quote: I hold no allegiance to the KJV. So let's get our facts straight first.
Ok, I'll stand corrected, but you no doubt hold allegiance to a verison of the bible that caters to your eternal torment belief. There are other versions of the bible that do not teach eternal torment at all! But you would no doubt dismiss those versions as being evil.
Also if you are convinced that I'm nothing but a Satanically inspired liar, I feel sorry for you. I have told you that your salvation is sure, but maybe I was lying there too. Maybe you are going to end up in the hell you warn others about. Is that what you want to hear? You want me to tell you that God is going to torture you forever unless you toe the line? What are you, a masochist? People who want to speak words that comfort, you want to condemn them as being of Satan. Would you rather have a maniac talk to you? How about a terrorist? Since you are not going to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven anyway, and I've showed you from YOUR beloved scriptures why, then maybe you had better stock up on ice cubes. Because according to YOUR OWN words, that will be your fate. As it is written, "by your own words you are justified, and by your own words you are condmened!"
quote:I ask questions and offer proofs of my beliefs. You are the one who is getting angry and offer only opinion.
What proof have you offered? All you have done is quote your interpretation of the bible. And perhaps you can charge me with the same. So tell me Def, what is the objective of this thread that you have started?
quote:so far you offer opinion only as the basis of your faith. My bible says faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.
The last two quotes have you charging me with offering nothing more than opinion. The words of the prophets, and subsequently your bible, are no less opinion than my words. So what is your point?
When should we translate aionon as "eternal" and when for an "age?"
If I understand the tentmaker.org site, aionon only means "age" a limited amount of time.
But what about when the word aionon is used in reference to God? Does this mean God is limited?
This is a serious question and an attempt on my part to restore some decorum to this thread.
According to what you believe Def, God IS limited when it comes to salvation. He has limited salvation only to those who believe, according to you.
The word "eternity" comes from the Latin word "aeternus", which comes from the Latin word "aevum", meaning "age". Therefore "eternity" and "age" are apparently synonymous. Age is always a definite period of time, so eternity must be too. Time, or should I say eternity, is always measurable. We have assumed that eternity has no beginning and no end. Theoretically this is true in respect to us, but we are finite beings, with a beginning, and an end. The time that passes during our lifetime can be construed as "eternity". I don't see it as illogical to talk about "before eternity" and "after eternity". We generally consider eternity to be immeasurable, but what really is happening is that time has come to a theoretical standstill in eternity. But in reality time moves constantly. We generally agreee that there will be an "end of time". A moment in time is eternity. But that "eternity" had a beginning, and also has an end. How long does one second last? Well, ONE SECOND! Yet one second can be construed as eternity per se.
So what we generally believe is that time will never end, which is why we believe eternity will never end. Time will constantly move, therefore the "end of time" is sort of a misnomer, it should be the "end of the age", and yes, the "end of eternity" as well. If time has an end, then so does space for that matter. Time and space work hand in hand.
Speed is of course the rate of motion in relationship to time and space. So in reality, its the passing of time that is infinitive, NOT ETERNITY. Though we could say that all time per se is one big eternity, to define eternity as without end is incorrect, it's (the passing of) time that is endless.
Yes, God was before us, and he is after us, which would make him without a beginning and an end, IN RESPECT TO OUR EXISTENCE. But does that mean God has NO absolute beginning, and NO absolute end? This is what man has no doubt assumed. Another topic for another thread.
But in closing, I was talking about speed being the rate of motion between time and space. Speed is always expressed in the formula space/time. Therefore if time ends, then space would have to also, else you would have an illogical equation 5 miles/0 time. Zero divided into an absolute value has no logical answer. But zero divided into itself always equals infinity. Therefore 0 miles/0 time = ? , theoretically, if time stopped, then matter would be theoretically travelling at speeds 900,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000+x the speed of light (186,000 miles/sec.), which is scientifically impossible. Therefore I can safely assume that time will continue to pass endlessly. One more thing, I see an indication that "time" is NEVER translated from the Greek word "aion" or any root word thereof. There is a Hebrew word, "olam", that has been both translated "time" and "eternity" and "everlasting", but it seems to be related to a defnite period rather than infinity.
Hmmm, I think I may have even learned a lesson while I was typing this post :)-->
This is an interesting piece of literature. Click on the link, and then save it to your hard drive, and then open it using either Wordpad or Microsoft Word.
Incidenlty, The Apostle Paul NEVER once warned anyone about hellfire for all eternity. He did often warn about destruction however, a type of warning that even atheists today take heed on. But he never warned about an endless burning hell waiting to torture sinners for all eternity.
Why was this? Was Paul derelect in his duty and calling as an apostle? He was considered the greatest apostle of the first century. And look at his historical background! It seems the ones who have the worst sins and get the greatest amount of forgiveness are the ones that have the most mercy. After all, much was given to them, so they have much to give.
Def on the other hand was probably born with a silver bible in his mouth. So goody-goody-two-shoes himself. It's a wonder why he even accepted Jesus, since he hardly needs him. And because he was so righteous, he got very little forgiveness if any, therefore he has virtually no forgiveness to offer you or anyone else. The bible is full of stories of those who have received great forgiveness being the most loving people while those who received very little forgiveness being rather uppity. Just like those Pharisees. They were insulted because they thought they deserved to have Jesus in their company, but instead He rather would have the company of the sinners. And Jesus himself said he didn't call them to repentenance. I guess Def wasn't really called to repentenance either since he is so righteous it's flowing out of his ears. And neither was he called to proclaim The Gospel either, he even said his calling "was to warn!"
I almost want to compare Def with the prodigal son's older brother. You know the story, and when the prodigal son returned, the father embraced him and gave him a super-big feast. The older brother was offended because he knew the prodigal son had wasted his life, but was given a great welcome home celebration, while he on the other hand never got such a benefit, though he felt he should have because of his self assured faithfulness. Of course the prodigal son had to suffer much before he could repent. Before that, he had lived riotously, squandering his inhertance on anything from luscious food to the sexiest whores. What Def doesn't understand is that in order for a person to repent, he has to have a reason to. As long as the prodigal son had plenty of money and tons of pleasure, he had no reason to return to his father either. Only when a famine broke out, and a crisis resulted from it, and he was forced to take a job feeding pigs, and got no reward except the same food the pigs ate, that he realized his sorry state. And to think, he was even willing to make himself a hired servant of his father! He knew the blessings that he had with his father, but at the time felt some need to go on a vagabond. And likewise, an unsaved sinner is in a state where he is not being plagued by any crisises, so as long as that's the case, he continues on with his hedonistic lifestyle. Only when something in his life goes amok will he recognize the need for salvation. Perhaps this will only take place AFTER HE IS DEAD, and yes, he will recognize the need for a saviour then, and he will in fact be tormented! Question, did the prodigal son's father say to him, "you made your decision by YOUR OWN FREE WILL to leave me, tough luck Charlie!"???? ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!!!!!! Yet according to Def, this is just how God is going to regard those who only repent after they have died from their natural lives. I tell you, if that is what God is like, wouldn't you say the prodigal son's father is much more loving than God? BUT WE KNOW BETTER!!!!!!!! And when that sinner repents and turns to God under such conditions, in spite of what Def proclaims, GOD WILL NOT CAST HIM AWAY!!!!!! And I can assure you, Def, if he knows such a person, will take gross offense at such a person being forgiven, just like the prodigal son's older brother did.
