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

[ozso]

As a side note, on my way to work I was listening on the radio to a Monsignor who's performed a lot of exorcisms. And he said in talking to demons, commanding them to tell the truth in the name of Jesus Christ, he would ask them the following questions.

(All answers given grudgingly through gritted teeth)

Does Satan love you?

No.

Does Jesus love you?

Yes.

Was following Satan a mistake?

Yes.

 

[Hmm]

as a schizoidtypal personality (here,)

Yes, hanging onto such an immoral image of God does mean giving up any chance of a loving relationship with Him.

 

[Cormack]

Yes, hanging onto such an immoral image of God does mean giving up any chance of a loving relationship with Him.

A loving relationship for sure, instead we could have an abusive relationship where we reject His peace and comforting Spirit because we have no idea if we’re saved (5 point Calvinism,) or we could have a confused and partial relationship where we have this all loving Father who’s going to see to it that billions are tormented forever (traditionalism.) Talk about an internal conflict.

Maybe I should apologise to the personalities in chat for treating them like people and conversing with them, I should have just plonked a list of dead pixels(!) onto their screen that represent Bible verses.

Here you go my dude, now your life is on the right track God shall be very pleased!

 

[Cormack]

Thank you for the prayers @Neogaia777. God love you and keep you.

 

[Neogaia777]

Thank you for the prayers @Neogaia777. God love you and keep you.

Thanks, I just hope and pray these things are not salvation issues for any of us, regardless of who's right or who's wrong or not, etc...

God's Love toward all you guys...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

A loving relationship for sure, instead we could have an abusive relationship where we reject His peace and comforting Spirit because we have no idea if we’re saved (5 point Calvinism,) or we could have a confused and partial relationship where we have this all loving Father who’s going to see to it that billions are tormented forever (traditionalism.) Talk about an internal conflict.

Maybe I should apologise to the personalities in chat for treating them like people and conversing with them, I should have just plonked a list of dead pixels(!) onto their screen that represent Bible verses.

Here you go my dude, now your life is on the right track God shall be very pleased!

Even Jesus did not know how many, or how few, or even if it would be all or not really, or at least He held out that hope anyway, etc, but knew it would all only be up to the Father in the end, etc...

And no one really knows how likely or unlikely He (Jesus) considered it (that all would or might be saved) might or might not be or not either, so...?

He just said "all things are "possible" with God", etc...

I don't know that the Bible teaches redemption after this life is over though, and I am one of those who believes in a quote/unquote "eternal hell", just because I believe that is what the Bible says or teaches, but I probably believe it "a whole whole heck of a lot lot more very much differently than maybe anyone else does maybe", etc...

But I don't want to argue about it though, my main point was about Jesus, and even him not knowing how many or few, etc, or whether it would be many or few, and how He held out at least a sliver of a hope that it could maybe be all maybe, etc, but I don't think He fully knew until after He went to where the Father was, etc, that is, after He ascended, etc, and so far, He hasn't come back and/or appeared to us again or told us anything more about it yet after that yet, etc...

Anyway,

Peace

God Bless!

 

[RickReads]

No it doesn't so do you believe in annihilation?

I always tell people I don`t know what God will do.

 

[RickReads]

What middle ground can there be between salvation and damnation?

I'm not sure proof can be provided to declare a doctrine correct or not. It seems obvious if incontrovertible proof of a doctrine existed, it would be outside the realm of debate among Christians. So one has to go with the preponderance of evidence and make a decision. But I don't think that can be found by way of posts on a discussion forum. And if one starts drilling forum posters and demanding proof, that's going to generate contention.

I consider scriptures a form of proof.

 

[Neogaia777]

I always tell people I don`t know what God will do.

Kind of hard to know for sure beyond what even Jesus knew/didn't know for sure, etc...?

And I think maybe even maybe dangerous as well, but like I just said a minute ago, I hope not, etc...

Peace

God Bless!

 

[RickReads]

Constructing the strongest case in favour of universal reconciliation goes to show how much of the conversation trends in its favour though, but we have to be prepared to make its case.

God is either incapable or unwilling to have everyone reconciled and it seems to me that the strongest case in scripture is that He prefers that every man, woman and child be saved without exception.

Or as William Lane Craig once said “God is an aspiring universalist!”

So does God aspire to His aim or actually achieve the aim?

Or as Dr. Micheal Brown argued in a debate with James White “God does all that He pleases, but what does He please?”

If it pleases Him that every man, woman and child be saved, and if He does all that He pleases in heaven and upon earth, it’s a matter of logical necessity that all shall be saved.

Users don’t seem to understand that their scripture safe house is in no small part a reflection of their own tastes and preferences, tastes and preferences which God doesn’t appear to share.

