RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Salvation Issues



Message

TheoJunkie -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/4/2007 12:13:37 PM)

DR,

quote:

I am curious as to why you aren't seeing any of those answers, you're usually more astute IMO.


I understand Floydette's response, because it deals with why the unbeliever should believe.

Your answers until then only dealt with (or at least were swamped and obscured by) complaints about how the believers "looked" and behaved and witnessed.

I will accept Floydette's answer as yours, based on your "You got it" statement to her.

As for the response itself:

quote:

DR: life with Jesus is a better life than I had as an unbeliever

FE: you get an awesome relationship with God. Healing, companion, comfortor, guidance, friendship, etc, etc. All, with the God of the Universe. You have access to all kinds of benefits. Who wouldn't want to be healed of their addictions for example? I think the question is why WOULD you wait?


How is this any less selfish than, say, someone who "believed" only to avoid hell? (Floydette does say "you get an awesome relationship with God" and she speaks of His comfort (in times of hardship, I assume)... but the general implied definition of why this relationship is "awesome" is the temporal benefits to Self. And that would seem to fit, because under universalism, EVERYONE eventually has an awesome relationship with God... so the temporal benefits to Self are really the only thing that makes the difference).

I can certainly understand why fallen man would jump at this offer (not to say that you or FE are not reborn... I'm talking about "what makes your gospel message sound good.").

The bible says though:

Blessed are the poor in spirit, those who mourn, the meek, ... those who are persecuted, who are reviled, who have all kinds of evil uttered against them, who are hated, excluded, spurned... on account of their association with the Son of Man.

It says that Christians will be flogged, delivered over to the courts, dragged before governors and kings, and be delivered over to death by their parents, their siblings, and Christians "will be hated by all for my name’s sake."

These are not exactly things to look forward to.

DR,

It also says this:

But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

Saved from what?

Your gospel message is about the here and now... being saved from the pains of right now. But the one who endures to the END will be saved.

What is left to be saved from "at the end"? Jesus's statement is refering to people who do believe "right now"-- he speaks of the one who ENDURES, which is at minimum inclusive of the ones who believe right now.



TheoJunkie -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/4/2007 12:27:40 PM)

DR,

By the way... the relevance to the OP topic of this thread is:

If someone is believing only to get temporal benefits, that is selfish... just as selfish as someone who believes just to get out of hell ("fire insurance faith").

True faith is not about Self, it is about glorifying God. God first, me as a side effect.

Granted, most people START towards faith out of fear of wrath, or START towards faith because their current life situation is awful... but that is not where it stays.

If the only content of the gospel message is, "your life now will be much better"... then this is an incomplete gospel (and slightly inaccurate, because Christians WILL be persecuted).

I'm not accusing you of preaching "another gospel"-- at least not in the judgemental sense. But your gospel is indeed incomplete, and inaccurate, and so I ask.. does someone who believes your gospel, really have faith that saves?

Again... never mind hell at this point. Does a "more better life for Me today" Gospel, result in a person who will glorify God and have Christ as his Lord for the sake of honoring Christ as Lord ... versus obeying Christ so God will bless MySelf.



Him4all -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/5/2007 2:23:29 PM)

TheoJunkie,

quote:

I will accept Floydette's answer as yours, based on your "You got it" statement to her

Thank you John...and Floydette.

quote:

DR: life with Jesus is a better life than I had as an unbeliever

FE: you get an awesome relationship with God. Healing, companion, comfortor, guidance, friendship, etc, etc. All, with the God of the Universe. You have access to all kinds of benefits. Who wouldn't want to be healed of their addictions for example? I think the question is why WOULD you wait?

John: How is this any less selfish than, say, someone who "believed" only to avoid hell?

It's not about selfishness. it's about believing God's promises for today as much as one claims to believe them for eternity. If the temporal reality of their faith is severly lacking fruit just how real is their 'everlasting faith'? I don't know but, as you said God will judge their faith. I must judge them by their fruit here and now. If I see a lack of fruit/love then I see a lack of God, and I must minister to that lack.

quote:

It also says this:

But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

Saved from what?

If you're born again your spirit is saved, your soul is being saved/lost and your body will be saved/glorified. The temporal and progressive salvation process of your soul (mind, will, emotions) is the salvation where one can take three steps foreward today and then backslide four steps tomorrow (loosing the ground gained). If you hold on to your soulish salvation/walk/gain until the end of your life, only then is it established for the hereafter and the receiving of rewards of an overcomer.

quote:

If someone is believing only to get temporal benefits, that is selfish... just as selfish as someone who believes just to get out of hell ("fire insurance faith").