Def, I would take heed to that parable if I were you.
Incidenlty, The Apostle Paul _NEVER_ once warned anyone about hellfire for all eternity. He did often warn about destruction however, a type of warning that even atheists today take heed on. But he never warned about an endless burning hell waiting to torture sinners for all eternity.
Why was this? Was Paul derelect in his duty and calling as an apostle? He was considered the greatest apostle of the first century. And look at his historical background! It seems the ones who have the worst sins and get the greatest amount of forgiveness are the ones that have the most mercy. After all, much was given to them, so they have much to give.
But Jesus did, so should we chuck (no pun intended) the words of Christ in favor of Paul? He did however, warn against falling away, and continuing practices that will not be allowed in heaven. See Colossians Chapter 3.
Def on the other hand was probably born with a silver bible in his mouth. So goody-goody-two-shoes himself. It's a wonder why he even accepted Jesus, since he hardly needs him. And because he was so righteous, he got very little forgiveness if any, therefore he has virtually no forgiveness to offer you or anyone else.
You know Chuck, if you weren't so full of yourself, you might be funny!
The bible is full of stories of those who have received great forgiveness being the most loving people while those who received very little forgiveness being rather uppity. Just like those Pharisees. They were insulted because they thought they deserved to have Jesus in their company, but instead He rather would have the company of the sinners. And Jesus himself said he didn't call them to repentenance. I guess Def wasn't really called to repentenance either since he is so righteous it's flowing out of his ears. And neither was he called to proclaim The Gospel either, he even said his calling "was to warn!"
Jesus called sinners to repentance. He also warned us all of the price rejecting him carried.
I almost want to compare Def with the prodigal son's older brother. You know the story, and when the prodigal son returned, the father embraced him and gave him a super-big feast. The older brother was offended because he knew the prodigal son had wasted his life, but was given a great welcome home celebration, while he on the other hand never got such a benefit, though he felt he should have because of his self assured faithfulness. Of course the prodigal son had to suffer much before he could repent. Before that, he had lived riotously, squandering his inhertance on anything from luscious food to the sexiest whores. What Def doesn't understand is that in order for a person to repent, he has to have a reason to. As long as the prodigal son had plenty of money and tons of pleasure, he had no reason to return to his father either. Only when a famine broke out, and a crisis resulted from it, and he was forced to take a job feeding pigs, and got no reward except the same food the pigs ate, that he realized his sorry state. And to think, he was even willing to make himself a hired servant of his father! He knew the blessings that he had with his father, but at the time felt some need to go on a vagabond. And likewise, an unsaved sinner is in a state where he is not being plagued by any crisises, so as long as that's the case, he continues on with his hedonistic lifestyle. Only when something in his life goes amok will he recognize the need for salvation. Perhaps this will only take place _AFTER HE IS DEAD_, and yes, he will recognize the need for a saviour then, and he will in fact be tormented! Question, did the prodigal son's father say to him, "you made your decision by _YOUR OWN FREE WILL_ to leave me, tough luck Charlie!"???? _ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!!!!!!_
B]The example here is of a God who forgives. Remember, the prodigal was coming back to ask to be servant. Instead, the father restores him. As for the older brother, yeah he was bitter, and the father reproved him for it. The lesson is that we rejoice one who was lost is found.[/b]
Yet according to Def, this is just how God is going to regard those who only repent after they have died from their natural lives.
[You would be right, if the scriptures promoted such an idea. Give me one clear verse where the unsaved, god-rejectors will get a second chance after they are dead. Just one. No, that would be proof-texting, so maybe a few.
I tell you, if that is what God is like, wouldn't you say the prodigal son's father is much more loving than God? _BUT WE KNOW BETTER!!!!!!!!_ And when that sinner repents and turns to God under such conditions, in spite of what Def proclaims, _GOD WILL NOT CAST HIM AWAY!!!!!!_ And I can assure you, Def, if he knows such a person, will take gross offense at such a person being forgiven, just like the prodigal son's older brother did.
Look, as I have said before. I do not want anyone to suffer hell. Not one. zip, zilch, nada, not on my watch, No way. How many times must I say this. When I get to heaven and I find that people I thought were unsaved in heaven, I will rejoice! I will be thankful for anybody who is there. That includes you too, Chuck.
Def, I would take heed to that parable if I were you.
And CK, I would take heed that there are warnings to be alert for his coming, be alert
Thank you for the post. At least now I understand where you come from. That's all I was asking.
I am not saying I agree with you, but at least I understand.
Right now, we will have to agree to disagree, while I study some more.
Chuck,
If you believe I have rejected God, because I rejected you, you should take yourself off the pedastal.
You and Mark automatically assume your right and anyone who disagrees is wrong.
But we all see through a glass darkly now.
Paul says we are to put away anger, maybe you should follow his advice.
If you ever want to hear my testimony, I'll PT it with you sometime.
Still, if there is no consequence for unbelief, why should anyone want to accept Christ? I mean what good does it do to try and live a holy life here just so we can live through a couple of special eons?
We are saved by grace, but we are expected to live according the Bible's standards for holy living. Jesus said it, Paul said it, Peter said it. James said it.
O.K. Def. That sounds reasonable. Spend some time studying the material on this thread. There has been quite a bit already. I would especially recommend that you participate in some of the word studies that I have offered. For example, the words "fire" (Strong's number 4442) and "age" (Strong's numbers 165 and 166). Do you have any bible study software or biblical reference books to help you with your study? This should give you some kind of a background for the other material. If you have any more questions I will try to help you.
Sure there is consequences for unbelief Def. Being part of the 1000 year millennial kingdom should be a lot better than your typical 70 years of existence now. If people miss out on this it is going to be a great loss. I want to be part of this even if I only shine shoes or fix sandals.
