Why not Universal Reconciliation?

[Jepne]

''And those arguments are technical in nature and ignore the spirit of the text.''

I have to laugh Homer because it is just the opposite for me. When I look at scripture as a whole (the spirit of the text), I tend strongly toward the reconciliation view (of course, not the Universalist view!). There are so many mistranslations in the Bible, following the translator's pre-concieved biases, that they don't bother me in the least.

[Homer]

Hi Brenden,

You wrote:

Of course, this parable is troubling on many levels. Who exactly are "the nations"? Who exactly are "the brothers"? When does this take place? I still cannot come to any firm conviction on this myself.

I understand the parable as not about the poor in general, but about the treatment His disciples would receive as the went about "making disciples of all nations". Nations are all those we are commissioned to take the Gospel to. And Jesus defined who are his brethren when his own family came looking for Him; His disciples are His family. In that culture, hospitality was an acceptance or the lack of it was rejection of the messenger and his message ( 2 John 10-11). And Jesus took rejection and mistreatment of His followers as a personal affront as when He asked Paul on the road to Damascus "why are you persecuting me?" Thus, as they did it to the least Christian, they did it unto Him. I see it as the final judgment.

Anyway, that's how I see it.

Blessings to you!

[steve]

The "impressions" any of us gets from a text depends upon what we already think the Bible teaches elsewhere.

We seldom look at a text without some presuppositions about the subject addressed there. On the subject of final disposition of sinners after the judgment day, almost no one is completely objective. Those who think bad people should be burned up or tormented forever can find texts that seem to support their view, and can contrive explanations of texts that seem unharmonious with their view. Those who think sinners should be redeemed can certainly find texts that seem to agree with them and can find explanations of seemingly disagreeable texts. Every side of the debate thinks that the opposing sides are more guilty of this than are they.

The obvious fact is that many texts, prima facie, seem to teach that Christ is the Savior of every last person, while there are also texts that tell of severe judgment of sinners. In the process of exegesis, the texts on one side of the aisle will inevitably be chosen to inform the interpretation of those on the other side. If one thinks that God's judgment upon sinners is the governing paradigm of biblical theology, he will then find ways of accommodating the texts that speak of universal salvation to the idea of eventual condemnation. Those who think that God's redemption of the world, and the restoration of that which was lost, defines the main theme of scriptural theology, will take the opposite approach. Both sides must use this approach.

The question, then, must be: What is the principal theme of biblical theology?

[Jepne]

"....the principal theme of biblical theology?" The church - comprised of overcomers who have learned agape love by entering into the sufferings of Jesus and living in union with him. ?

[dizerner]

[user account removed]

[Homer]

dizerner,

Well said!

IMO if a totally unbiased person who had never heard of Christianity or the Bible picked up a copy and read it from end to end they would never, no matter how many times they read it, come up with universalism.

[steve7150]

IMO if a totally unbiased person who had never heard of Christianity or the Bible picked up a copy and read it from end to end they would never, no matter how many times they read it, come up with universalism.

User avatar
Homer

Posts: 1614
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm




Reading Paul's straightforward statements without being told what i should think , gave me the clear impression he felt everyone in Adam would at some time (even so) also be in Christ.

[steve]

Well said!

Really! Wow, it is amazing how differently two different people can view the relevance of an argument.

IMO if a totally unbiased person who had never heard of Christianity or the Bible picked up a copy and read it from end to end they would never, no matter how many times they read it, come up with universalism.

Interesting! One does not have to read far into the Bible before encountering the promise to Abraham, which defines and controls the entire remaining portion of scripture. God stated his purpose that all families of the earth will be blessed by Abraham's Seed. Doesn't this have a somewhat universalistic ring to it? I'm not saying that it necessarily teaches universalism, in the sense of every last person being saved, but the general sound of it gives the impression of a God wishing to bless every family—and seemingly predicts that He will—through Christ.

Since I, like dizerner and Paul, would rather be lost than to see my family members lost, it is hard to see how my family (or how I) can be regarded as blessed when there are family members unnecessarily lost for all eternity. I say "unnecessarily" because there is nothing compelling God arbitrarily to cut off the opportunity for their repentance and any given point. He could extend the opportunity infinitely beyond the point of death, if He was pleased to do so.

