WHY UNIVERSALISM IS NOT TRUE?

[Shrewd Manager]

Wow! . . .Physician heal thyself!

Yes Clare, I pray that He heals me as well as you, don't be afraid to confess your need, the doctor comes for the sick.

First of all, there is no such thing as the "letter of the Scriptures" and the "spirit of the Scriptures" in the Bible (2 Corinthians 3:6).

There is only "the letter" (the written code of the Law) and "the Spirit" (the Holy Spirit of the Law).

It has nothing to do with an outward (by the letter) vs. an inward (by the spirit) obedience, nor a counterfeit vs. a genuine obedience, nor hypocrisy vs. righteousness.

The letter (law) kills because it curses all those who rely on it (Galatians 3:10), because it must be kept perfectly to make one righteous before God, which no one can do, so it condemns every one to death; i.e.,
it kills.
That's life under the Old Covenant:
righteousness by works, which is impossible = judgment/condemnation.

Thanks, but I find your reading of scripture is like navigating some kind robotic video game. Just prefab silly doctrine and pigeon holing, and once you're finished it's been denuded of any meaning.

The spirit of the law is as the expression is used in law and in general. People who are sticklers for the literal rule but fail to appreciate its purpose, and thus the application produces injustice. Jesus was all for the purposive interpretation, always be guided by the objects of the legislation, which for the Bible are the golden principles of the Shema and love thy neighbour. The narrow literalistic approach opens possibility of all kinds of abuses and corruptions, for obvious reasons. So yes, not giving from the heart is fake and hypocritical, gotta strive to forgive in spirit and in truth.

 

[Shrewd Manager]

As shown in the scriptures provided in the OP, it is not me that says so, it is God that says so.

Lol - god of universal damnation, well we might as well pack up and go home then. See you in hell, or at the scaffold.

You can't seem to grasp the most basic teachings of UR, but you're sure you've got a handle on God's word?

God's Word does not teach anywhere that the wicked receive eternal life at the second coming after being tortured into repentance and being forced by God to follow him and then receive eternal life.

Nope, still in Antarctica.

Scriptures are already provided starting here linked. What do you think these scriptures are saying?

You're the annihilationist, I'm simply asking if there's any net loss from the unbeliever's perspective.

 

[ozso]

What you describe isn't what biblical is, unless you are changing established concepts and language placing yourself outside the normal Judaeo/Christian space. Biblical is where the Bible OT, it self is the doctrine, everything in the NT should be tested against the OT.

If Based on scripture was Biblical then the Koran would be Biblical.

If you're going to compare the OT to the NT regarding everlasting life in heaven and eternal torment in hell, you're going to find that the OT doesn't really have anything to say about it, except for perhaps Daniel 12:2 and Isaiah 66:24. So it wasn't taught in Judaism, except perhaps after the Babylonian captivity and the writings of the Babylonian Talmud. As for Apocatastasis, I suggest that you study the views held and taught in early Christianity. Especially the views held by Gregory of Nyssa, who's known as the "Father of Fathers" rather than being deemed a heretic. It wasn't until after the Church became the Holy Roman Empire and Augustine came along, that the current teaching of salvation and hell really got rolling, according to what I've heard.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Lol - god of universal damnation, well we might as well pack up and go home then. See you in hell, or at the scaffold. You can't seem to grasp the most basic teachings of UR, but you're sure you've got a handle on God's word? Nope, still in Antarctica. You're the annihilationist, I'm simply asking if there's any net loss from the unbeliever's perspective.

Did you notice that there is nothing in your post here that addressed anything in the post you were quoting from? I did.

Take Care.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

If you're going to compare the OT to the NT regarding everlasting life in heaven and eternal torment in hell, you're going to find that the OT doesn't really have anything to say about it

It is very clear according to the scriptures as to what happens to the wicked at the second coming from both the old and the new testament scriptures so there is no need to guess what will happen as it is not even a close call (scriptures provided here linked).

 

[ozso]

It's interesting that at least some UR people have espoused that you do have to believe to be saved. That salvation is based on belief. So, if that is the case you have to believe before you die.

Then others do say everyone will believe. If everyone believes, you are required to have that happen after death.

So, do you believe that you have to have belief in Jesus in order to be saved or not as Jesus said in John? Or all the other scripture that speak of believe on Him?

From what I understand regarding the doctrine of universal reconciliation, one has to become a disciple of Christ in order to be saved from sin and living in darkness and Satan's power over us. There are many sermons, and testimonies and songs about that. Also the Jews needed to convert to believing in Jesus, because the fiery holocaust like destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem was on the way. But when it comes to the penalty of sin that came to all through Adam, it was atoned for all by Christ.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

From what I understand regarding the doctrine of universal reconciliation, one has to become a disciple of Christ in order to be saved from sin and living in darkness and Satan's power over us. There are many sermons, and testimonies and songs about that. Also the Jews needed to convert to believing in Jesus, because the fiery holocaust like destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem was on the way. But when it comes to the penalty of sin that came to all through Adam, it was atoned for all by Christ.

