Would you prefer it if “Christian universalism” were true?

[Fervent]

Of course you’d have to cherry pick which of those ideas you would like to believe is an anthropomorphism and which weren’t.

Again that’s just as strange as saying God doesn’t love because humans love and God isn’t to be so quickly likened unto humanity. It’s an attempt at voiding God of content and leading into absolute mystery.

Paul spoke boldly against the idea of an unknown God just so Christians could box him up again. It’s very odd.

Still just so far as your beliefs go. You do believe there are an unsaved section of humankind who are going to be lost, tormented or something to that effect. Fair?

Does God want those people with him in heaven or does he want them without him in hell?

I mean the whole junking in the biblical witness and its language makes it difficult to even ask the question.

You are clearly battling a strawman in putting what I am saying to "an unknown God." The Bible is very clear, no one knows the council of God except God Himself. No one. When the Bible reveals things in human terms about God it is always taking something we are familiar with and using it to speak analogically about God so that what cannot be comprehended in full is understood in part. God does, in some sense, have preferences and it is sensible to speak of Him prefering one thing to another. It is an abuse to turn the analogical into the actual, though, so we cannot say "God prefers as we prefer, so this is how God will act when he prefers." We grasp some semblance of God's heart by analogy, certainly. Yet God is not like us, His thoughts are not our thoughts and His ways are not our ways. So to pull out a handful of verses, interpret them strictly according to our own thoughts and then extend that interpretation is an abuse. So we can say God prefers that all be saved, but we must recognize that how God prefers things is only vaguely similar to our own experience of preference. There's no need to cherry pick, simply a need to recognize that God is understood via analogy and we cannot extend the analogy beyond the limited application that is presented in the context in which those verses appear, and none of those verses are arguing that God will eventually save everyone because of this preference but are instead aimed at how we should treat the unsaved with zeal for their salvation. The analogy is useful, but going beyond contextual application is abuse.

 

[Albion]

Preferring that everybody be saved through Jesus and come to the knowledge of the truth is simply a preference for Christian universalism. I’ve exchanged with @RDKirk about whether or not he shares the desire of God that wicked men “turn from their ways and live.” That’s simply a synonym for universal. They turn and they live and there’s no grand hellfire waiting for them in eternity.

We all, as Christians, would like everyone to come to Christ.

That says nothing about universal salvation being a reality. And the term is normally meant to refer to the certainty of this happening. Almost all the defenses and justifications posted on this thread understood it that way also.

If you have another view, I don't take offense at that, but when all the talk is about there being no eternal hell, that everyone will be reconciled to God because he's loving, and so on, how many other people, do you think, are using the term as you apparently choose to do?

@Hmm and others have already explained that God doesn’t arrange the salvation of humanity no matter what or by any means, rather He does so through Jesus in His own time.

That's a fundamental belief of Christians generally, wouldn't you say? That salvation is in Christ is about as basic to the religion as anything, except perhaps for a belief in God, and it transcends all denominational lines. We wouldn't have this discussion at all if the issue were about Christ being the way to salvation, pro or con.

And Yes, I know of a mail-order pastor's ordination outfit that defines the word to mean "anything you want to believe" or something like that, and the term "Christian Universalism" as you are using it was coined by one guy somewhere to describe his own slant on the subject.

 

[Albion]

You wrote it dude.

Yes. It was a question.

 

[Albion]

NM

 

[Cormack]

You are clearly battling a strawman in putting what I am saying to "an unknown God."

I’m not writing that’s your view, but rather that when you dismiss the biblical witness about Gods attributes or His ways that’s making Him unknown. You’ve voided God of content because you don’t like the biblical witness teaching how God would prefer the wicked man turn from his way and live rather than continue in his way.

Right now you’re showing your own ability to preform mental gymnastics and escape a plain reading of the Bible in favour of your own philosophy.

The Bible is very clear, no one knows the council of God except God Himself. No one.

Which would be very different from saying God doesn’t have preferences or feel love or have any of what you believe are anthropomorphic phrases. Your reading of the Bible is like a salad bar when you throw out so much material in favour of your unknown God.

“Who has known the mind of God to instruct Him?” Isn’t a blank check to ignore His many thoughts and attributes.

And that’s not worth it just so you can avoid the plain Bible verses that teach God would prefer that the wicked turn from his ways and live.

We can speak of God having preferences…. (Sensible.)

God does, in some sense, have preferences and it is sensible to speak of Him prefering one thing to another.

We can’t speak of God having preferences… (not sensible.)

We can't truly speak of "preferences" for God in the same way we speak of our own preferences.

So it doesn't truly make sense to speak of God having "preferences" in this manner,

Then there’s your philosophical rationale behind the whole scheme of doublespeak in terms of Gods sufficiency, but once again your philosophical conjecture and salad bar approach to what’s an anthropomorphism in the Bible doesn’t do much to undermine the plain sense reading of scripture.

That’s why you can’t answer my question.

So to pull out a handful of verses, interpret them strictly according to our own thoughts

“Strictly” according to the plain meaning of words. Yes I’m being strict because those are the words directly in front of us and they are not in harmony with your less than strict handling of the Bible. You’re making the Bible serve your philosophy, which wouldn’t be so bad just as long as you had better philosophy.

Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?
​

simply a need to recognize that God is understood via analogy and we cannot extend the analogy beyond the limited application that is presented in the context in which those verses appear,

You’d rather minimise than extend. So you can dry up the verses about Gods love or preference that the wicked turn from their way and live (AKA Christian universalism,) which would help soften the blow that God Himself prefers universalism. You’re entangled in your own theological spaghetti here.

and none of those verses are arguing that God will eventually save everyone because of this preference but are instead aimed at how we should treat the unsaved with zeal for their salvation.

That’s the real source of your discomfort here. You’re trying to play 4D chess and preplan defences against universalism to the point that you can’t play regular chess and you end up throwing out simple Bible verses.

interpret them strictly according to our own thoughts and then extend that interpretation is an abuse.

The analogy is useful, but going beyond contextual application is abuse.

It is an abuse to turn the analogical into the actual, though, so we cannot say "God prefers as we prefer, so this is how God will act when he prefers."

The Bible does though. So the Bible is guilty of abuse. Christians who are faithful to the biblical witness everywhere do the very thing you believe is an “abuse” and they do it without the constraints of your philosophy. There’s an abuse for sure, but it’s only the abuse of unbiblical ideas that you are attracted to.

 

[Cormack]

We all, as Christians, would like everyone to come to Christ.

That’s an awfully naive view considering how long you must have been posting to other Christians online.

That says nothing about universal salvation being a reality.

Since much of our revived conversation started with me asking @RDKirk about Gods preference for the sinful unbelievers, whether or not universalism’s going to be the end state of things isn’t the focal point of the discussion.

Again this is @Fervent’s 4D chess match, where y’all are having a conversation that nobody else is having because you’re triggered by the idea that universalism could get its foot in the door.

“B b b but the universalism!” It must delight the hearts of universalists everywhere to know that their view is so credible as to engender this level jumpiness in people.

how many other people, do you think, are using the term as you apparently choose to do?

Simply use the context. That’s how you’re to best understand my use of words, imagine not engaging with what someone’s actually writing in plain because lots of people aren’t writing the same way.

For example “All” doesn’t always mean everyone without exception because sometimes the Bible authors simply mean “all” within a certain set. I’m not a Calvinists but I have to give way to the context when it’s applicable, as do you in our exchanges.

It’s like me saying give me “all” of the marbles, and if you’ve only got about 20 marbles in front of us, it would be fairly naff to assume I’m asking for every single marble without distinction.

You ought to give way regardless of how many people are mimicking my use of words so long as the context is plain.

It would be silly of us to turn around and insist “well I’ve never heard that argument explained in that way before, how many people are writing it like that?”

Universalism may be used as in “the certainty of this happening,” but you won’t find me using that sort of language in our most recent exchange. As I’ve already shared in my clarifying messages throughout the topic, once again the topic isn’t about whether or not this view or that view is the truth.

What Christian Universalism means and the fact that this topic isn’t about arguing over whether or not universalism is true was explained on the first page (#6 and #9.)

Now the topic has slowly moved into does God the Father would prefer that wicked humanity turn from their way and live rather than continue in their way and be lost.

 

[Neogaia777]

Some programs are only meant for, and never ever go beyond, only just ever more of only just here only...

And that both has been/will be, since eternity, and or at the very least since they were made, etc...

Were only just only ever just finding out still, is all, etc, who was made for where, and what/who, etc...

But it has already been written since eternity, etc... And will always continue to be, etc...

With each and every Creation, in the mind of God the Father, etc...

God Bless!

 

[Cormack]

Do you feel comfortable writing about God having preferences, @Neogaia777?

 

[Hmm]

Again this is @Fervent’s 4D chess match, where y’all are having a conversation that nobody else is having because you’re triggered by the idea that universalism could get its foot in the door.

“B b b but the universalism!” It must delight the hearts of universalists everywhere to know that their view is so credible as to engender this level jumpiness in people.

Indeed. Christian universalism is not monolithic but includes a range of views but each is Christocentric. Christian universalism is notoriously misrepresented and misunderstood. The consistent refusal which we've seen at times to accept what it actually does say, whether its agreed with or not, shows I think the power of the universalist understanding of scripture - it's so challenging to ideas such as ECT that often it can only be denounced and not discussed rationally.

 

[Cormack]

It’s jumping at shadows by this point, @Hmm. The Bible can go in either one of two ways on the subject of wicked people who haven’t yet turned from their ways. Either….

1. God wants them to turn from their way and live….

Or…

2. He doesn’t want them to turn from their way and live…

But #1, which is explicitly stated in the Bible, that creates the fear(!) that creates a universalism panic in the minds of people.

So they self destruct the Bibles vocabulary around choices, preferences, love and the willingness of God in order to protect their own sad philosophy of people being tormented forever.

To be super duper clear, I’m not dunking on anyone for believing in the sad philosophy of people being tormented forever, rather I’m side eyeing y’all because you are hacking away at the biblical witness like a machete in the rainforest, and all that destruction just because you’re triggered by the shadows of universalism that God Himself prefers casting upon the walls.

