The universalist does not stand on solid ground. 1 Timothy 4:10 can easily be understood to mean that Jesus provided salvation potentially for all men and actually for those who believe. The universalist position is built on conjecture and speculation.
God does not need our approval our our opinion regarding what glorifies him in our eyes. God does not need anything, particularly from us (Acts 17:24-25).
In Matthew 25:46, Matthew used the exact same Greek word, aionios, to describe the duration of the state of the saved and lost that will commence at judgement day. By what logic can aionios have different meanings in the same sentence? And if it may mean temporary, how do we have any assurance eternal life can not end, or that our status is permanent? A.T. Robertson informs us that aionios "...comes as near to the idea of eternal as the Greek can put it in one word".
All must admit that the wicked will be cast away from the presence of God into an unimaginably terrible state. The bible often and repeatedly informs us of the commencement of this state. All the universalists in the world cannot produce one sentence in scripture that speaks of the termination of this state. We are informed that "it is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God". Who are we to relax the sanctions (threats, if you will) of the gospel of grace?
Alternative Views of Hell
-
_STEVE7150
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:38 pm
Homer, Your reaction is typical of Cristendom which is that they would'nt even consider the possibility of universalism. In fact there are dozens and dozens of verses that do indicate ultimately Gods clear declarations that he does intend that everyone be saved will prevail over mans freewill. The method you used to not accept 1 Tim 4.10 is to read something into the verse that isn't written in the scripture. The word "potentially" is not in this verse or dozens other like it so why add it when it isn't there? I think the reason is because a certain theology is more important than the plain reading of scripture.
So Homer i guess you figure that when "every tongue confesses Jesus as Lord" which can only be done with the Holy Spirit that God will then say "it's to late depart from me into eternal damnation?"
So Homer i guess you figure that when "every tongue confesses Jesus as Lord" which can only be done with the Holy Spirit that God will then say "it's to late depart from me into eternal damnation?"
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
jcdv wrote:
"Do you think the bible is purposefully ambiguous on this subject? It seems that the more I learn and study scripture, the more ambiguous some things become, even though I once believed them to be air-tight. I can only conclude that God doesn't want us to know for certain what his plans are for some things. But my questions is, why is there an intellectual tease if we're not meant to know for sure?"
I have often wondered if the data on judgment is deliberately vague. We tend to be fascinated by the subject, but it may be that it is one of those things that God knows we could not yet fully understand or appreciate, even if told explicitly.
It certainly isn't necessary for us (or sinners) to know the specifics. If it were, then the scriptures have let us down in not giving them unambiguously. Is it darkness? Is it fire? Is it eternal regret? Is it eternal destruction? Is it annihilation with the consequent eternal loss of the glory of God? Is it chastisement with eventual restoration..."yet as by fire"? It seems that any of these positions can be argued from one scripture or another.
My own survey of the data has led me to believe that the bulk of the scriptures do not necessarily come down entirely upon one side. Perhaps God, in giving us the Bible, did not wish for us to make our decisions about loving Him strictly on the basis of our fear of the specific form that the punishment of sinners will eventually take. He wants us to know that the consequences for rejecting Him are considerable and terrifying, but, perhaps, does not want us to fixate on them. I think He wants us to love Him regardless what the alternative may be.
As for your observation that the more you study some subjects, the more unsure you become of them, I have had this experience with a number of biblical subjects. I view this phenomenon in the following ways:
1. There are some things that would not be so confusing if I had not learned them wrongly in the first place. Human traditions have been with us for thousands of years, and we learned them from those wholearned them from a previous generation. Even if we had not prior prejudices, it would take a very long time of study to master the contents of the Bible, but it is definitely made more difficult by the added task of seeing our way clear of embedded orthodoxies that have put our studies off on a false scent in some areas. Unlearning is perhaps more difficult than is learning;
2. There is no hurry to reach total understanding. The Spirit of God has our whole lifetime to school us, if we do not lose patience. It can be frustrating to think that we have to go back to square-one and rethink subjects that we thought we had previously mastered...but it is made more frustrating if we feel that we have to be in a hurry to "get through" this learning stage (like getting through college) so that we can get on with the business of fully knowing. MY perspective is that all of my life is for learning; heaven is for knowing fully (1 Cor.13:12). Besides, I think life would not be half so exciting if I now knew everything and had no more thrills of discovery to look forward to.