I am not talking about believing to get temporal benefits. I'm talking about being an "overcomer" here and now which does bring glory to Him. I believe He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. And His rewards are both temporal and everlasting.

MAT 24:12 And because wickedness is multiplied, most men's love will grow cold. 13 But he who endures to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, as a testimony to all nations; and then the end will come.
Yes, the gospel of the kingdom is a gospel of here and now and overcoming "multiplied wickedness"...here and now. Those whose faith wanes and love for Jesus is going cold are not enduring/overcoming to the end. 'This gospel' is the gospel I believe I'm preaching. Yes it's here and now, yes it is everlasting in its effect. That, I believe, is the salvation that this verse is talking about when rightly dividing the word.

And yes I'm tiring of defending my position. It works for me and it has paid off in many dividends in the lives of those I've minstered to over the years. And I'm not going to continue trying to justify it here if that's OK.


DR



floydette -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/5/2007 2:52:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheoJunkie
FE: you get an awesome relationship with God. Healing, companion, comfortor, guidance, friendship, etc, etc. All, with the God of the Universe. You have access to all kinds of benefits. Who wouldn't want to be healed of their addictions for example? I think the question is why WOULD you wait?


How is this any less selfish than, say, someone who "believed" only to avoid hell? (Floydette does say "you get an awesome relationship with God" and she speaks of His comfort (in times of hardship, I assume)... but the general implied definition of why this relationship is "awesome" is the temporal benefits to Self. And that would seem to fit, because under universalism, EVERYONE eventually has an awesome relationship with God... so the temporal benefits to Self are really the only thing that makes the difference).

Hey John.

I agree with you. It is a selfish reason. You bet. Or, at least it can be. On the other hand, I do not know anyone (at least I haven't met that person) who came to God based on "oh my gosh, this is at the God of the universe, let me bow down and worship." For the most part we come to him, because we see our great need for him. As we grow and mature, we can get to the point where we can honestly worship him for who he is, not only for what he has done for us. But I do not see people starting out their relationship with him in that manner. (The worshipping him for who he is part)


EDITED TO ADD: I responded before I read your post John. [:D]



floydette -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/5/2007 2:55:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dukeman

I would also add onto the wonderful reasons that when we are not in relationship with God we are essentially living a lie. If we believe (as I do) that God is the author of ALL truth and is the source for TRUE reality, then when we live a life divorced from the God who created us we are not living into the fullness of the life we have been promised we could have. We live a lie. Our desires are warped, our passions, our hopes and dreams - we are blind, deaf and dumb. It is when we give ourselves to God that we see Truth for the first time, we sing "I once was blind but now I see."

peace.

amen, amen and amen



TheoJunkie -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/5/2007 3:54:33 PM)

H4A,

quote:

And yes I'm tiring of defending my position.


Ok, so be it.

I disagree with most of what you have said. But I do trust that if God is working in you and those you have preached to, the truth will be made known to you and them eventually. (Same goes for me, if I'm wrong).

One last thing.... if hell is real and one must believe in Christ before this life is over, then preaching about the reality and danger of hell is not judgmental, but loving.



TheoJunkie -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/5/2007 4:04:20 PM)

Floydette,

Do you believe everyone on the planet will be saved from eternal wrath? If so, will it be only by grace through faith in Christ, or regardless of faith?

Just seeking clarity...



Him4all -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/5/2007 6:40:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheoJunkie

H4A,

quote:

And yes I'm tiring of defending my position.


Ok, so be it.

I disagree with most of what you have said. But I do trust that if God is working in you and those you have preached to, the truth will be made known to you and them eventually. (Same goes for me, if I'm wrong).

Your disagreement is truly frustrating for me...we just seem to be on totaly different pages here. I do thank you for your parenthetical end to the above quote.

quote:

One last thing.... if hell is real and one must believe in Christ before this life is over, then preaching about the reality and danger of hell is not judgmental, but loving.


OK, one last thing from me too. [:)] If Paul wrote one third of the bible without even mentioning the word hell (my earlier comment you never addressed) then maybe there's more to this whole discussion for many to think about. And I do mean 'think' so we, or at least I, can move on here.