 

[Neogaia777]

Do you feel comfortable writing about God having preferences, @Neogaia777?

God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, come to prefer those who were already preferred or chosen of by the Father already...

So its rather a matter of perspective or point of view really, etc...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

Do you feel comfortable writing about God having preferences, @Neogaia777?

Is there such a thing as having a preference for a thing or not you did (or made) only just doing what it was just always designed to do (and/or was always to be, and/or become), or was made, etc...?

Some were meant to go beyond this, but some just never ever were not at all ever, etc...

God Bless!

 

[Cormack]

those who were already preferred or chosen of by the Father already...

So in your view, God prefers that the believer lives?

If “yes,” then is the sinful state or the sinful opposite of that also true.

If God prefers some for life, does he prefer some for damnation too?

How do you feel about the biblical material that teaches God wants the wicked man to turn from his ways and live?

God bless you like always sir

 

[Hmm]

a universalism panic

Lol. The fear that everyone makes it to the party.

 

[Neogaia777]

So in your view, God prefers that the believer lives?

If “yes,” then is the sinful state or the sinful opposite of that also true.

If God prefers some for life, does he prefer some for damnation too?

How do you feel about the biblical material that teaches God wants the wicked man to turn from his ways and live?

God bless you like always sir

All of who right now live should all get and be very excited about the kinds of thing we can now do in Christ, sinful habits and lifestyles we can now overcome, and no longer have even have any need for, etc, no longer practice, or be in, etc... But, then again, sometimes just only having the right words only, is sometimes still not enough, etc, sometimes the reality is more the just having the right words, right, etc...?

Look, we "don't know", is the thing... none of us do, etc... and there is only one who always did/does/do/did always fully, etc, and that is only the Father God only, etc, and it matters not in the grand scheme of things, changes nothing, etc, we are all in here discovering and uncovering all of what he already knew/made, etc, but everything He being God could put into it for us to learn and/or discover, etc, and that is a lot, etc, and includes us now too, what do you now think you can do or conquer/make happen/accomplish now, etc, with Him, etc, hopefully you have a personal relationship with Him, etc, but that should all increase your desire to overcome, etc, and do away with all the bad and evil that you can, etc...

It needs to be Him in you though...

Anyway,

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

It's almost like God says, "Make your wish as high and wide as the mountains, or as deep as depths of the seas"...? and then causes us/you/me/we to ponder that question if we knew we only had just one, realizing that, your reward was not as much as eventual answer to the question along the way, or in the results of it being answered along the way, but was in how you grew in seeking it out all along, all along the way... and that they grew together all along, all along the way, etc....

God Bless!

 

[Cormack]

Lol. The fear that everyone makes it to the party.

Exactly. Hence my earlier point about naivety, because if you’ve ever gone into a church or shared on a forum it’s only a matter of time before you find people who (either explicitly or implicitly) want their theology of damnation to be right more than they want everyone to come to Christ.

Christians take great pleasure in the idea of the wicked (or just people they don’t like very much) being punished and going into hell under the guise of justice being done.

Replying “but don’t all Christians wanna see the world saved?” Is why I’ve memed on people for doing theatre around here. It’s theatrical, it’s rhetoric, it’s divorced from anything resembling the church or what human psychology looks like.

and it matters not in the grand scheme of things, changes nothing, etc,

We change though, wouldn’t you agree? I personally believe we take those changes into our lives with God and into our lives here on earth. It’s not outside of the grand scheme or unrelated to its significance.

Surely if you believe in eternal separation from God then what we feel or believe in today is incredibly important.

Especially what we believe about the character of God.

If we can’t say whether or not God wants the wicked to live or be doomed, then there’s very little we can say we know about God. No?

 

[Saint Steven]

No, iet's agree to the obvious, which is that something being restored does not necessarily tell us what the something is, when it will occur, etc, but you want to believe it has to mean that everyone will be in heaven forever. I've restored the finish on my coffee table, but I surely do not think the table has been given eternal existence because of it.

Only God is eternal. Even the complete restoration will only be for that age. Very much like your coffee table.

Matthew 25:46 Young's Literal Translation
And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.'

 

[Cormack]

It's almost like God says, "Make your wish as high and wide as the mountains, or as deep as depths of the seas"...? and then causes us/you/me/we to ponder that question if we knew we only had just one, realizing that, your reward was not as much as eventual answer to the question along the way, or in the results of it being answered along the way, but was in how you grew in seeking it out all along, all along the way... and that they grew together all along, all along the way, etc....

God Bless!

Isn’t this our way of saying we love the journey, but not the destination.

The trouble with that is that questions are made for answers, not for pondering.

God is the destination, and if we love pondering the grandness that we devise more than destination God, then I’m not sure He’s really on our mind.

God bless you too!

 

[Saint Steven]

Christians take great pleasure in the idea of the wicked (or just people they don’t like very much) being punished and going into hell under the guise of justice being done.

Worse than that. Some will even abandon loved ones to the flames to worship their eternal torturer. Madness!