However, as Chuck said how is an eternity of torment a just penalty for 70 years of sin? Even under the Old Testament Law the amount of lashes with a wip a person was given as a penalty was strictly limited to 40. Someone giving more lashes than this prescribed amount had to face the same penalty of 40 lashes as the person originally receiving the lashes. Even in the case of those receiving the death penalty, under the Old Testament Law this was to be relatively quick and not drawn out over days and days of agony. As I recall it was only the heathen nations that practiced torture and combined this with the death penalty. Perhaps we should become better acquainted with the Old Testament law in seeing what was prescribed as a death penalty. Why do you think God would grant more mercy now in this imperfect and sometimes heathenistic world than one would receive in his future kingdom and New Heaven and Earth?
i've loved reading this thread. i think the difference between the "self-saving christianity" and the "christian universalism" is a distinct one. and worthy of all praise, yada yada.
but i think the next challenge to biblical universalism is to get over the scriptural racism that binds to the bible, and perhaps take a look at the possibility that the "Moses experience" was one that all races must go thru (and many have).
like how individuals and societies both do grow from the same stage to stage, each stage being better than the next, but also having gifts that need to be carried forward...
(this is just a loose off-the-cuff list, using the familiar body/soul/spirit model)
CENTERED ON BODY
1 - animalistic (instinctual)
2 - tribal (gatherers, shamanism)
3 - warlords, gangland (led by selfish masculine for self-preserving reasons)
4 - ethnocentric or nationalistic membership, patriarchy, monarchy (full of justice and law and rules - like feudalism), masculine reliance upon messiah/child to save him
5 - meritocracy, industry, science, freer markets (like what the US did coming out of the patriarchies and monarchies)
CENTERED ON SOUL
6 - wordcentric, global, non-racist, non-sexist, compassionate, healing (and dying), women and children, liberal education and communication (like where the jews touched for the first time on pentecost and more so later in Acts)
7 - subtle realm, dreams, astrology, visions, quickening of cognitive skills and logic, invention, innovation, the realm of "mere" possibility
CENTERED ON SPIRIT
8 - independence from identification with body and ego. actual experience with (during pre-mortal death) post-death realities. the "new birth." angelic/christ experience (often confusing angelic self as "other")
9 - bliss, nirvana, heaven, the ground of all being, from where we can free-fall "downward", and "return" to earth (tho many get stuck "up" here too)
its our "addiction" or "possession" of any of these stages of evolution at the exclusion of the others that is anti-christ or an evil spirit.
also, we can peak and develop in any stage, tho our center of gravity may be in the lowest (such as the familiar world-class genius whose center of gravity is warlord or ethnic)
also, notice how our devil/enemy gets smaller and smaller...tho nothing changes outside...just us, within. perspective. faith. whatever
perhaps you can see how Moses was not in the same stage as those he freed. but he was trying to elevate them to their next available stage, and free them from the patriarchies empowered by developed higher stages (such as soul-powers of the pharoahs, for example). and so sure, the jews will think they were chosen, if everyone else is at tribal and warlord. and of course, they are warned against tampering into the higher stages before they are ready.
anyway, most importantly, what strictly biblical universalists need to see, i think, is how the logos is simply generic and human. it just needs to be quickened on all levels(turned on) so it can evolve. no new parts required. and nothing need be removed. and its the same logos that is the universal shape of the cosmos (you all know the verses).
and so maybe consider how much of scriptural prophecy is simply referring to the changing of our own inner perspectives, which then changes the whole world as the numbers add up. yes, all knees shall eventually bow, and all that.
Here's a quote from Hank Henegraff of the Christian Research Institute:
You’d expect cultists to annihilate the concept of hell, but today, more and more evangelical Christians are buying into this idea of annihilation as well. Rather than believe that unbelievers are going to suffer forever and ever, they claim a just God would never allow infinite suffering for finite sin. But for this argument to be consistent, we would be forced to say that God shouldn’t extend eternal bliss to finite creatures. See this argument is self-defeating because annihilationism teaches that finite wrongdoers will be zapped into unconscious oblivion for an infinite amount of time.
Let me also add this, if there were no hell, the atrocity of sins against the very character of God would be minimized. And in light of crimes committed by Nazi war criminals and things like that, the horror of eternal, conscious punishment may not be so inconceivable after all.
The Bible talks a lot about the need to confess Jesus as Lord now. Not in the future.
If aionon means what you say, then does not stand to reason that God himself is only for an age?
Our blessings are only for an age?
tentmaker is the only place that makes these claims. It sounds too much like TWI-speak. "Hidden" knowledge, "mistranslations", "oh-the-Bible-doesn't-really-say-that" kind of talk.
It strikes me that Hannegraff's comments are pure P.I. He draws a false comparison, arguing that "eternal reward" is a parallel to "eternal punishment," when annihilationists (I prefer the term "cessationists") believe the comparison is between "eternal life" and "eternal death." (ignoring the "eternal" argument for the sake of this post).
"We would be FORCED to say that God shouldn't extend eternal bliss to finite creatures."
Right, Hank. That's, umm, well, it's kind of why we call it GRACE!
If you believe I have rejected God, because I rejected you, you should take yourself off the pedastal.
So you don't believe I'm anointed of the Lord eh? Then suppose you tell me who is, you wiseass. And when you do, you should follow ALL his advice, for YOU have put HIM on a pedastal. I didn't put myself on any pedastal. All you are doing is trying to justify your vicious hate. You say you exalt Jesus? Then why haven't you taken His advice? Jesus said to LOVE YOUR ENEMIES, and to DO GOOD TO THOSE WHO DO YOU EVIL, and to BLESS THOSE WHO CURSE YOU (and that means BLESS and NOT CURSE BACK), that you may be A CHILD OF GOD. Would God do any different? But you showed us whose child YOU are. Your father is Satan, and the works of Satan you do indeed. I told you the truth and you didn't believe me. I don't seek my own glory, neither do I walk in pride. But YOU do! What charge do you want to lay on me, you who are so righteous? So far you only have charged me with a Mickey Mouse one of "offering mere opinion". I am convinced that your heart is very calloused, and that there is no amount of reasoning I can lay on you. Only God alone can touch your heart, and evidently at this time He has chosen not to. Jesus also said you will know them by their fruits, and yours is ROTTEN TO THE CORE!!!!
quote:You and Mark automatically assume your right and anyone who disagrees is wrong.
And what do you think YOU are doing? I could easily agree with you, but you would only exalt yourself an rub my nose in it. Ok, consider this if you will: you, Mark, and I, ALL THREE OF US ARE RIGHT!!!!!! How can that be you ask? Go figure it out, you're a smart man.
quote:Paul says we are to put away anger, maybe you should follow his advice.