Have a good one,
DR



floydette -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/5/2007 7:12:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheoJunkie

Floydette,

Do you believe everyone on the planet will be saved from eternal wrath? If so, will it be only by grace through faith in Christ, or regardless of faith?

Just seeking clarity...


John, I have believed that those who do not believe in the name of Jesus will perish (hell) for all of my life. However, that being said, I have recently (last few years) wondered how that works with the entire scheme of God desiring to restore his creation to himself. And, if the overarching theme of scripture is that (which I believe that it is) then it causes me to ask questions. So, I am pondering, and reading scripture, and looking at what I have always been taught, and putting that up against what I am reading now a days...

As far as the faith and grace portion. Here is something that I have been reading, and wondering about. When Paul, in Romans talks about faith... In Greek it can be read one of two ways. "Faith in Christ" or the "faithfulness of Christ." So, my upbringing taught me to read it the first way. It is MY faith that brings salvation. But John, what if it is the second? What if it is God's faithfulness that brings my salvation? Seems to put a different spin on it doesn't it?

Gotta get my kiddo to homecoming. Talk later!



1love1God1way -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/5/2007 9:04:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Him4all


quote:

One last thing.... if hell is real and one must believe in Christ before this life is over, then preaching about the reality and danger of hell is not judgmental, but loving.


OK, one last thing from me too. [:)] If Paul wrote one third of the bible without even mentioning the word hell (my earlier comment you never addressed) then maybe there's more to this whole discussion for many to think about. And I do mean 'think' so we, or at least I, can move on here.

Have a good one,
DR


It may not have mentioned the word "hell", but certainly the idea is there....something along the lines of the wages of sin being death....



TheoJunkie -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/5/2007 9:16:30 PM)

quote:

What if it is God's faithfulness that brings my salvation? Seems to put a different spin on it doesn't it?


It does, but not in the way you are getting at. (And it changes the meaning of that spot of text, but actually affirms statements elsewhere concerning who the key to salvation really is).

Paul (and Jesus, and the rest) are clear that salvation is God's doing from first to last.

We are saved BY God, FROM God, FOR God... by his grace and maintained by his faithfulness. It happens to be through our faith that this is mediated.



figmentPez -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/6/2007 5:53:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Him4all

If Paul wrote one third of the bible without even mentioning the word hell


You're playing word games, even though Paul didn't use the word hell, He did speak of death and the wrath of God.

Romans 5:9
Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.

Ephesians 5:6
Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.

Colossians 3:6
For it is because of these things that the wrath of God will come upon the sons of disobedience,

1 Thessalonians 1:10
and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, that is Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath to come.

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

2 Corinthians 1:10
who delivered us from so great a peril of death, and will deliver us, He on whom we have set our hope. And He will yet deliver us,

All this talk of the wrath and death that Christians are saved from is talk of hell, the lake of fire.

John 3:36
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

Universal reconciliation says that those who don't believe in the Son will see life, and the wrath of God does not abide on them, the exact opposite of scripture.



Him4all -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/6/2007 9:45:03 PM)

1TH 2:16 by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved - so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them at last!

Hell is already here? [sm=icon_smile_yikes.gif]

ROM 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth.

No wait hell is still in heaven? [sm=hammerhead.gif]

And its purpose is to torture ungodly and wicked men eternally...?[sm=icon_smile_cry.gif]

Or is wrath a judgment against ungodliness and wickedness here and now as well as later? [sm=fireanger.gif]

quote:

Universal reconciliation says that those who don't believe in the Son will see life, and the wrath of God does not abide on them,


You're wrong about the above quote too. [sm=wave.gif]



figmentPez -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/7/2007 5:33:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Him4all

1TH 2:16 by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved - so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them at last!

Hell is already here? [sm=icon_smile_yikes.gif]

ROM 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth.

No wait hell is still in heaven? [sm=hammerhead.gif]

And its purpose is to torture ungodly and wicked men eternally...?[sm=icon_smile_cry.gif]

Or is wrath a judgment against ungodliness and wickedness here and now as well as later? [sm=fireanger.gif]


Are you even trying to keep up, or is your head so full of heresy that nothing else fits? Most of these concepts have already been addressed in this thread, you just don't listen when someone challenges your definition of death. Lets see if we can do a quick review:

The wages of sin is death. Death entered the world because of sin and is what causes the fallen state of the world. Death is the wrath of God expressed, it is the just punishment for sin. The wrath we experience now, as the fallen state of the world and our bodies of death (Romans 7:24), is just a partial expression of wrath. The fullness of the wrath of God will be the wrath of fire. Believers will not suffer the second death, unbelievers will never escape the second death.