3. Some things simply aren't as important for us to know as we think they are. God is more interested in discussing and revealing the things that He believes to be essential than satisfying our curiosity about things that we think we want to know (like, "Is there life on other planets?"). Part of maturing, I believe, is becoming content to know what God wants me to know and to let Him know the "secret things" that "belong to the Lord" (Deut.29:29).
STEVE7150 wrote:
"the word 'fire' used in the 4 examples concerning believers is the same FIRE used in Revelation concerning non believers. "
Though this is true, it still does not tell us how many different ways the word may be used metaphorically. It is the same word in English in every case, as well, but that does not mean that it is always the same fire. Think of the variety of ways this one word can be used (to list only a few):
1. God's anger or jealousy is like fire (Ps.78:21; 79:5; 89:46)
2. The fire of God is a "consuming fire" (Ps.18:8; 21:9; 50:3/ Isa.30:30; 33:14/ Heb.10:27; 12:29)
3. A fire can purge dross (Jer.6:29/ Zech.13:9/ Mal.3:2/ 1 Pet.1:7)
4. There is a "fire" that burns in the heart of the saints (Ps.39:3/ Jer.20:9)
5. Love or sexual desire is like fire (Prov.6:27/ Song of Sol.8:6/ cf.1 Cor.7:9).
Because fire is used, not only literally, but in many metaphorical ways, we cannot assume it always will be referring to the same thing in different occurrences.
Homer wrote:
"All the universalists in the world cannot produce one sentence in scripture that speaks of the termination of this state."
This is not so clearly the case as your statement would imply. It may be so that there isn't a verse mentioning the termination, but some of the verses used by universalists and annihiliationists sound like they may imply it. There is debate (see above posts) as to whether there is a specific teaching in scripture that the torment is unending. There are at least as many scriptures that sound like they support the alternative views as there are that support the traditional view.
"We are informed that "it is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God". Who are we to relax the sanctions (threats, if you will) of the gospel of grace?"
We must not relax them, but we also need to be careful not to misrepresent them. This discussion is not really about removing biblically-defined penalties for sin from our theology. The concern of those who take the views alternative to the traditional view is that the gospel of grace not be misrepresented by our own poor exegesis of passages about judgment.
"Do you think the bible is purposefully ambiguous on this subject? It seems that the more I learn and study scripture, the more ambiguous some things become, even though I once believed them to be air-tight. I can only conclude that God doesn't want us to know for certain what his plans are for some things. But my questions is, why is there an intellectual tease if we're not meant to know for sure?"
I have often wondered if the data on judgment is deliberately vague. We tend to be fascinated by the subject, but it may be that it is one of those things that God knows we could not yet fully understand or appreciate, even if told explicitly.
It certainly isn't necessary for us (or sinners) to know the specifics. If it were, then the scriptures have let us down in not giving them unambiguously. Is it darkness? Is it fire? Is it eternal regret? Is it eternal destruction? Is it annihilation with the consequent eternal loss of the glory of God? Is it chastisement with eventual restoration..."yet as by fire"? It seems that any of these positions can be argued from one scripture or another.
My own survey of the data has led me to believe that the bulk of the scriptures do not necessarily come down entirely upon one side. Perhaps God, in giving us the Bible, did not wish for us to make our decisions about loving Him strictly on the basis of our fear of the specific form that the punishment of sinners will eventually take. He wants us to know that the consequences for rejecting Him are considerable and terrifying, but, perhaps, does not want us to fixate on them. I think He wants us to love Him regardless what the alternative may be.
As for your observation that the more you study some subjects, the more unsure you become of them, I have had this experience with a number of biblical subjects. I view this phenomenon in the following ways:
1. There are some things that would not be so confusing if I had not learned them wrongly in the first place. Human traditions have been with us for thousands of years, and we learned them from those wholearned them from a previous generation. Even if we had not prior prejudices, it would take a very long time of study to master the contents of the Bible, but it is definitely made more difficult by the added task of seeing our way clear of embedded orthodoxies that have put our studies off on a false scent in some areas. Unlearning is perhaps more difficult than is learning;
2. There is no hurry to reach total understanding. The Spirit of God has our whole lifetime to school us, if we do not lose patience. It can be frustrating to think that we have to go back to square-one and rethink subjects that we thought we had previously mastered...but it is made more frustrating if we feel that we have to be in a hurry to "get through" this learning stage (like getting through college) so that we can get on with the business of fully knowing. MY perspective is that all of my life is for learning; heaven is for knowing fully (1 Cor.13:12). Besides, I think life would not be half so exciting if I now knew everything and had no more thrills of discovery to look forward to.
3. Some things simply aren't as important for us to know as we think they are. God is more interested in discussing and revealing the things that He believes to be essential than satisfying our curiosity about things that we think we want to know (like, "Is there life on other planets?"). Part of maturing, I believe, is becoming content to know what God wants me to know and to let Him know the "secret things" that "belong to the Lord" (Deut.29:29).
STEVE7150 wrote:
"the word 'fire' used in the 4 examples concerning believers is the same FIRE used in Revelation concerning non believers. "
Though this is true, it still does not tell us how many different ways the word may be used metaphorically. It is the same word in English in every case, as well, but that does not mean that it is always the same fire. Think of the variety of ways this one word can be used (to list only a few):
1. God's anger or jealousy is like fire (Ps.78:21; 79:5; 89:46)
2. The fire of God is a "consuming fire" (Ps.18:8; 21:9; 50:3/ Isa.30:30; 33:14/ Heb.10:27; 12:29)
3. A fire can purge dross (Jer.6:29/ Zech.13:9/ Mal.3:2/ 1 Pet.1:7)
4. There is a "fire" that burns in the heart of the saints (Ps.39:3/ Jer.20:9)
5. Love or sexual desire is like fire (Prov.6:27/ Song of Sol.8:6/ cf.1 Cor.7:9).
Because fire is used, not only literally, but in many metaphorical ways, we cannot assume it always will be referring to the same thing in different occurrences.
Homer wrote:
"All the universalists in the world cannot produce one sentence in scripture that speaks of the termination of this state."
This is not so clearly the case as your statement would imply. It may be so that there isn't a verse mentioning the termination, but some of the verses used by universalists and annihiliationists sound like they may imply it. There is debate (see above posts) as to whether there is a specific teaching in scripture that the torment is unending. There are at least as many scriptures that sound like they support the alternative views as there are that support the traditional view.
"We are informed that "it is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God". Who are we to relax the sanctions (threats, if you will) of the gospel of grace?"
We must not relax them, but we also need to be careful not to misrepresent them. This discussion is not really about removing biblically-defined penalties for sin from our theology. The concern of those who take the views alternative to the traditional view is that the gospel of grace not be misrepresented by our own poor exegesis of passages about judgment.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve
Steve
-
_STEVE7150
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:38 pm
Steve, Thanks for your response. I don't mean to imply that falling into the hands of God for judgement is anything less than terrifying and that is one of the reasons that i think ultimately mans freewill will melt like snow in July when he is in the hands of a jeolous God. Not where i wanna be, trust me. And the possibility would'nt keep me from preaching the gospel and trying to do Gods will because if i do than i might end up in that place. Regarding your answer about "fire" you said it could be used differently in different cases and that's true BUT i think the more likely scenario is that if the same word is used for believers and unbelievers than it would'nt mean chastisement for believers and torment for unbelievers. Just my thoughts but if you wanted to differentiate the treatment each group receives would'nt you use a different word? Again this is not to minimize the Lake of Fire and the thought of Hitler ending up in heaven is enough to make me throw up. On the other hand if he spent a billion or so years in hell first maybe i could live with it.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_STEVE7150
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:38 pm
Steve, Also i want to mention that i don't think annihilation works because Paul said that "And the last enemy to be destroyed is death" 1 Cor 15.26 and as you know death and hades are first thrown into the Lake of Fire and presumably destroyed and afterwards unbelievers are thrown in.
Everyone believes there is no specific verse citing that an unbeliever can get out of hell at some point but perhaps Jesus was alluding to this when he was talking about the judge throwing you into prison in Matt 5.25-26 because i think Jesus would have no reason to talk about earthly prison rules , it's just not what he was here to tell us , rather i think it is an allusion to hell. "so that your opponent may not hand you over to the judge and the judge to the officer and you be thrown into prison. Truly i say to you , YOU WILL NOT COME OUT OF THERE UNTIL YOU HAVE PAID UP THE LAST CENT."
Everyone believes there is no specific verse citing that an unbeliever can get out of hell at some point but perhaps Jesus was alluding to this when he was talking about the judge throwing you into prison in Matt 5.25-26 because i think Jesus would have no reason to talk about earthly prison rules , it's just not what he was here to tell us , rather i think it is an allusion to hell. "so that your opponent may not hand you over to the judge and the judge to the officer and you be thrown into prison. Truly i say to you , YOU WILL NOT COME OUT OF THERE UNTIL YOU HAVE PAID UP THE LAST CENT."
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_STEVE7150
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:38 pm
Homer, You said there is no verse stating that anyone can ever get out of hell or "Gods wrath" but i think Jesus alludes to this several times in scripture. Luke 12.47 " And that slave who knew his masters will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will ,will receive many lashes,but the one who did not know it and committed deeds worthy of a flogging will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much ,much will be rquired ,and to whom they entrusted much ,of him they will ask all the more."
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_STEVE7150
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:38 pm
I believe God has given man "so called" freewill but only because it's part of Gods plan to allow us to learn from our mistakes. God knew Eve could'nt resist the devil because she could'nt recognize evil and God put good and evil in the same tree. He could have had seperate trees for good and evil but they are in the same tree together ,therefore to experience one means you experience both. And that's how God works by contrasts so we can discern and appreciate the differences. So back to freewill ,how does it measure up against Gods intentions or desires? Does mans freewill stand up against Gods wishes? In scripture we are told who was the worst sinner "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation that Christ Jesus came into the world to SAVE SINNERS OF WHOM I AM CHIEF." 1 Tim 1.15 Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit claimed to be the foremost sinner of all time but it took Jesus about 30 SECONDS to convert him into the greatest preacher of all time. Why did Jesus pick the worst of sinners to be his apostle at that particular time in history? To be a pattern or example 1 Tim 1.16 So what did Pauls freewill amount to when God decided it was his due time? Paul "trembled" and was "astonished" and said after 30 seconds "Lord what will you have me do?" So any man can be instantly converted if God decides it's the right time and the right price has been paid, freewill or not.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_Anonymous
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:03 pm
-
_STEVE7150
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:38 pm
Michelle, I was alluding to the fact that as we pile up sins we are storing up Gods wrath against us at judgement day. And the price of paying for our sins would be the right price as God determines it to be.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Again I must state that I would be most happy if the universalist is correct. What a happy thought! Yet, it seems to me a doctrine based on a wish. I would have no problem if I found Hitler in heaven; I would know it was only through the blood of the Lamb of which the efficacy knows no limit.
It seems to me Steve7150 believes Hitler can somehow get a pass after a certain amount of suffering to "pay" for his sins. If this is incorrect, please explain. How would one pay through suffering where there are neither days, months, or years? "A billion years or so" seems meaningless.
Today while listening to "the Narrow Path", Steve was commenting how the adulterer could never enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. I immediately thought "if the universalist is correct, what a hollow threat". The universalist God reminds me of the Wizard in the Wizard of Oz, full of bluster but revealed to be something other than what he appears to be. (I have long suspected the Wizard has a nefarious motive behind it.)
Steve had mentioned universalism among the early Christians. My understanding is that this began with Origen. Were any of the early fathers universalist? By the time of Tertullian things began to get a bit strange so Origen would carry little weight with me.
In Romans 14:10-12 Paul informs us "For we shall all stand before the judgement seat of God. For it is written, as I live says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue give praise (or confess) to God. So then each of us shall give an account of himself to God." This confession is obviously made at the last judgement, a forced confession. What benefit accrues from a forced confession? Do they get an immediate pass to heaven?
It is asserted that the Holy Spirit works on the heart of the condemned to bring about repentance. How do we know the Holy Spirit has this role in the afterlife? Jesus role apparently changes. He informed us that "all power in Heaven and earth is given unto me" yet 1 Cor. 15:23-28 strongly indicates this will change. The role of the Spirit in eternity would seem to also change. How will a repentance forced by the circumstances of terrible punishment be worth anything? Coerced love is no love at all.
Acts 3:21 wrested from its context is no proof of universalist view, note v.23.
Jesus informs us (Matthew 12:31-32) that anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit "it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the age to come. And who is this person other than the one who rejects the testimony of the Holy Spirit regarding Messiah, thus calling the Holy Spirit a liar? This is ample proof or eternal destiny is determined in this life!
And what of Jesus' parable of the unmerciful servant who owed a debt impossible to repay? when he would not forgive a small debt, his master had him jailed until he paid all he owed, which would be never - he would never get out. Need I say the parable is meant to describe God's judgement on the unforgiving? Jesus seems to have misspoke if universalism is correct.
I could go on but enough for tonight. I hope I am misrepresenting no one's views, please inform me if I have.
It seems to me Steve7150 believes Hitler can somehow get a pass after a certain amount of suffering to "pay" for his sins. If this is incorrect, please explain. How would one pay through suffering where there are neither days, months, or years? "A billion years or so" seems meaningless.
Today while listening to "the Narrow Path", Steve was commenting how the adulterer could never enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. I immediately thought "if the universalist is correct, what a hollow threat". The universalist God reminds me of the Wizard in the Wizard of Oz, full of bluster but revealed to be something other than what he appears to be. (I have long suspected the Wizard has a nefarious motive behind it.)
Steve had mentioned universalism among the early Christians. My understanding is that this began with Origen. Were any of the early fathers universalist? By the time of Tertullian things began to get a bit strange so Origen would carry little weight with me.
In Romans 14:10-12 Paul informs us "For we shall all stand before the judgement seat of God. For it is written, as I live says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue give praise (or confess) to God. So then each of us shall give an account of himself to God." This confession is obviously made at the last judgement, a forced confession. What benefit accrues from a forced confession? Do they get an immediate pass to heaven?
It is asserted that the Holy Spirit works on the heart of the condemned to bring about repentance. How do we know the Holy Spirit has this role in the afterlife? Jesus role apparently changes. He informed us that "all power in Heaven and earth is given unto me" yet 1 Cor. 15:23-28 strongly indicates this will change. The role of the Spirit in eternity would seem to also change. How will a repentance forced by the circumstances of terrible punishment be worth anything? Coerced love is no love at all.
Acts 3:21 wrested from its context is no proof of universalist view, note v.23.
Jesus informs us (Matthew 12:31-32) that anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit "it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the age to come. And who is this person other than the one who rejects the testimony of the Holy Spirit regarding Messiah, thus calling the Holy Spirit a liar? This is ample proof or eternal destiny is determined in this life!
And what of Jesus' parable of the unmerciful servant who owed a debt impossible to repay? when he would not forgive a small debt, his master had him jailed until he paid all he owed, which would be never - he would never get out. Need I say the parable is meant to describe God's judgement on the unforgiving? Jesus seems to have misspoke if universalism is correct.
I could go on but enough for tonight. I hope I am misrepresenting no one's views, please inform me if I have.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
A Berean