Oh, I should put away MY anger, but God can kindle his own wrath eternally. Who the hell are YOU to tell me to put away anger??? Sounds like the God you serve Def is nothing but a hypocrite, not to meniton a LIAR!!!!! Read Psalm 30:4-6 It says God's wrath is only for a MOMENT, but YOU teach God's wrath is ETERNAL. Also read Proverbs 15:1-3. It says soft words turn away wrath, but hard words kindle anger. You wonder why my anger is kindled, it's because you are hitting me with hard words on behalf of your dishonest God, who has a never ending wrath in spite of His own promise that His anger is but only for a moment. Hey, like father, like son! I have said nothing but kind words to you and you have chosen to rub my nose in them. Yeah, maybe I don't take Jesus' advice very well, He said "Cast not your pearls before the swine, neither give holy things to dogs! Lest they trample on them and then turn and rend you!" I guess that's my sin, in telling you that your salvation is sure, I cast my pearls before a pig and a gave a holy thing to a dog, namely YOU!!!!!!!!!
quote:If you ever want to hear my testimony, I'll PT it with you sometime.
Why not just tell us here in the forum? Do you have something to be ashamed of? I'm sure everyone would love to hear your testimony.
quote:And CK, I would take heed that there are warnings to be alert for his coming, be alert
I have no reason to dread the Day of His Coming. And I guess you don't either, which is fine. And even if I'm not caught up in the clouds at the rapture, I'm going to take that as an indication that the Lord has called me to stay behind and fight. AND FIGHT I WILL!!!!! What do you expect, to be caught up in the clouds? If so, YOU COWARD!!!!! But it is also written "he who overcomes shall inherit ALL THINGS". So go ahead and fly away!!!!!!!! See if you overcome anything and will inherit anything!!!!!!
quote:But for this argument to be consistent, we would be forced to say that God shouldn’t extend eternal bliss to finite creatures.
Are you now denying the work of Jesus Christ in saving man with Jesus' life, death and resurrection? What is the point of Jesus Christ's life at all? Was it all for naught? Are you learning anything at all on this forum? Do you want to learn anything?
Def, you seem to be having a great deal of difficulty in comprehending this material presented here. Much more so than other posters. This may be different than what you have been previously taught at your church, but there is enough simple word studies and the like on this forum thread for you to have at least learned something.
Nevertheless you still seem to be having a great deal of difficulty with even the more simpler explanations here. Hence, this is what I recommend for you. Copy and paste my posts here which should total about 20 pages, to your word processing software. Print out one or more paper copies of this. Then take this copy to church with you this Sunday. Have your pastor or someone else that you value the scriptural opinion of look it over for you. Yes, they will need to actually read the material including the word studies and articles. Get their opinion. Then get back to us here on what you and your church representative(s) learn. Def, I may be reading you wrong, but you strike me as the type of person that is afraid to believe anything as Christian doctrine that is not the status quo for your church or immediate circle. Hence, here is your opportunity to get the support or feedback that you seem to need.
The Bible talks a lot about the need to confess Jesus as Lord now. Not in the future.
Your bible doesn't support the argument that death seals your fate, and that repentenance at that point is useless on the grounds that once you die it's too late. Why do you keep stressing that baseless argument?
I'm aghast at the tenor of "discussion" here. Can you just imagine Peter or Paul coming off with a smug "I know it all you poor sap, and you don't" attitude? If I hear "my Bible says" one more time I think I'll scream.
Of one thing I am sure: none of you know for sure.
TheEvan wrote, "I'm aghast at the tenor of 'discussion' here. Can you imagine Peter or Paul coming off with a smug 'I know it all you poor sap, and you don't' attitude?"
I can only concur. I teach part time at a Christian classical academy. When the students reach seventh grade, we begin teaching them HOW to argue in a formal manner.
The process is call "discourse". The first stage of discourse is for the participants to sound out each others' position, to come to agreement on terms and principles. They do this by asking probative questions of each other.
After terms and principles are agreed upon, the participants can begin to present persuasive arguments. These arguments begin with each side giving a statement of its thesis, and presenting evidence in favor. Then each side gets to question the others' thesis, and to present evidence against. This process alternates. The discourse can go on as long as the parties are interested in the question.
We encourage the students to use a passive voice placing emphasis on the logic, rather than the passion, of their agument. We teach them to avoid emotionally loaded words and phrases ( such as "BS"). We disallow ad hominem attacks, and comments about each others personalities.
We discourage them from using absolute language by having them introduce their statements with phrases such as "it would seem that" or "it appears that". This prevents them from backing themselves into "either/or", I'm right/you're wrong", "do or die" corners. There seems to have been plenty of that in this thread.
Concerning appeals to the Bible, while we all may or may not recognize that it contains absolute truth, none of us have an absolute understanding of the whole thing. We can present our understandings for consideration, and we can question each others' hermaneutics, but none of us can impose our interpretation simply by dictate.
It appears to me that def59 was willing to entertain information concerning Biblical Universalism, and was asking probing questions to learn more. It also appears that Chuck took these probative questions as attacks on his position, and responded with unwarrented, emotionally driven outbursts, as well as information.
While Chuck's information may be right, his outbursts seem counter productive. Instead of tending to persuade def59 to come around to his point of view, Chuck's outbursts would more probably harden def59 in his position.
Mark Sanguinetti's posts appear to be models for dispassionate consideration of an issue that raises many people's hackles.
If you believe I have rejected God, because I rejected you, you should take yourself off the pedastal.
So you don't believe I'm anointed of the Lord eh? Then suppose you tell me who is, you wiseass.
Chuck, If you have all the answers, why do you resort to name-calling? I have never once called you a name or made disparaging remarks about your upbringing. But you have constantly railed against me. And for what purpose? To show how much love you have for the lost or deceived?
And when you do, you should follow _ALL_ his advice, for _YOU_ have put _HIM_ on a pedastal. I didn't put myself on any pedastal. All you are doing is trying to justify your vicious hate.
B]My vicious hate? Look in the mirror pal![/b]
You say you exalt Jesus? Then why haven't you taken His advice? Jesus said to _LOVE YOUR ENEMIES_, and to _DO GOOD TO THOSE WHO DO YOU EVIL_, and to _BLESS THOSE WHO CURSE YOU_ (and that means BLESS and NOT CURSE BACK), that you may be _A CHILD OF GOD_.
Yes, Jesus said those things. But he also warns of the reward for rejection. You don't like the word hell? Fine let's say separation from God. And yes, I do love my enemies. I love you. If I didn't, I wouldn't keep coming back. I disagree with many posters on GSC, but that's DOES NOT MEAN that I don't love them. Who are you to judge me anyway. What do you know of Satan?
Would God do any different? But you showed us whose child _YOU_ are. Your father is Satan, and the works of Satan you do indeed. I told you the truth and you didn't believe me. I don't seek my own glory, neither do I walk in pride. But _YOU_ do!
Look in the mirror dude.
What charge do you want to lay on me, you who are so righteous? So far you only have charged me with a Mickey Mouse one of "offering mere opinion". I am convinced that your heart is very calloused, and that there is no amount of reasoning I can lay on you. Only God alone can touch your heart, and evidently at this time He has chosen not to. Jesus also said you will know them by their fruits, and yours is _ROTTEN TO THE CORE!!!!_
You swear, call me names and scream. Who are you, the second coming of LoyBoy?
quote:You and Mark automatically assume your right and anyone who disagrees is wrong.