So, to answer your questions.
  • No, the lake of fire is not here already, but God's wrath, in part, already is. God is holding His hand, staying His judgement, but still shows part of His wrath so that we know what sin brings, in hope that will lead us to repentance (Romans 8:20)
  • No, hell is not in heaven, but God is and it is His wrath that is death, which is the just punishment for sin. Where else would something of God be revealed from, if not directly from God?
  • The purpose of God's wrath is to justly punish sin, and that just punishment is the eternal death of unbelievers.
  • Yes, wrath is the judgement of sin, and it is expressed here and now as well as, in full, later.


    quote:

    quote:

    Universal reconciliation says that those who don't believe in the Son will see life, and the wrath of God does not abide on them,


    You're wrong about the above quote too. [sm=wave.gif]


    Yes or no:
    Does universal reconciliation claim that all humans will have eternal life, regardless of belief in this life?
    Does UR claim that the wrath of God is temporary, and that it does not remain forever on unbelievers?

    The answer two both of these is yes, and means that means my statement is true.



    • Him4all -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/8/2007 10:37:21 AM)

    quote:

    Fig: Does universal reconciliation claim that all humans will have eternal life, regardless of belief in this life?
    YES

    quote:

    Fig: Does UR claim that the wrath of God is temporary, and that it does not remain forever on unbelievers?
    YES

    quote:

    Fig: The answer two both of these is yes, and means that means my statement is true.
    Wrong...again.

    Original statement
    quote:

    Fig: Universal reconciliation says that those who don't believe in the Son will see life, and the wrath of God does not abide on them,

    After the purgative fires of God's next age of judgment has dealt with all rebellion, disobedience and all dead works in all of His bleoved creation, not only will all believe but every one of thier knees shall bow and every tongue shall confess because Him as their saving Lord. Only after every person believes, will God's perfect plan for all of his loved creation come to pass. Only then, when every one is willingly obedient unto Christ, will God be all in all.

    quote:

    Fig: Are you even trying to keep up, or is your head so full of heresy that nothing else fits?


    It is arrogent and hurtful comments like the above, which I see you make so often and to so many others, which will make this my last personal post to you. Please honor this request for me Figment.



    figmentPez -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/8/2007 4:04:10 PM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Him4all

    It is arrogent and hurtful comments like the above, which I see you make so often and to so many others, which will make this my last personal post to you. Please honor this request for me Figment.


    You can stop posting if you want, but I won't stop posting in defense of the truth. I will promote sound doctrine, and I will expose the lies you are spreading.

    quote:

    After the purgative fires of God's next age of judgment has dealt with all rebellion, disobedience and all dead works in all of His bleoved creation, not only will all believe but every one of thier knees shall bow and every tongue shall confess because Him as their saving Lord. Only after every person believes, will God's perfect plan for all of his loved creation come to pass. Only then, when every one is willingly obedient unto Christ, will God be all in all.


    The problem with this claim is that the Bible makes no mention of those suffering the second death being resurrected from the lake of fire. Those who die the second death will remain dead, the wrath of God will remain on them. There is no mention in the Bible of this wrath ever ending, no mention of them being given life after suffering the second death. When they are judged, they will bow and confess that He is LORD, but the Bible makes no mention of them being able to call Him savior. Nor is your horrible abuse of the term "all in all" supported by scripture.



    Dred -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (10/12/2007 3:33:07 PM)

    This post caught my eye primarily because the answer should be obvious to anyone who has a Christian's understanding of how one is saved.

    Specifically, we are saved when we trust in Jesus alone to save us. As Paul particularly stressed in Galatians, trusting in Christ plus our works or plus circumcision or plus anything can make Christ "of no benefit to" us.

    Thus, the disturbing thing about the question (if not merely rhetorical) and much of the response is the idea or the desire that an additional list of dogma be added to the requirement of faith in Christ. Obviously, a universalist may have undiluted faith in Christ for salvation. No matter how you feel about the accuracy of the doctrine itself, a universalist would be in a position to have the most undiluted faith in Christ. That is, a universalist who felt that Christ won salvation for all would certainly feel that Christ won salvation for him. Isn't that obvious? Much like the Calvinist, he would view even his own faith as no personal merit demonstrated, but rather the gift of God to him.