To suggest that everybody would not, given sufficient time and inducements, eventually repent, as you and I have, is to say that there are people more wicked and rebellious than us. I realize that one of the most frequently-stated objections to universalism stems from this very presupposition on the part of the objector. However, Paul did not think anyone worse than himself, yet he was persuaded to repent.

I think that your statement is a perfect demonstration of the phenomenon that I identified in my last post.

[backwoodsman]

Universal reconciliation for me destroys the very foundation of Biblical truth and faith, the work of Christ, the work of Satan, the fear of God.
[...]
So the whole idea is motivated in fleshly feelings not subject to the fear of God and ends up in compromise after compromise.

dizerner, you're pretty new here, so you may not be aware that this topic has been discussed at great length in several threads over the last few years. You're kind of jumping into the middle here with, clearly, a number of misconceptions about what Christian universalism actually teaches. If you take the trouble to find and go through those threads, I think you'll find that most or all of your concerns are answered. At that point, you may still find the position unconvincing, but one should at least take the trouble to understand what their brothers actually believe, before accusing them of compromising scripture and not taking God seriously.

[TheEditor]

Greetings,

No eternal torment proponent I know of would phrase it the way you have, none of us have a desire to punish bad people, even Scripture says "vengeance is mine" and to love our enemies.

Well, I have met ET believers that get a gleam in their eye when they think of certain ones "getting theirs" in hell. I wouldn't say every "Christian" has the right mental attitude on judgment and punishment, regardless of what these mean.

As I have stated before, I am not at this time a believer in UR. I also have jettisoned many positions I used to have when I was an active JW. Having said that, I do (his faults duly noted) have some respect for CT Russell's thoughts on a few subjects. He was raised in a Presbytyerian household, but joined a Congregationalist chuch. He was also originally Calvinistic and a believer in hellfire before he accepted Conditionalism. Russell made what to my mind was a very insightful comment regarding the belief in hellfire:

"You may know when I tell you that at 17 years of age it was my custom to go out at night to chalk up words of warning in conspicuous places, where working men passing to and fro might see them, that peradventure I might save some from this awful doom. And the while I wondered why God, who is of infinite power, did not blazon forth some words of warning upon the sky or cause angel trumpeters to announce positively and forcefully the doom to which the world in general was, I supposed, hastening. I was an admirer of the great Baptist preacher, Charles Spurgeon, and esteemed him very highly for his honesty and candor which made his sermons so dreadfully hot, believing that he was an exceptionally honest minister, and that others were grossly derelict in not preaching hell strenuously, in proclaiming eternal torment continually." -- Pastor Russell’s Sermons, p. 517

In discussing the lack of success in world conversion, using numbers available to him at the time, Russell drew a "chart" of the degree of unbelief in the world:

"In fact, to every thoughtful observer, one of two things must be apparent: either the church has made a great mistake in supposing that in the present age, and in her present condition, her office has been to convert the world, or else God’s plan has been a miserable failure. Which horn of the dilemma shall we accept? Many have accepted, and many more doubtless will accept, the latter, and swell the ranks of infidelity, either covertly or openly.

"But dark as this picture appears, it is not the darkest picture that fallen humanity presents. The above [chart] represents only the present living generations. When we consider the fact that century after century of the six thousand years past has swept away other vast multitudes, nearly all of whom were enveloped in the same ignorance and sin, how dark is the scene! Viewed from the popular standpoint, it is truly an awful picture. The various creeds of today teach that all of these billions of humanity, ignorant of the only name under heaven by which we must be saved, are on the straight road to everlasting torment; and not only so, but that all of those 116,000,000 Protestants, except the very few saints, are sure of the same fate. No wonder, then, that those who believe such awful things of Jehovah’s plans and purposes should be zealous in forwarding missionary enterprises—the wonder is that they are not frenzied by it. Really to believe thus, and to appreciate such conclusions, would rob life of every pleasure, and shroud in gloom every bright prospect of nature." -- The Divine Plan of the Ages, pp. 16, 17. (emphasis mine)

Regards, Brenden.