So, I guess they just did not teach you yet that all the wicked who rejected God and lived like the devil here on earth will also be saved after the second coming when the wicked and all those who rejected Christ on earth are put into the lake of fire and forced into repentance to follow God? Sadly this is not what the scriptures teach and neither is it the God of the bible.

 

[sparow]

If you're going to compare the OT to the NT regarding everlasting life in heaven and eternal torment in hell, you're going to find that the OT doesn't really have anything to say about it, except for perhaps Daniel 12:2 and Isaiah 66:24. So it wasn't taught in Judaism, except perhaps after the Babylonian captivity and the writings of the Babylonian Talmud. As for Apocatastasis, I suggest that you study the views held and taught in early Christianity. Especially the views held by Gregory of Nyssa, who's known as the "Father of Fathers" rather than being deemed a heretic. It wasn't until after the Church became the Holy Roman Empire and Augustine came along, that the current teaching of salvation and hell really got rolling, according to what I've heard.

I believe you are telling me to study the teachings of men instead the teaching of God. There were two early churches There was the Jerusalem church of the original apostles who used the OT scriptures as their covenant and there was the Pauline churches; Paul did not abrogate the Law but I believe he taught the Law by faith and not by command. It was the the Jerusalem church who came teaching a different Gospel to Paul and who Paul threatened to curse. The Jerusalem church went into hiding around 300 AD for 1260 years, then came the Inquisitions; 300 AD was when Augustine was doing his thing, the Holy Roman Empire came much later.

 

[ozso]

So, I guess they just did not teach you yet that all the wicked who rejected God and lived like the devil here on earth will also be saved after the second coming when the wicked and all those who rejected Christ on earth are put into the lake of fire and forced into repentance to follow God? Sadly this is not what the scriptures teach and neither is it the God of the bible.

This is a conversation I can't have with you, because I know from extensively questioning you, that you believe and teach that only the scant few Christians who are sabbitarians will escape being condemned to the Lake of Fire. There's nowhere to go from there.

 

[LightLoveHope]

Universal damnation? Total blowdown, scorched earth policy? If you say so.

Question: if annihilationism is true, how does it affect the unbeliever? I mean, these folks have already reconciled themselves to 'dead and gone'. So they get to 'do as they wilt' for a lifetime and then the result - with or without God - is the same in that eschatology, is it not?

The Lord holds justice in His hands.
Let me put this simply. Unrepentant and unforgiven sin causes rebellion against God, a rejection of being in His presence. The picture is of one being burnt up, destroyed, undone, made into nothing, chaff blown in the wind, of no significance. Jesus talked about yeast, working its way through the whole lump.

Relationships. One either is resolved, or reservation destroys the closeness and ultimately everything.
The Lord made man to be morally consistent, built into their DNA. It is why everyone has a conscience, a sense of right and wrong, whether they like it or not. Some try and root this in belief in God, but it is fundamental to who we are without any hurts, sin or regrets.

If man has real free will, we have choices with consequences. Sin is like a stubborn behaviour that will not go away. If one chooses to continue it works through to break everything else.

Men choose their path, separate from the ideal they desire to be like yet never attain. Is there punishment more than being made irrelevant, without reference or memory? In a sense eternal torture and punishment would be a statement of their success in rebellion, rather than being ignored and removed eternally is their just desire.

But if a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked man does, will he live? None of the righteous things he has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness he is guilty of and because of the sins he has committed, he will die.
Eze 18:24

You will be fuel for the fire, your blood will be shed in your land, you will be remembered no more; for I the LORD have spoken.'
Eze 21:32

 

[ozso]

I believe you are telling me to study the teachings of men instead the teaching of God.

I mentioned the teachings of men in response to you saying "What you describe isn't what biblical is, unless you are changing established concepts and language placing yourself outside the normal Judaeo/Christian space". If you want to leave out the teachings of men, you shouldn't have brought them up in the first place. There's scripture and then there's the interpretation of scripture. The minute anyone starts talking about what the Bible says, they're in the camp of interpretation, commentary and doctrine ie the teachings of men regarding scripture.

In other words if you want to leave out the teachings of men, you can't talk about what scripture says, you can only post Bible passages.

There were two early churches There was the Jerusalem church of the original apostles who used the OT scriptures as their covenant and there was the Pauline churches; Paul did not abrogate the Law but I believe he taught the Law by faith and not by command. It was the the Jerusalem church who came teaching a different Gospel to Paul and who Paul threatened to curse. The Jerusalem church went into hiding around 300 AD for 1260 years, then came the Inquisitions; 300 AD was when Augustine was doing his thing, the Holy Roman Empire came much later.

Wrong wording on my part. I meant after Constantine established Christianity as the main religion of the Roman Empire.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

This is a conversation I can't have with you, because I know from extensively questioning you, that you believe and teach that only the scant few Christians who are sabbitarians will escape being condemned to the Lake of Fire. There's nowhere to go from there.