    That is the nice thing about Calvinism and reveals a problem with Arminianism. Specifically, from the Arminian perspective, God is viewed as being fair because we had the choice to have faith or not and made the right or wrong choice. In any event, our destiny is viewed as being in our own hands, so that God is justified as being fair and we are without excuse. The difficulty is that this makes us look much like we are saved because we had some merit or goodness in us which caused us to make the right choice for faith in Christ.

    That is not to say that Arminians are not saved because they talk that way, but the talk seems dangerously close to the idea that we merit our salvation. A famous Arminian, C.S. Lewis, also said that he felt he had "no choice in the matter," that he was "dragged kicking and screaming into the kingdom of God." In other words, he felt that God's saving grace was irresistible in his case. Most Calvinists are not entirely determinists, even about salvation, but believe that though different ones among us may resist grace for a shorter or longer time, it is only a matter of time before we succumb. That is, if God has marked us out for salvation.

    To be fair, Calvinism also has its discomforts. A true Calvinist would say that God created some people with no intention or desire to save them; He created them with the intent to torment them forever in order to show how great He is, or something along those lines. Most of us are not comfortable with that idea and it does often look like the Bible is telling us that God loves all people and would like each one to be saved.

    Now, to be fair to the universalist, he may not simply be a bleeding heart who thinks people deserve salvation and God would be wrong not to provide it. He may rather be motivated by the desire that God should not have to supervise the torments of 90% or so of his sentient creatures for all eternity. His position could result from accepting the most popular part of Arminianism along with the most popular part of Calvinism. I am speaking of the belief that God loves all of us and wants to save us all and the belief that God's will concerning salvation is ultimately irresistible. If one believes both and wishes to be logically consistent, one must draw the conclusion that all people are eventually saved somehow. I think many people actually do believe both in God's universal love and God's irresistible grace, but have either not noticed the implication or are willing to leave the matter unresolved as one of those mysteries we can't yet understand.

    But, the question was whether a universalist might be saved. The answer is clearly yes. Most of the responses, including the first couple of them, entirely forgot the question and were concerned with just how wrong universalism itself may be. I think we need a dose of tolerance. It is tempting to want to say that those who hold doctrines we consider wrong and even harmful are just not saved. Then we must be careful that we don't, as a result, end up maintaining a heretical doctrine about salvation itself.

    In fact, I will go so far as to say that if we don't call an Arminian a heretic for being absolutely convinced of God's universal love and we don't call a Calvinist a heretic for being absolutely convinced of God's irresistible grace, then we can't call someone a heretic for being convinced of both. Such a man was George MacDonald. Though Lewis never accepted his position on universal reconciliation, he did consider him and his writings closest overall to the Spirit of Christ Himself.

    Ed



    SnapDraggin -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (4/2/2008 5:04:18 AM)

    Universal Reconciliation was apparantly the main doctrine in the first 5 centuries according to a Wikipedia article. Doing a little homework on the subject, alot of church fathers followed this doctrines, the most famous being Origen. Origen believed in Apokatastasis, and this word appears in Acts 3:21.

    A few points on understanding Universal Reconciliation..

    1) God has a plan for humanity in total. Just like Israel was first chosen and the rest not, but later, so is this salvation to be understood.
    2) The words "eternal, everlasting, forever" are wrongly translated, and before going into the texts, if it was so sure to mean ""eternal, everlasting, forever", why would there be a mighty many Universalists in the first 5 centuries. (After that, they had to go underground, because of the dominant orthodox doctrines - sometimes they were killed). Jonah was in the fish "forever"..
    3) Christ never spoke of a "hell", and if He did, Paul's hell and Christ's hell was totally different. Most of the Apostels didn't even use the term. If it was such a terrible place that needed to be avoided, wouldn't they say it in about every verse?
    4) The word "punishment" never actually appear in die New Testament, but actually "chastisement".
    5) If 99% of all souls burn in hell forever, and only 1% manages to get saved, how much of a victory is it?
    6) If acceptance of Christ as Lord is a prerequisite to justification, what happens in Php 2:10 when every knee shall bow?
    7) Could Eve have made the correct choice (Gen 3:6) if God subjected creation to vanity? (Rom 8)
    8) Who creates evil? (Isa 45:7)
    9) Satan was created for his evil purpose since the very beginning, and the lake of fire is prepared for them to free them from this evil. Rev 20:10 uses the word "basaniso" - What does it mean in terms of chastisement? The "Forever and ever" is wrong. What is 2 x forever?
    10) According to Old Testament theology, Satan is a servant of God. Isa 14:12 and Eze 28 talks nothing of Satan.
    11) Christ died to save the whole world and God says 1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. Do you think God's will will be done?