And what do you think _YOU_ are doing? I could easily agree with you, but you would only exalt yourself an rub my nose in it. Ok, consider this if you will: you, Mark, and I, _ALL THREE OF US ARE RIGHT!!!!!!_ How can that be you ask? Go figure it out, you're a smart man.
quote:Paul says we are to put away anger, maybe you should follow his advice.
Oh, _I_ should put away _MY_ anger, but God can kindle his own wrath eternally. Who the hell are _YOU_ to tell me to put away anger??? Sounds like the God you serve Def is nothing but a hypocrite, not to meniton a _LIAR!!!!!_ Read Psalm 30:4-6 It says God's wrath is only for a _MOMENT_, but YOU teach God's wrath is _ETERNAL._ Also read Proverbs 15:1-3. It says soft words turn away wrath, but hard words kindle anger. You wonder why my anger is kindled, it's because you are hitting me with hard words on behalf of your dishonest God, who has a never ending wrath in spite of His own promise that His anger is but only for a moment. Hey, like father, like son! I have said nothing but kind words to you and you have chosen to rub my nose in them. Yeah, maybe I don't take Jesus' advice very well, He said "Cast not your pearls before the swine, neither give holy things to dogs! Lest they trample on them and then turn and rend you!" I guess that's my sin, in telling you that your salvation is sure, I cast my pearls before a pig and a gave a holy thing to a dog, namely _YOU!!!!!!!!!_
Wow, what kind of love is this? Paul warns us about people teaching false doctrines, to me that sounds like you. God wiped out Soddom and Gommorah for their sin, Jesus gave us a parable of Lazarus and the rich man. And before you start barking, (Mark, are you really proud of this guy?) some believe that story was real. There is a separation. I am studying your take on aionon, but so far I can't find anyone outside of you that takes it to the extreme. www.carm.org agrees that aionon means age, but says the traslantions are based on the context. So have you folks at tentmaker looked at context?
quote:If you ever want to hear my testimony, I'll PT it with you sometime.
Why not just tell us here in the forum? Do you have something to be ashamed of? I'm sure everyone would love to hear your testimony.
quote:And CK, I would take heed that there are warnings to be alert for his coming, be alert
I have no reason to dread the Day of His Coming. And I guess you don't either, which is fine. And even if I'm not caught up in the clouds at the rapture, I'm going to take that as an indication that the Lord has called me to stay behind and fight. _AND FIGHT I WILL!!!!!_ What do you expect, to be caught up in the clouds? If so, _YOU COWARD!!!!!_ But it is also written "he who overcomes shall inherit ALL THINGS". So go ahead and fly away!!!!!!!! See if you overcome anything and will inherit anything!!!!!!
[
Chuck, this will be my last communication with you. I'll post and respond to others, but since you can only call me names, I learned a long time ago not to play with someone like you.
Thank you Steve Lortz for participating in this forum. Def59, it is not my job to publicly repremand people in this forum. I must admit though, occasionally I do this. Yes, Chuck has reacted emotionally in this forum and this is mixed in with some good well researched material by him. If you have been offended by his emotional outbursts, I am sure in his heart he is sorry for this. However, Chuck has confided to me by private message that he has been condemned and tortured by people in his life and in his impressionable youth preaching hell fire. Perhaps he is now experiencing an emotional flash back of sorts. Chuck now and over the last number of years upon looking at their position of hell fire and comparing it to other biblical material now disagrees with their basic premises as do I.
As far as my participation in this thread is concerned, I will continue to post information. However, my work schedule will not allow me to post again today. I have a business trip for the weekend, leave tomorrow morning and I have to be ready. However, I will look at more material that may be pertinent to this thread tonight with some friends at our weekly bible study. If we come up with anything of interest I may be able to post it over the weekend from my hotel room while I am on the road.
Until I write again please play nicely everyone. Also remember as 1 Corin. 13 says "we see through a glass darkly" and this can be especially true with regard to prophetic knowledge.
I looked up cessationism and realized that, although I personally prefer the term, it is incorrect for this discussion. Annihilationist is the correct term.
A cessationist believes the "gifts of the spirit" (or manifestations: let's not get into that here) ceased with the first century.
An annihilationist believes that hell is not literal.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
27
86
73
57
Popular Days
Jan 25
22
Apr 27
18
Jan 26
17
Jan 24
12
Top Posters In This Topic
TheInvisibleDan 27 posts
def59 86 posts
Mark Sanguinetti 73 posts
CKnapp3 57 posts
Popular Days
Jan 25 2005
22 posts
Apr 27 2005
18 posts
Jan 26 2005
17 posts
Jan 24 2005
12 posts
CKnapp3
Def59 said:
Ok, I'll stand corrected, but you no doubt hold allegiance to a verison of the bible that caters to your eternal torment belief. There are other versions of the bible that do not teach eternal torment at all! But you would no doubt dismiss those versions as being evil.
Also if you are convinced that I'm nothing but a Satanically inspired liar, I feel sorry for you. I have told you that your salvation is sure, but maybe I was lying there too. Maybe you are going to end up in the hell you warn others about. Is that what you want to hear? You want me to tell you that God is going to torture you forever unless you toe the line? What are you, a masochist? People who want to speak words that comfort, you want to condemn them as being of Satan. Would you rather have a maniac talk to you? How about a terrorist? Since you are not going to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven anyway, and I've showed you from YOUR beloved scriptures why, then maybe you had better stock up on ice cubes. Because according to YOUR OWN words, that will be your fate. As it is written, "by your own words you are justified, and by your own words you are condmened!"
What proof have you offered? All you have done is quote your interpretation of the bible. And perhaps you can charge me with the same. So tell me Def, what is the objective of this thread that you have started?
The last two quotes have you charging me with offering nothing more than opinion. The words of the prophets, and subsequently your bible, are no less opinion than my words. So what is your point?
Edited by CKnapp3Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKnapp3
According to what you believe Def, God IS limited when it comes to salvation. He has limited salvation only to those who believe, according to you.
The word "eternity" comes from the Latin word "aeternus", which comes from the Latin word "aevum", meaning "age". Therefore "eternity" and "age" are apparently synonymous. Age is always a definite period of time, so eternity must be too. Time, or should I say eternity, is always measurable. We have assumed that eternity has no beginning and no end. Theoretically this is true in respect to us, but we are finite beings, with a beginning, and an end. The time that passes during our lifetime can be construed as "eternity". I don't see it as illogical to talk about "before eternity" and "after eternity". We generally consider eternity to be immeasurable, but what really is happening is that time has come to a theoretical standstill in eternity. But in reality time moves constantly. We generally agreee that there will be an "end of time". A moment in time is eternity. But that "eternity" had a beginning, and also has an end. How long does one second last? Well, ONE SECOND! Yet one second can be construed as eternity per se.