No I do not believe that at all and I have only ever posted scripture to you that shows that it is the many that are called but only the few that are chosen *Matthew 22:14; Matthew 7:13-23. These of course are Gods' Words not mine. You can appeal to the masses all you like. According to the scriptures, the masses will not be saved but the remnant will because they are the few that are chosen according to the scriptures, *Revelation 12:17; Romans 9:27

Take Care Brian.

 

[ozso]

No I do not believe that at all and I have only ever posted scripture to you that shows that it is the many that are called but only the few that are chosen *Matthew 22:14; Matthew 7:13-23. These of course are Gods' Words not mine. You can appeal to the masses all you like. According to the scriptures, the masses will not be saved but the remnant will because they are the few that are chosen according to the scriptures, *Revelation 12:17; Romans 9:27

Take Care Brian.

Simultaneous denial and conformation.

 

[Clare73]

Thanks, but I find your reading of scripture is like navigating some kind robotic video game. Just prefab silly doctrine and pigeon holing, and once you're finished it's been denuded of any meaning.

So Scripture is just the springboard to launch our own notions of God.

Assertion without demonstration is assertion without merit.

Please demonstrate my Biblical error.

The spirit of the law is as the expression is used in law and in general. People who are sticklers for the literal rule but fail to appreciate its purpose,

Which is not its meaning in 2 Corinthians 3:6, which is where the phrase comes from, and which meaning is not a Biblical application to anything, not being its Biblical meaning in the text.

The Spirit of the Law is the Holy Spirit of life, who gave the law (the letter) which kills because of disobedience.

It's not about the external text killing while the internal meaning gives life.
That's a notion of man, not Scripture.

The Scriptural distinction is drawn between sincerity and hypocrisy of intention, not between text and meaning of script.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Simultaneous denial and conformation.

Not at all dear friend. It is called scripture opposing the opinions, and teachings and traditions of men that are not supported by the scriptures that lead others away from God and His Word. Our opinions do not really mean much in God's eyes. According to the scriptures, only Gods' Word is true and we should believe and follow it *Romans 3:4; Acts of the Apostles 5:29. Of course if you have scripture to support your view your welcome to share it and of course you are free to believe as you wish, that is between you and God.

Take Care.

 

[sparow]

I mentioned the teachings of men in response to you saying "What you describe isn't what biblical is, unless you are changing established concepts and language placing yourself outside the normal Judaeo/Christian space".

If you want to leave out the teachings of men, you shouldn't have brought them up in the first place. There's scripture and then there's the interpretation of scripture. The minute anyone starts talking about what the Bible says, they're in the camp of interpretation, commentary and doctrine ie the teachings of men regarding scripture.

In other words if you want to leave out the teachings of men, you can't talk about what scripture says, you can only post Bible passages.



Wrong wording on my part. I meant after Constantine established Christianity as the main religion of the Roman Empire.

You are not able to discern between the teaching of God and the teaching of men. The prophets of old are described this way: "They do not interpret it from scripture, they do not make it up, They receive it directly from God." The validity of the OT is confirmed for some who believe He is the Messiah, Had Jesus taught differently to the OT He would have been a False Prophet.

 

[Saint Steven]

Had Jesus taught differently to the OT He would have been a False Prophet.

You aren't familiar with Matthew chapters five and six? He treats the Law like hearsay.

“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago... But I tell you..."

 

[Clare73]

You aren't familiar with Matthew chapters five and six? He treats the Law like hearsay.

“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago... But I tell you..."

Good grief!!!

That is not Jesus treating the law like "hearsay," that is Jesus the Lawgiver giving new law for the New Covenant.

UR is not serving you well.

 

[ozso]

You are not able to discern between the teaching of God and the teaching of men.

That appears to be a judgmental disparagement to someone you've barely spoken with.

Prophets of old are described this way: "They do not interpret it from scripture, they do not make it up, They receive it directly from God."

Are you saying that you are a prophet?

The validity of the OT is confirmed for some who believe He is the Messiah, Had Jesus taught differently to the OT He would have been a False Prophet.

The OT isn't invalid. The Old Testament Old covenant was foretelling of the Messiah to come who would establish a New Covenant New Testament Colossians 2:17. And the fact that Jesus came to establish a New Covenant New Testament, is why He was called a false prophet and was crucified for it.

 

[rjs330]

From what I understand regarding the doctrine of universal reconciliation, one has to become a disciple of Christ in order to be saved from sin and living in darkness and Satan's power over us. There are many sermons, and testimonies and songs about that. Also the Jews needed to convert to believing in Jesus, because the fiery holocaust like destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem was on the way. But when it comes to the penalty of sin that came to all through Adam, it was atoned for all by Christ.

So you can not be saved from sin and live in darkness under the power of Satan and die that way, and still be saved? Cause that's not what some UR people have claimed. They even use the scripture that says every knee shall bow and tongue confess that Jesus is Lord. Saying that scripture means everyone will.believe.

But that doesn't happen before death. Therefore you can get saved and believe after you die.