    1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.


    Regards
    Snappy



    Ps103 -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (4/2/2008 11:34:04 AM)

    MODERATOR'S NOTE :: ATTENTION PLEASE

    Hi, Snappy, and welcome.

    Now might be a good time to read the Range of Acceptable Doctrines for this site.

    HERE they are.

    Please do not reply to this message within the Community.

    Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns.

    Please do not send me PMs regarding this message.



    Sammy_S -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (4/5/2008 1:15:34 AM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: HansC

    Can a Universalist be saved? Can someone who holds to the belief of Universalism be saved? By universalism I mean the belief that ALL people will eventually end up in heaven, that a good and loving God would not condemn man to eternal darkness.

    What do you guys think?

    Hans


    I wouldnt think so,especially since they would be denying the Word Of God.

    It is quite clear,If they believe that man does not need to repent to be saved then they themselves do and will not repent of their sins and thus remain in their sins.



    SnapDraggin -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (4/6/2008 6:26:48 AM)

    Thank you for the welcome, Ps103. I have read the Range of Doctrines and do not wish to impose/force any of my beliefs onto others. This is a thread regarding Universalists and the questions raised, I would believe, can be helped by someone who knows something about this ancient doctrine. Alot of things said relating to this doctrine is grossly misunderstood, and in a sense, not fair.

    As an example of "grossly misunderstood", I quote from Sammy_S

    quote:

    It is quite clear,If they believe that man does not need to repent to be saved then they themselves do and will not repent of their sins and thus remain in their sins.

    Man does need to repent, but only God grants repentance. Repentance cannot come from within one's self because then you stand in danger of fabricating repentance. The Word of God says..

    Act 11:18 "...When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life..."

    2Ti 2:25 "...In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;..."

    You desire and pray that God will grant you true repentance. Nothing I can say or do will ever change God's mind, because God does everything to everybody in the right way at the right time.

    Regards
    Snappy



    Ephesians4_32 -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (4/6/2008 8:11:19 AM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: P31W

    google "Christian Universalist"

    I know some Christian Universalist. I do believe some of them are "saved" however have a hard time trying to connect God's holiness and love. If they have accepted Christ as their savior then they are saved. I know when I was first saved I would have probably failed the "trinity" test because I didn't fully understand that......let's get real I don't fully understand it now either. However I do believe if a person is saved they will 'grow' in their walk with the Lord and he will begin to correct these false beliefs they hold.

    For some of these people that I know I believe they cannot come to terms with their loved ones who have died without Christ. For example their grandparents who were good people who loved them dearly and did sacrificial acts inorder to help them are now dead without Christ. I don't think they can comprehend how a loving God would allow their dearly loved grandparents to suffer eternal damnation in hell. That's even hard for someone like me to comprehend when I think of the "good people" I know who have rejected Christ.

    I do "not' believe that people who preach and teach this view are saved.

    I found this for you. It's from http://www.christian-universalism.com/faq/jesus-savior.html You will want to read the question and asnwer part as well.


    God's Love Can Never Fail: The True Meaning of the Cross of Christ

    Why did Jesus Christ have to die on the cross, if there is no eternal hell for sinners and unbelievers? This is perhaps the single most important question that Christian Universalists must answer. Many Christians believe that Jesus's sacficicial death enables God to forgive the sins of those who believe in him -- but those who do not hold the correct beliefs about Christ in this lifetime can never be forgiven, and must eternally remain separated from God in hell. If there is no good reason why Jesus had to be crucified other than to allow people to escape damnation, then perhaps God really does condemn non-Christians to burn forever in the torments of hell.

    Fortunately, there is a good reason for the cross of Christ other than what fundamentalists teach. And this alternative explanation can even be found in the Bible. The reason for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ is that it proves that God's love is unfailing and conquers all evil. The cross is not a dividing line, permanently excluding some people from the love of their Creator. No, the cross is a ladder to heaven through which all people may eventually return to the Father who sent His Son, Lord Jesus, into our world. ....


    Tell us about this ladder. How high does a person have to climb? And why do you say"Return to the Father?" Have we already gone to heaven and then come to earth?



