continue to do it. It's "habitual" right? It's "unrepentant" since they haven't changed their ways....correct? That's the sort of thing I mean as "imperfections". It's in situations like this that I really believe the community is important (but.....just as in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man.....often times a blindness isn't going to be healed until our next life....and I think that's because it's apart from the power and wealth and concern about what others think that blinds people in this life).

 

[ladodgers6]

Evidently, brother, you are quite misinformed regarding universalism. May i suggest some reading:

statement of faith
http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=57

7 myths
https://reforminghell.com/7-myths-about-universalism/
http://evangelicaluniversalist.blogspot.com/2008/04/responses-to-evangelical-objections-to.html

Checkout the orthodox universalism majority in the early church (and a hope for universalism majority in the present day church):

https://www.christianforums.com/thr...niversalism-since-early-church-times.8042013/

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unfund...017/04/indeed-many-universalism-early-church/

If you think the Bible & the early church & the modern church are all wrong, you will have to prove it.

If you think Love Omnipotent's love is finite & expires like a carton of milk so He can torture most of His creatures called human beings in fire with immortal worms eating them for all endless trillions X trillions X trillions of eons, forever and ever and ever, you will have to prove it.

Well, from what you have written so far. Everyone is eventually saved, correct? You do not believe in eternal punishment. It's only a time out that people face. So speaking for myself here. Why would people repent, if they are already going to be allowed to enter heaven? It's kinda like they can sin, as much and as bad, as they want, and still go to heaven!

And this is the problem with universalism. I will read the links you have provided, but I kinda get the gist of it by your comments already.