Rattling the cage for more scripture when the detractor himself could google hundreds of verses that appear to support universalism isn’t just an exercise in futility, it’s also ignoring the mighty philosophical and moral case in favour of universalism.

Over the course of discussing justice and mercy and Gods desires the universal reconciliation of all things comes out as an untouchable champion, while ideas like the eternal conscious torment of the damned can’t even commend itself to our own minds and hearts.

But none of that matters eh, because we each have our verses…

All that big talk and not a single verse. Disappointing. I rarely address secular issues so scriptures are the only items of interest for me. You like to turn it into a philosophy issue. That`s easier than fighting the gospel for it so I don`t blame you.

I answered the OP question but I elected not to try and prove universalism so I`m not going to look up verses for your side of the argument. I think you vastly overestimate the numbers. I highly doubt I could find hundreds that would be relevant.

 

[RickReads]

Kind of hard to know for sure beyond what even Jesus knew/didn't know for sure, etc...?

And I think maybe even maybe dangerous as well

Peace

God Bless!

Exactly.

 

[Neogaia777]

I guess the kinds of questions some of you might want to think about to be asking yourselves are/is: If God doesn't save some, and you find out there is a kind or type of quote/unquote "hell" that God sends some people to and that cannot ever be redeemed from there, etc, will you then question Him greatly, or be vehemently or angrily upset with Him for that or because of that even if He deems you as one of the ones to be saved, etc...?

Will you openly speak out against Him, question His justice or moral integrity before all in those very moments, etc...?

Because that's the kind of thing that I think could or might be "dangerous" maybe, etc...

Anyway, I guess we'll all find out when we get there, eh...?

Peace

And God's Love

God Bless!

 

[ozso]

I consider scriptures a form of proof.

As do most of us.

 

[ozso]

All that big talk and not a single verse. Disappointing.

You complain about receiving bad responses, but you hand them out too. It sets a tone.

 

[Cormack]

All that big talk and not a single verse.

Logical talk, Rick. Perfectly logical. That’s why in over 1600 posts there’s no refutation of my flawless logic.

The only thing that users can resort to is returning to the safe space of their preferred verses, not what God prefers, so they end up sucking on their biblical pacifier.

I’d enjoy it if you looked into the other perspectives more.

 

[Cormack]

Will you openly speak out against Him, question His justice or moral integrity before all in those very moments, etc...?

I think I’d speak with God in the same way that Abraham spoke with God before He destroyed Sodom, the same Sodom that universalists argue will be restored someday (Ezekiel 16:53.) Or how Moses or Paul wanted to intercede for Israel. It’s not meant to be in arrogance or hatred of His authority, it’s not speaking at God or lecturing Him, but rather it’s an appeal to His love, which He prefers over all else.

 

[Neogaia777]

I think I’d speak with God in the same way that Abraham spoke with God before He destroyed Sodom, the same Sodom that universalists argue will be restored someday (Ezekiel 16:53.) Or how Moses or Paul wanted to intercede for Israel. It’s not meant to be in arrogance or hatred of His authority, it’s not speaking at God or lecturing Him, but rather it’s an appeal to His love, which He prefers over all else.

And if He explains it all to you in a way that is at the very least "acceptable", and maybe very logical and very reasonable, but may just be something you've never thought of and/or considered before, would you accept that, etc...?

Peace

God Bless!

 

[Cormack]

Of course @Neogaia777! God’s truth is a beautiful thing, I’m just not here to be bull whipped into believing things that appear to me to throw salt on Gods game.

God’s about love and saving people, so I’d rather defend those things that are true to His plain sense qualities and desires.

I tease writing about things being logical or flawlessly logical, but God is the Lord of logic, not of illogic, illogical things aren’t real.

The Father is truth, so the Lord of reality, that means logic. The author of life and truth, not confusion.

Satan is the father of lies, confusion and mental pains we experience. That means illogic too.

Like I wrote earlier: That’s why we should resist philosophical contradictions in the same way we resist Bible contradictions.

 

[ozso]

Logical talk, Rick. Perfectly logical. That’s why in over 1600 posts there’s no refutation of my flawless logic.

The only thing that users can resort to is returning to the safe space of their preferred verses, not what God prefers, so they end up sucking on their biblical pacifier.

I’d enjoy it if you looked into the other perspectives more.

Can you imagine if apologists stuck to just quoting scriptures? Or pastors giving sermons? Or evangelists? Or missionaries? Or all the books written on Christianity?

 

[Cormack]

I’ve seen it first hand with many evangelists, @MMXX. They’re terrible at their “calling.” I don’t know who really did the calling some are so bad.