Universalism

You mean you'r saying there not the same thing. Grace is love in action!

There is actually no indication they will not eventually have another opportunity either! What about other scriptures that say they will? Like Romans 5:19

What is the purpose of belief for you? I don't see how I undermine it at all!

Romans 5:9

It shows how some people seemingly without hope, can be saved in the long run.

I try to engage the most relavent posts! The're not tough for me if I don't believe them. I read all your posts addressed to me! If you have any others that are relevant, you can address me to them. I wasn't trying to attack you personally for not reading my scriptures, I just noticed they were ignored when you accused me of ignoring yours!

Well, I don't either!

Yes, but when you ask a question like you did, you are implying it would be so under those circumstances. I find it ironic that you think God would be mean for applying remedial punishment, but not eternal, unending punishment!

Well, I worded my response wrong. I know everyone's sins are paid for, but the atonement is not applied in this life or the next unless received. I've read all your posts about this. For some reason, you just don't believe that a God of love would allow anyone another chance to receive Him in the next life. I think there is something highly illogical about the statement that people do not go to hell because of their sins but because they reject Christ. I think you need to rethink that one. If mankind had never sinned, they never would have needed a Savior. It's difficult to see how ones failure to understand their need to receive a free gift of mercy and grace would be more heinous than the sins that caused this need to start with. It doesn't make any sense to me. Certainlly we need a Savior, but it's because of our sins!

You either can't or won't understand something here! Certainlly, Christ took away the sin of the world! But, like you say it has to eventually be received. If not judgment awaits. Judgment for sin is not endless torture like you say. You believe Christ has to be received in this life in order to avoid hell, don't you? Well, I believe He has to be received in this life or the next in order to avoid remedial punishment. This will come a lot easier for some than others. Some will need the sternest of descipline.

This is rather vague, I don't quite follow you here.

Well, I tried too! When I said "I can come close" I meant I couldn't show anything about the "lake of fire" par say but could show the same parallel from other scriptures that just mentioned "fire" The fire is all symbolic anyway, it's just used in different ways in different scriptures.

Because sometimes we are so stubborn that we close our eyes and ears to the plain truth. Jesus spoke about those who "had no eyes to see or no ears to here" When you say that my proof is like a conspiracy theory, I think your just tired.

I'm not an oxymoron Neil. Your twisting what I'm trying to say.
Matthew 12:31-32 (ESV)
Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. [32] And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

I believe if this scripture says that if there is one sin that won't be forgiven in this age or the age to come then all other sins can be forgiven. "every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people"! So there you have every other sin capable of being forgiven even in the next age! So, what does it mean for people who blaspheme against the Holy Spirit when they enter the next age? They can't be forgiven, so they undergo the just punishment for their sin. The're not like those who enter the next life and immediatelly see their need for repentance and are thus saved. People who are saved immediatelly have no need for any further punishment. But the ones resisting the Holy Spirit, are stubborn and therefore need the sternist of descipline. But once they receive this, they are now able to come back to their loving God. You see, you've been so conditioned to see hell as a place of only endless torture, that its hard for you to understand anything else. When the Bible contrasts God with human beings it always shows how imminantelly better He is than us. We don't put people away forever in this country, not even in Texas, unless its murder, and then its only for a lifetime.

Well, some of that is unfair, but I do agree we ought to be through. You can have the last word!

 

It was also Augustine that brought the idea of eternal torture into full flower in Christian theological circles. And John Calvin brought Augustine's theological considerations forward to the Reformation. Many criticize Calvinism's Augustinian basis. Maybe those that criticize Reformed theology should also question Augustine's championing of eternal torture as well.

 

Actually, I would prefer the description in Ephesians chapter 2 - by grace through faith. The basis is God's grace. Without God's grace, faith wouldn't matter.

I look forward to your new thread, brother.

 

It was also Augustine that brought the idea of eternal torture into full flower in Christian theological circles. And John Calvin brought Augustine's theological considerations forward to the Reformation. Many criticize Calvinism's Augustinian basis. Maybe those that criticize Reformed theology should also question Augustine's championing of eternal torture as well. </font>[/QUOTE]Hi Ken

Yes, I agree. We've been hoodwinked all right. But then again - God's in control of even this as well. That is why a major paradigm shift needs to occur in order to see things more clearly. And of course we know Who does the paradigm shifting

I praise Him and thank Him for His love endures forever. Hallelujah!

Just as an aside, I read recently (in scripture) where John the Baptist says that no one can see unless God wills it. I'm at work and don't have the reference (I will find it and post it). But I was so excited for I had never seen that before. Even John the Baptizer believed in the sovereignty of God and this while under the law. It is just blessing my socks off

John the Baptist, too!!!! I'm floored I'll tellya. I really shouldn't be surprised for since the beginning it has always been God's way. He is a good God.