    Dred -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (4/7/2008 10:38:23 AM)

    quote:

    ORIGINAL: SnapDraggin

    Universal Reconciliation was apparantly the main doctrine in the first 5 centuries according to a Wikipedia article. Doing a little homework on the subject, alot of church fathers followed this doctrines, the most famous being Origen. Origen believed in Apokatastasis, and this word appears in Acts 3:21.


    7) Could Eve have made the correct choice (Gen 3:6) if God subjected creation to vanity? (Rom 8)
    8) Who creates evil? (Isa 45:7)
    9) Satan was created for his evil purpose since the very beginning, and the lake of fire is prepared for them to free them from this evil. Rev 20:10 uses the word "basaniso" - What does it mean in terms of chastisement? The "Forever and ever" is wrong. What is 2 x forever?
    10) According to Old Testament theology, Satan is a servant of God. Isa 14:12 and Eze 28 talks nothing of Satan.



    Origen is not of such good repute among orthodox Christians; why did you choose to mention him rather than one of the others, such as Gregory of Nyssa? And which of the great fathers of the early church stated any agreement with points 7 through 10?



    Nothingman -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (4/7/2008 2:27:46 PM)

    As far as heaven, hell, salvation, pre-destination, arminianism and the like discussion go, I think none of us have any definite knowledge of what EXACTLY will happen/is happening. As a favorite theologian has written, Christians should be weary of describing the furnature of heaven and the temperature of hell.

    As for me, I tend toward universalism. Although Origen is not the favorite of the early church fathers among orthodox, his argument is compelling. In his writings he gives all sorts of extenuating circumstances and reason why the most villified individuals of history will not ultimately be in hell forever. The underlying argument is that God, through Jesus,the most merciful, cannot be less merciful than I, a finite human who is limited in mercy. I will say that universalism is NOT based on the idea that all are saved regardless of whether they accept Jesus or not. That is not the doctrine, or at least not mine. All need Jesus/ repentance to be saved. I will say rather that while the above mentioned doctrine of salvation is true, where the universalist strays from the orthodox is in the opinion of whether our lives are finalized once we breath our last breath. I do not believe it is, and indeed, think that because our knowledge here on earth is so limited that it is silly to conceive of eternal contingencies such as heaven/hell as being solely based on occurances here on earth.

    Couple questions: One, do you believe we are eternal and therefore heaven and, more specifically, hell is as well? Either hell is eternal, or, hell is not, and those not in heaven are "blinked" out of existence. If the latter, then well, that is that and universalism hasn'tmuch to say as it would be that only those in heaven even exist. This reality makes sense to me, although I don't know either way if its true.

    If the former, and those in hell exist eternally, then I will ask, do you not believe that God is able to hear those who are hell? More specifically, do you not believe God can hear the cries of mercy and forgiveness of those in hell toward God?

    And if God, who is all-powerful and all-loving, can hear these cries of mercy, do you not believe that he could respond to those cries? That he perhaps would forgive those who cry out from hell? That he would leave the 99 to save the one lost?

    I do. And I don't believe God's perfect plan, if it is perfect, will be complete until each and every person come back to the Father.

    Now, the issue with this conception of the afterlife is concerning those who do not cry out for mercy. I believe only those who accept God in repentance are saved so therefore, ultimately, my universalism has one important premise: I think eventually all people would ask for forgiveness. Whether that's the case, I don't know. I'm sure there would be some who would never let go of their own self-centredness and refuse God. The more fundamental belief I hold regarding this is that hell is a process, a purification, a taste of the ultimate reality of a life seperated from God and that God can and will save those who repent spent time apart from him, ie, hell.



    Nothingman -> RE: Can a Universalist be saved? (4/7/2008 3:46:47 PM)

    quote:

    Origen is not of such good repute among orthodox Christians; why did you choose to mention him rather than one of the others, such as Gregory of Nyssa? And which of the great fathers of the early church stated any agreement with points 7 through 10?


    Glad you mentioned him. The father of the theologyof the Trinity. Just as an aside, all you Sola Scripture folk can rested assured that your belief in the Trinity came a man three to four centuries after Jesus.

    Anyways, Gregory also tended toward universalism. His view is closer to mine, which I stated above, than Origen's is. While Gregory did not contend that all will be saved per ce, he did believe we could pray for those who had already died (for salvation), ie, that our fate is not absolute upon earthly death.



    Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>



    Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI