Featured Univeralism?

I do.
God doesn't torture babies....
If your God tortures babies...He is not the same God I worship.

yes, he does.
Yahweh does not torture babies...

He wanted me to know: He wanted you to know: and he wrote it down in a book to make it obvious:
The God I worship does not torture babies.
I know not what demon you may worship, but the Yahweh God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is not a baby torturer.

He doesn't have "vessels" in the sense that you think he does.
I know you think it means God pre-determining beings he wants to torture for eternity(to include babies)...but, that isn't what it means.

NO.
He would be a monster, and unworthy of worship.
I worship the YHWH God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob.

There are:
One of those things is NOT the question:
"Does God torture babies for eternity for his own inexplicable reason?"
If you've ever entertained that thought for more than ten seconds, you have no place debating, preaching, or teaching Scripture.

There's a charming tautology:
Here's another one:
Baby torturers are baby torturers and those who aren't aren't.

Yes.

God does not say he is a baby torturer:
You think he does say that. That is sick and it is sad.

The Scriptures are CLEAR about the fate of infants.
Your Calvinist Theology is not:
It provides no satisfactory answer other than that:
"All infants are born (or still-born at less than 5 months?) disgustingly wicked in God's eyes and deserving of being tortured forever...but, some.....might incidentally be of a lucky few whom God has chosen [based upon his own inscrutable purposes] to live forever in bliss and joy.

I worship him because of who he is...
He is not a demon who tortures babies.
If he did, he would be unworthy of worship.

There is no correlation between what happened to Job, God's purpose in permitting it, and what God did afterwards to God seemingly randomly choosing to torture babies eternally for no explicable reason whatsoever.
Let us count a few differences:
1.) Job was an adult, a man capable of choosing right and wrong and generally chose that which was right
2.) There was a Direct intervention of Satan upon that one man to encourage God or challenge him to treat him in a specific way for a very particular reason.
3.) There was never the threat of Job being eternally tortured forever, only temporal hardships..
4.) Satan, not God was the one who afflicted Job.
5.) God rewarded Job in the end, re-imbursing his troubles ten-fold

None of this applies to your "God tortures babies for his own glory" Theology.

"Unthinkable" doesn't mean self-evidently false:
That God loves me is "unthinkable"..
That God does not torture babies eternally for no reason....is obvious.

 

Am I to understand that the God of the Old Testament is not the God of the Bible?

"Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” And the Lord sent you on a mission and said, ‘Go, devote to destruction the sinners, the Amalekites, and fight against them until they are consumed.’"
- 1 Samuel 15:2-3,18

 

Romans 5:17 has already placed a restriction on the all Note :[They which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ ] All universally do not meet the restrictions placed , Christ has been given power over all flesh'' As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.'' plus or minus none. Looking at two verses I understand the suggestion looking at three verses removes it from possibility.
Romans 5:17

“For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)”

 

Does either of his verses, "actually," eliminate one?

Just for the sake of argument.

 

Lo, all the souls are Mine, As the soul of the father, So also the soul of the son -- they are Mine, The soul that is sinning -- it doth die.

What did God do about 400 years after this was said relative to dead souls?

 

I'm not accusing you of understanding anything.

So, we have established that this command is in response to intentionally sinful acts as a punishment, and also to eliminate a threat to Israel's future.

No mention of arbitrarily torturing babies here.

Still waiting for God's command to torture babies (or donkeys for that matter).
Does this passage speak of using the rack on sheep perhaps in another translation?

Consumed or tortured?
Is it recompense for willful sin (as established in this passage already) or arbitrary and universal?

Why do people think randomly quoting an irrelevant passage which says nothing about the topic at hand is constructive thing to do?
What is the argument you are making here? That God can be straight-up gangster if he needs to be? We all understand this rather elementary point. No arguments from me (or likely anyone here on BB).
But, this says nothing about the topic I was responding to.

 

When did those Amalekite babies do something that deserved their death?

You are trying to dance around God's command and excuse God while still attempting to say that God doesn't torture babies.

"Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him."
- Numbers 31:17

Do you wish to take back your bolded exclamation that says God doesn't torture children?

 

Those particular babies did nothing. Then again...this is a particular scenario, not a Universal one. Thus, it does not provide an example of what God does generally.

No. I fully acknowledge God's moral rightness in doing what he did, commanding what he commanded. I have zero problems with that passage meaning exactly what it says. It says God told the Israelites to literally destroy/kill everything and everyone.
You need me to be dancing around that, and you would have an argument if I did. But, alas, I do not.

God was perfectly consistent with his holiness and morality in that command, no excuse needed. God had perfectly justified moral reasons for doing so.
Again, you need me to be making excuses and dancing around it in order for you to sound as though you have an argument here....but; sorry, I do not.

He doesn't.
And you have provided zero Biblical evidence that God does.

Still, no Biblical evidence of God torturing babies:
Keep looking:
You may learn something.

Sure.....
As soon as you show us the Biblical passage which states that God does so.
I'm happy to wait.
I'll be pleased to know you will have scoured the Scriptures repeatedly from Genesis to Revelation in search of it. That will do you nothing but good.

 

I am not arguing for or against.

Your understanding or what you call the contextual meaning is the, "elimination," not what is written in either of those verses. IMHO.

 

Your whole post is you "dancing around" your statement which is: "God doesn't torture babies...."
I gave you biblical examples of God commanding the killing of babies and your post here is you dancing around this fact.

Are babies born sinless, or are they born in corruption that needs God to extend grace to them, just like all sinners?

"Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me."
- Psalm 51:5

 

I don't dance around it, I state it clearly and unapologetically.
God doesn't torture babies.
You have, so far, shown zero Biblical passages stating as much. And you will also never find them. I also think you know that, and are doubling and tripling down to save face somehow, but, perhaps not.

You needn't have done so. I don't deny (I think no one here on BB denies them or is unfamiliar with them.)
I'm fully aware of those passages and accept them as both historical fact and God acting with morally sufficient reasons to command the slaughter of children.

No, I accept those passages as fact.
You Want me to be avoiding them or explaining them away, but I do not, and I will not do that for you; even though methinks you so desperately wish I would.
You most likely assumed I would.
No such luck. Deal with it.

I do not believe they are born guilty, but they are born into corruption.

Yup, I know that one. I invariably don't believe it means what you think it means, but, whatever it says:
It isn't "God tortures babies".
I await with baited breath your posting of that passage.
Keep looking.

 

I'm not in the disposition to argue theology right now, so all I can say is that I'm getting tired of reading msg boards and every time a deceased person-- usually a celebrity-- is brought up, with a birthday or anything else, there will be multiple msgs of "Happy Birthday in Heaven!" Most of you likely know how futile it is to protest that on a secular msg board or social media. You might even get a response such as "Hell is only for evil tyrants and religious bigots-- one is usually the other!"

 

Has God ordered the killing of babies? I provided scripture. You attempted to dance your way around the fact that God has done so. This means your statement is not universally true.
God is not evil for ordering the destruction of babies right alongside the destruction of others. When God sent the flood, he killed many, many babies by drowning them. At the end of the age God will burn them with their parents. It will be just and right.

Babies are not guiltless. They need gracious pardon like all humans need. David indicates to us that God does indeed graciously pardon, but there is no place in scripture that says God will not annihilate babies. In fact, we see that he has, in the past, ordered just such a thing.
Now, you can deny, twist, and explain away, but the facts are right in your Bible.

 

No, stop lying. I freely and completely admit God ordered the slaying of children.
Tell the truth for crying out loud.

Tell me something I don't know, and haven't already said myself in this pointless exchange with you.

YUP! I know, you are beginning to bore me by repeating the same stuff I've already agreed to a zillion times.

I disagree.

Yeah, I know...I said so myself already...

I don't. Stop lying.

God does not torture babies.
You have shown no passages of Scripture which show that.
You will never show them because they do not exist. I think you know that and are trying to pass off God's command to kill the children off as evidence. It's not going to work. It's not just that I see right through it, but, everyone on BB will see right through it.