Love, Di

 

So You are saying that the first edition of Revelation was written as the result of Constantine's influence? Or do you simply reject Revelation as being NOT Holy Spirit Inspired writing of the Apostle who gave us "God is Love"? </font>[/QUOTE]Hiya Yelsew

No - I'm saying that it was INTERPRETED based on pagan beliefs.

Love, Di

 

ARE SOME SINS UNPARDONABLE


More than a few Christians, who read that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come, live in fear that they may have committed such a sin. But just what might it mean to say that God will never forgive or pardon a given sin? Does it mean that God no longer loves the person who commits the sin in question?--or that he no longer seeks to reconcile this person to himself?--or that his attitude towards this person is no longer one of forgiveness? Nothing like that follows at all. When Jesus speaks of pardoning or forgiving a sin, he has in mind something utterly different from an attitude of forgiveness, which in God never ceases; he has in mind instead a release from some obligation, or a canceling of some debt, or a setting aside of some prescribed punishment. It is very close to our idea of forgiving a debt or pardoning a criminal. If a debt is unforgiven, then it must be paid; and once it is paid, it no longer exists. Similarly, if a criminal is unpardoned, then the criminal must serve his or her sentence; and once the sentence is served, there is no longer any need for a pardon. An unforgivable or unpardonable sin, therefore, need not be an uncorrectable sin at all; it is simply one that God cannot deal with adequately in the absence of an appropriate punishment.
To put the whole thing in perspective, we might observe that most people probably have committed sins that are unpardonable in the relevant sense; indeed, Jesus elsewhere indicates that one of the most widespread of all sins--the refusal to forgive others--is so unpardonable that it renders all other sins unpardonable as well: “if you do not forgive others, neither will your father forgive your trespasses” (Matthew 6:15). That is hardly surprising. God could hardly be for forgiveness and, at the same time, tolerate our refusal to forgive others; he could hardly be for reconciliation and, at the same time, tolerate our refusal to repent of that which separates us from others; and similarly, he could hardly be for our ultimate perfection and spiritual regeneration and, at the same time, tolerate our willful opposition to the work of the Spirit within. Accordingly, God does not withhold punishment--that is, a harsher means of correction--when we sin in this way. As the author of Hebrews put it: “For if we willingly persist in sin after having received the knowledge of truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries” (10:26-27).

If we adopt a Pauline perspective, however, then we must regard all punishment, even the harsh punishment to which the author of Hebrews alludes, as an expression of mercy. When we nurse old grudges, refuse to forgive others, and willfully oppose the Spirit within, we become adversaries--not only in our relationship to God and to others, but in our relationship to ourselves as well. We undermine the very conditions of our own happiness and, in the end, make ourselves utterly miserable. It is as if we thereby launch an attack upon ourselves and fling ourselves into a fiery pit. Only in this modern scientific age, perhaps, are we beginning to understand in full the devastating physiological consequences of refusing to forgive those who have wronged us. But God’s mercy, according to Paul, consists in just this: He will continue to hold our feet to the coals until the adversary--that is, the false self--is utterly consumed. Like the failed Christian leaders of which Paul speaks in I Corinthians 3:15, we “will be saved, but only as through fire."

A point worth re-emphasizing here is that God’s refusal to pardon a given sin--for example, his refusal to pardon blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, whatever exactly such blasphemy might be--in no way implies a lack of compassion or mercy on his part. When we speak of forgiveness, we typically have in mind an attitude or state of mind in the one who forgives; that is, a state of mind that exists when a person gives up all resentment towards an offender. But when Jesus speaks of forgiveness in the present context, he has in mind, as we noted above, the canceling of some obligation, debt, or prescribed punishment. A little reflection will reveal that the two kinds of forgiveness are utterly different. A governor may pardon a criminal for reasons, such as political expediency, that have nothing to do with a forgiving attitude; alternatively, loving parents, despite their forgiving attitude, may judge it best to hold their rebellious child to a given punishment. Precisely because the parents do love and do forgive their child, they may refuse to forgive the punishment in the sense of setting it aside. And that, I want to suggest, is exactly how we should understand the idea of a sin that God will not forgive or pardon as well. Because a refusal to forgive others, a refusal to repent, and a willful opposition to the work of the Spirit within undermine the very possibility of reconciliation and are so contrary to the conditions of our own future happiness, God will require that we experience in full the painful consequences of, and hence the punishment for, such sins as these. He could not express his love for us--his concern for our future happiness--in any other way. For when mercy itself requires severity, or a harsh means of correction, that is just what we can expect, says Jesus, either in this age or in the age to come.

Tom Talbot

 

You are wrong. Paul does mention everlasting punishment. He may not use the exact word "Hell," but he certainly describes it well. Perhaps he is describing the Lake of Fire which burns forever and ever where those who have not their names written in the Lamb's book of Life shall be tormented day and night forever and ever (Rev.20:10-15)

1Thes. 1:7-11
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

If you believe not God's Word, then who will you believe?
DHK

 

Show me otherwise, then. Look at the bottom of page one where I showed that people go to hell because of rejecting Christ. If you are so sure otherwise, show me. By the way, I know that Christ came for sins. I made that point in my last post. But He has taken away sin now. So what is left? Why do people go to hell? Hmm.......

Ah, yes. The same Jesus who warned of hell and said that He would one day turn aside some who would WANT to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

Please show me where I have said anything remotely similar to what you have me claiming. Hell is for rejection of Christ, not judgment of sin. It is not God 'torturing,' but is eternal separation from God. If you would show me the statement that you have me making I will gladly change it. If not, I would appreciate you taking this false witness against me out of your post.

For the last time, I asked you a question about God being mean, I DID NOT MAKE A STATEMENT. Please, if you are going to discuss things, get it straight. That is not my belief. Universalists are the ones who like to say that I have a mean God. Besides, I would think that God is not being just and fair for giving remedial punishment for sins already paid for by Christ. You are the one who undermines what Christ has done if you have people going to hell for remedial punishment. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Did He or did He not take away the sin of the world?

As for the rest of your post I will adopt your method. I can't address it because I can't believe it. You want to define different words to mean the same and post verses that do not address the question being asked. Fare thee well, my friend.

Neal

[ May 30, 2003, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: neal4christ ]

 

Amazing! I quote Ephesians 2:8, a verse which Christians universally love, cling to, and cite, and you question my understanding of God's grace. I know you will disagree but your faith is in your faith and not in the finished work of Christ Jesus. We have discussed these subjects enough in the Calvinism/Arminianism Forum that I know this is where you stand as practical matter. You continuously downplay God's grace and talk up man's faith response. That is the opposite of what the Bible teaches - the Word of God talks up God's grace and talks down man's position in relation to God. Just read Romans chapter 3:10-18 and see how man stacks up to God. Man is saved only, ONLY, by God's grace, and then, and ONLY then, through faith. You may not like it, Yelsew, but without God's grace all of the faith in the world you can somehow muster up would be absolutely worthless.

 

Oh, I agree. I didn't mean to imply that. But there would be no salvation without faith, either. That is God's chosen means of salvation. Salvation is only by the grace of God. We receive it through faith.

Neal

 

Right on, Neal. Years ago on a Compuserve forum I once posted that we are saved by faith through grace. I quickly noticed my error and corrected it.

 

1)I am flabbergasted, Yelsew. Absolutely flabbergasted.

Ephes. 2:5 (ESV)
even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ— by grace you have been saved—

Ephes. 2:8 (ESV)
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

Look at what I placed in bold letters. Those are God's words in the Good Book, Yelsew - God's words. God says He saves us by His grace - His grace, Yelsew, not your faith. The Good Book says by grace through faith, Yelsew - not by faith through grace.

2)Yes, man must have faith, and repentance. Why do you not mention repentance? Some would say that repentance even comes before faith.

Acts 20:21 (ESV)
testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Another area where we disagree is that you believe that God fails when man doesn't respond in faith, and that the devil wins. I totally disagree. God always accomplishes His purposes.

Isaiah 46:9-10 (ESV)
[9]remember the former things of old;
for I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like me,
[10] declaring the end from the beginning
and from ancient times things not yet done,
saying, 'My counsel shall stand,
and I will accomplish all my purpose,'

Isaiah 55:10-11 (ESV)
[10]"For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven
and do not return there but water the earth,
making it bring forth and sprout,
giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater,
[11] so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth;
it shall not return to me empty,
but it shall accomplish that which I purpose,
and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.

Now you and I may disagree on what God's purpose is, but to determine God's success or failure based on sin-soaked humans' actions as you do, Yelsew, is just not what the Bible teaches.

 

So You are saying that the first edition of Revelation was written as the result of Constantine's influence? Or do you simply reject Revelation as being NOT Holy Spirit Inspired writing of the Apostle who gave us "God is Love"? </font>[/QUOTE]Hiya Yelsew

No - I'm saying that it was INTERPRETED based on pagan beliefs.

Love, Di </font>[/QUOTE]Hogwash! It was interpreted by linguistic scholars based on language not on politics or common practices! Take off the rose colored glasses! </font>[/QUOTE]Bolderdash! Without the power of the Holy Spirit linquistic scholars don't know diddlely. Dead words on a dead page without the Life of the Spirit to make them alive \o/

Could you drop the rose colored glasses remarks, Yelsew. Not unless you want me to call you blind. We don't want to go there, do we?

Let us try to discuss this in a mature fashion.

In His Love, Di