So what we generally believe is that time will never end, which is why we believe eternity will never end. Time will constantly move, therefore the "end of time" is sort of a misnomer, it should be the "end of the age", and yes, the "end of eternity" as well. If time has an end, then so does space for that matter. Time and space work hand in hand.
Speed is of course the rate of motion in relationship to time and space. So in reality, its the passing of time that is infinitive, NOT ETERNITY. Though we could say that all time per se is one big eternity, to define eternity as without end is incorrect, it's (the passing of) time that is endless.
Yes, God was before us, and he is after us, which would make him without a beginning and an end, IN RESPECT TO OUR EXISTENCE. But does that mean God has NO absolute beginning, and NO absolute end? This is what man has no doubt assumed. Another topic for another thread.
But in closing, I was talking about speed being the rate of motion between time and space. Speed is always expressed in the formula space/time. Therefore if time ends, then space would have to also, else you would have an illogical equation 5 miles/0 time. Zero divided into an absolute value has no logical answer. But zero divided into itself always equals infinity. Therefore 0 miles/0 time = ? , theoretically, if time stopped, then matter would be theoretically travelling at speeds 900,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000+x the speed of light (186,000 miles/sec.), which is scientifically impossible. Therefore I can safely assume that time will continue to pass endlessly. One more thing, I see an indication that "time" is NEVER translated from the Greek word "aion" or any root word thereof. There is a Hebrew word, "olam", that has been both translated "time" and "eternity" and "everlasting", but it seems to be related to a defnite period rather than infinity.
Hmmm, I think I may have even learned a lesson while I was typing this post
:)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKnapp3
This is an interesting piece of literature. Click on the link, and then save it to your hard drive, and then open it using either Wordpad or Microsoft Word.
Why We Hardly Love God
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKnapp3
Incidenlty, The Apostle Paul NEVER once warned anyone about hellfire for all eternity. He did often warn about destruction however, a type of warning that even atheists today take heed on. But he never warned about an endless burning hell waiting to torture sinners for all eternity.
Why was this? Was Paul derelect in his duty and calling as an apostle? He was considered the greatest apostle of the first century. And look at his historical background! It seems the ones who have the worst sins and get the greatest amount of forgiveness are the ones that have the most mercy. After all, much was given to them, so they have much to give.
Def on the other hand was probably born with a silver bible in his mouth. So goody-goody-two-shoes himself. It's a wonder why he even accepted Jesus, since he hardly needs him. And because he was so righteous, he got very little forgiveness if any, therefore he has virtually no forgiveness to offer you or anyone else. The bible is full of stories of those who have received great forgiveness being the most loving people while those who received very little forgiveness being rather uppity. Just like those Pharisees. They were insulted because they thought they deserved to have Jesus in their company, but instead He rather would have the company of the sinners. And Jesus himself said he didn't call them to repentenance. I guess Def wasn't really called to repentenance either since he is so righteous it's flowing out of his ears. And neither was he called to proclaim The Gospel either, he even said his calling "was to warn!"
I almost want to compare Def with the prodigal son's older brother. You know the story, and when the prodigal son returned, the father embraced him and gave him a super-big feast. The older brother was offended because he knew the prodigal son had wasted his life, but was given a great welcome home celebration, while he on the other hand never got such a benefit, though he felt he should have because of his self assured faithfulness. Of course the prodigal son had to suffer much before he could repent. Before that, he had lived riotously, squandering his inhertance on anything from luscious food to the sexiest whores. What Def doesn't understand is that in order for a person to repent, he has to have a reason to. As long as the prodigal son had plenty of money and tons of pleasure, he had no reason to return to his father either. Only when a famine broke out, and a crisis resulted from it, and he was forced to take a job feeding pigs, and got no reward except the same food the pigs ate, that he realized his sorry state. And to think, he was even willing to make himself a hired servant of his father! He knew the blessings that he had with his father, but at the time felt some need to go on a vagabond. And likewise, an unsaved sinner is in a state where he is not being plagued by any crisises, so as long as that's the case, he continues on with his hedonistic lifestyle. Only when something in his life goes amok will he recognize the need for salvation. Perhaps this will only take place AFTER HE IS DEAD, and yes, he will recognize the need for a saviour then, and he will in fact be tormented! Question, did the prodigal son's father say to him, "you made your decision by YOUR OWN FREE WILL to leave me, tough luck Charlie!"???? ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!!!!!! Yet according to Def, this is just how God is going to regard those who only repent after they have died from their natural lives. I tell you, if that is what God is like, wouldn't you say the prodigal son's father is much more loving than God? BUT WE KNOW BETTER!!!!!!!! And when that sinner repents and turns to God under such conditions, in spite of what Def proclaims, GOD WILL NOT CAST HIM AWAY!!!!!! And I can assure you, Def, if he knows such a person, will take gross offense at such a person being forgiven, just like the prodigal son's older brother did.
Def, I would take heed to that parable if I were you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
I'm still trying to catch my breath from what sirguessalot said.
Edited by CMLink to comment
Share on other sites
def59
And CK, I would take heed that there are warnings to be alert for his coming, be alert
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Mark
Thank you for the post. At least now I understand where you come from. That's all I was asking.
I am not saying I agree with you, but at least I understand.
Right now, we will have to agree to disagree, while I study some more.
Chuck,
If you believe I have rejected God, because I rejected you, you should take yourself off the pedastal.
You and Mark automatically assume your right and anyone who disagrees is wrong.
But we all see through a glass darkly now.
Paul says we are to put away anger, maybe you should follow his advice.
If you ever want to hear my testimony, I'll PT it with you sometime.
Still, if there is no consequence for unbelief, why should anyone want to accept Christ? I mean what good does it do to try and live a holy life here just so we can live through a couple of special eons?
We are saved by grace, but we are expected to live according the Bible's standards for holy living. Jesus said it, Paul said it, Peter said it. James said it.
why do it if we get to live forever anyway?
That's my next question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
O.K. Def. That sounds reasonable. Spend some time studying the material on this thread. There has been quite a bit already. I would especially recommend that you participate in some of the word studies that I have offered. For example, the words "fire" (Strong's number 4442) and "age" (Strong's numbers 165 and 166). Do you have any bible study software or biblical reference books to help you with your study? This should give you some kind of a background for the other material. If you have any more questions I will try to help you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Sure there is consequences for unbelief Def. Being part of the 1000 year millennial kingdom should be a lot better than your typical 70 years of existence now. If people miss out on this it is going to be a great loss. I want to be part of this even if I only shine shoes or fix sandals.
However, as Chuck said how is an eternity of torment a just penalty for 70 years of sin? Even under the Old Testament Law the amount of lashes with a wip a person was given as a penalty was strictly limited to 40. Someone giving more lashes than this prescribed amount had to face the same penalty of 40 lashes as the person originally receiving the lashes. Even in the case of those receiving the death penalty, under the Old Testament Law this was to be relatively quick and not drawn out over days and days of agony. As I recall it was only the heathen nations that practiced torture and combined this with the death penalty. Perhaps we should become better acquainted with the Old Testament law in seeing what was prescribed as a death penalty. Why do you think God would grant more mercy now in this imperfect and sometimes heathenistic world than one would receive in his future kingdom and New Heaven and Earth?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
i've loved reading this thread. i think the difference between the "self-saving christianity" and the "christian universalism" is a distinct one. and worthy of all praise, yada yada.
but i think the next challenge to biblical universalism is to get over the scriptural racism that binds to the bible, and perhaps take a look at the possibility that the "Moses experience" was one that all races must go thru (and many have).
like how individuals and societies both do grow from the same stage to stage, each stage being better than the next, but also having gifts that need to be carried forward...
(this is just a loose off-the-cuff list, using the familiar body/soul/spirit model)
CENTERED ON BODY
1 - animalistic (instinctual)
2 - tribal (gatherers, shamanism)
3 - warlords, gangland (led by selfish masculine for self-preserving reasons)
4 - ethnocentric or nationalistic membership, patriarchy, monarchy (full of justice and law and rules - like feudalism), masculine reliance upon messiah/child to save him
5 - meritocracy, industry, science, freer markets (like what the US did coming out of the patriarchies and monarchies)
CENTERED ON SOUL
6 - wordcentric, global, non-racist, non-sexist, compassionate, healing (and dying), women and children, liberal education and communication (like where the jews touched for the first time on pentecost and more so later in Acts)
7 - subtle realm, dreams, astrology, visions, quickening of cognitive skills and logic, invention, innovation, the realm of "mere" possibility
CENTERED ON SPIRIT
8 - independence from identification with body and ego. actual experience with (during pre-mortal death) post-death realities. the "new birth." angelic/christ experience (often confusing angelic self as "other")
9 - bliss, nirvana, heaven, the ground of all being, from where we can free-fall "downward", and "return" to earth (tho many get stuck "up" here too)
its our "addiction" or "possession" of any of these stages of evolution at the exclusion of the others that is anti-christ or an evil spirit.
also, we can peak and develop in any stage, tho our center of gravity may be in the lowest (such as the familiar world-class genius whose center of gravity is warlord or ethnic)
also, notice how our devil/enemy gets smaller and smaller...tho nothing changes outside...just us, within. perspective. faith. whatever
perhaps you can see how Moses was not in the same stage as those he freed. but he was trying to elevate them to their next available stage, and free them from the patriarchies empowered by developed higher stages (such as soul-powers of the pharoahs, for example). and so sure, the jews will think they were chosen, if everyone else is at tribal and warlord. and of course, they are warned against tampering into the higher stages before they are ready.
anyway, most importantly, what strictly biblical universalists need to see, i think, is how the logos is simply generic and human. it just needs to be quickened on all levels(turned on) so it can evolve. no new parts required. and nothing need be removed. and its the same logos that is the universal shape of the cosmos (you all know the verses).
and so maybe consider how much of scriptural prophecy is simply referring to the changing of our own inner perspectives, which then changes the whole world as the numbers add up. yes, all knees shall eventually bow, and all that.
for what its worth...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
What's your take on annihilationism?
Here's a quote from Hank Henegraff of the Christian Research Institute:
You’d expect cultists to annihilate the concept of hell, but today, more and more evangelical Christians are buying into this idea of annihilation as well. Rather than believe that unbelievers are going to suffer forever and ever, they claim a just God would never allow infinite suffering for finite sin. But for this argument to be consistent, we would be forced to say that God shouldn’t extend eternal bliss to finite creatures. See this argument is self-defeating because annihilationism teaches that finite wrongdoers will be zapped into unconscious oblivion for an infinite amount of time.
Let me also add this, if there were no hell, the atrocity of sins against the very character of God would be minimized. And in light of crimes committed by Nazi war criminals and things like that, the horror of eternal, conscious punishment may not be so inconceivable after all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Still,
The Bible talks a lot about the need to confess Jesus as Lord now. Not in the future.
If aionon means what you say, then does not stand to reason that God himself is only for an age?
Our blessings are only for an age?
tentmaker is the only place that makes these claims. It sounds too much like TWI-speak. "Hidden" knowledge, "mistranslations", "oh-the-Bible-doesn't-really-say-that" kind of talk.
Sounds too weird for me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
It strikes me that Hannegraff's comments are pure P.I. He draws a false comparison, arguing that "eternal reward" is a parallel to "eternal punishment," when annihilationists (I prefer the term "cessationists") believe the comparison is between "eternal life" and "eternal death." (ignoring the "eternal" argument for the sake of this post).
"We would be FORCED to say that God shouldn't extend eternal bliss to finite creatures."
Right, Hank. That's, umm, well, it's kind of why we call it GRACE!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKnapp3
Response to Def
So you don't believe I'm anointed of the Lord eh? Then suppose you tell me who is, you wiseass. And when you do, you should follow ALL his advice, for YOU have put HIM on a pedastal. I didn't put myself on any pedastal. All you are doing is trying to justify your vicious hate. You say you exalt Jesus? Then why haven't you taken His advice? Jesus said to LOVE YOUR ENEMIES, and to DO GOOD TO THOSE WHO DO YOU EVIL, and to BLESS THOSE WHO CURSE YOU (and that means BLESS and NOT CURSE BACK), that you may be A CHILD OF GOD. Would God do any different? But you showed us whose child YOU are. Your father is Satan, and the works of Satan you do indeed. I told you the truth and you didn't believe me. I don't seek my own glory, neither do I walk in pride. But YOU do! What charge do you want to lay on me, you who are so righteous? So far you only have charged me with a Mickey Mouse one of "offering mere opinion". I am convinced that your heart is very calloused, and that there is no amount of reasoning I can lay on you. Only God alone can touch your heart, and evidently at this time He has chosen not to. Jesus also said you will know them by their fruits, and yours is ROTTEN TO THE CORE!!!!
And what do you think YOU are doing? I could easily agree with you, but you would only exalt yourself an rub my nose in it. Ok, consider this if you will: you, Mark, and I, ALL THREE OF US ARE RIGHT!!!!!! How can that be you ask? Go figure it out, you're a smart man.
Oh, I should put away MY anger, but God can kindle his own wrath eternally. Who the hell are YOU to tell me to put away anger??? Sounds like the God you serve Def is nothing but a hypocrite, not to meniton a LIAR!!!!! Read Psalm 30:4-6 It says God's wrath is only for a MOMENT, but YOU teach God's wrath is ETERNAL. Also read Proverbs 15:1-3. It says soft words turn away wrath, but hard words kindle anger. You wonder why my anger is kindled, it's because you are hitting me with hard words on behalf of your dishonest God, who has a never ending wrath in spite of His own promise that His anger is but only for a moment. Hey, like father, like son! I have said nothing but kind words to you and you have chosen to rub my nose in them. Yeah, maybe I don't take Jesus' advice very well, He said "Cast not your pearls before the swine, neither give holy things to dogs! Lest they trample on them and then turn and rend you!" I guess that's my sin, in telling you that your salvation is sure, I cast my pearls before a pig and a gave a holy thing to a dog, namely YOU!!!!!!!!!
Why not just tell us here in the forum? Do you have something to be ashamed of? I'm sure everyone would love to hear your testimony.
I have no reason to dread the Day of His Coming. And I guess you don't either, which is fine. And even if I'm not caught up in the clouds at the rapture, I'm going to take that as an indication that the Lord has called me to stay behind and fight. AND FIGHT I WILL!!!!! What do you expect, to be caught up in the clouds? If so, YOU COWARD!!!!! But it is also written "he who overcomes shall inherit ALL THINGS". So go ahead and fly away!!!!!!!! See if you overcome anything and will inherit anything!!!!!!
Edited by CKnapp3Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Are you now denying the work of Jesus Christ in saving man with Jesus' life, death and resurrection? What is the point of Jesus Christ's life at all? Was it all for naught? Are you learning anything at all on this forum? Do you want to learn anything?
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Def, you seem to be having a great deal of difficulty in comprehending this material presented here. Much more so than other posters. This may be different than what you have been previously taught at your church, but there is enough simple word studies and the like on this forum thread for you to have at least learned something.
Nevertheless you still seem to be having a great deal of difficulty with even the more simpler explanations here. Hence, this is what I recommend for you. Copy and paste my posts here which should total about 20 pages, to your word processing software. Print out one or more paper copies of this. Then take this copy to church with you this Sunday. Have your pastor or someone else that you value the scriptural opinion of look it over for you. Yes, they will need to actually read the material including the word studies and articles. Get their opinion. Then get back to us here on what you and your church representative(s) learn. Def, I may be reading you wrong, but you strike me as the type of person that is afraid to believe anything as Christian doctrine that is not the status quo for your church or immediate circle. Hence, here is your opportunity to get the support or feedback that you seem to need.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKnapp3
You said it Def! And because you believe in this hell, the atrocity of your own sins against God's character have definitely been magnified!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CKnapp3
Your bible doesn't support the argument that death seals your fate, and that repentenance at that point is useless on the grounds that once you die it's too late. Why do you keep stressing that baseless argument?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
I'm aghast at the tenor of "discussion" here. Can you just imagine Peter or Paul coming off with a smug "I know it all you poor sap, and you don't" attitude? If I hear "my Bible says" one more time I think I'll scream.
Of one thing I am sure: none of you know for sure.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
TheEvan wrote, "I'm aghast at the tenor of 'discussion' here. Can you imagine Peter or Paul coming off with a smug 'I know it all you poor sap, and you don't' attitude?"
I can only concur. I teach part time at a Christian classical academy. When the students reach seventh grade, we begin teaching them HOW to argue in a formal manner.
The process is call "discourse". The first stage of discourse is for the participants to sound out each others' position, to come to agreement on terms and principles. They do this by asking probative questions of each other.
After terms and principles are agreed upon, the participants can begin to present persuasive arguments. These arguments begin with each side giving a statement of its thesis, and presenting evidence in favor. Then each side gets to question the others' thesis, and to present evidence against. This process alternates. The discourse can go on as long as the parties are interested in the question.
We encourage the students to use a passive voice placing emphasis on the logic, rather than the passion, of their agument. We teach them to avoid emotionally loaded words and phrases ( such as "BS"). We disallow ad hominem attacks, and comments about each others personalities.
We discourage them from using absolute language by having them introduce their statements with phrases such as "it would seem that" or "it appears that". This prevents them from backing themselves into "either/or", I'm right/you're wrong", "do or die" corners. There seems to have been plenty of that in this thread.
Concerning appeals to the Bible, while we all may or may not recognize that it contains absolute truth, none of us have an absolute understanding of the whole thing. We can present our understandings for consideration, and we can question each others' hermaneutics, but none of us can impose our interpretation simply by dictate.
It appears to me that def59 was willing to entertain information concerning Biblical Universalism, and was asking probing questions to learn more. It also appears that Chuck took these probative questions as attacks on his position, and responded with unwarrented, emotionally driven outbursts, as well as information.
While Chuck's information may be right, his outbursts seem counter productive. Instead of tending to persuade def59 to come around to his point of view, Chuck's outbursts would more probably harden def59 in his position.
Mark Sanguinetti's posts appear to be models for dispassionate consideration of an issue that raises many people's hackles.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Chuck, this will be my last communication with you. I'll post and respond to others, but since you can only call me names, I learned a long time ago not to play with someone like you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
At this point in my life I think sin affects this life more then the next. And the 2 are 1.
John said there is a sin unto death. But what that means I'm not sure of. What will die?
The fire of God will burn all the bad and leave the good.
And I'm talking about all people. Not just "believers". A term that is thrown around a lot but not quite understood. Like the term "born again".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Thank you Steve Lortz for participating in this forum. Def59, it is not my job to publicly repremand people in this forum. I must admit though, occasionally I do this. Yes, Chuck has reacted emotionally in this forum and this is mixed in with some good well researched material by him. If you have been offended by his emotional outbursts, I am sure in his heart he is sorry for this. However, Chuck has confided to me by private message that he has been condemned and tortured by people in his life and in his impressionable youth preaching hell fire. Perhaps he is now experiencing an emotional flash back of sorts. Chuck now and over the last number of years upon looking at their position of hell fire and comparing it to other biblical material now disagrees with their basic premises as do I.
As far as my participation in this thread is concerned, I will continue to post information. However, my work schedule will not allow me to post again today. I have a business trip for the weekend, leave tomorrow morning and I have to be ready. However, I will look at more material that may be pertinent to this thread tonight with some friends at our weekly bible study. If we come up with anything of interest I may be able to post it over the weekend from my hotel room while I am on the road.
Until I write again please play nicely everyone. Also remember as 1 Corin. 13 says "we see through a glass darkly" and this can be especially true with regard to prophetic knowledge.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Just a note:
I looked up cessationism and realized that, although I personally prefer the term, it is incorrect for this discussion. Annihilationist is the correct term.
A cessationist believes the "gifts of the spirit" (or manifestations: let's not get into that here) ceased with the first century.
An annihilationist believes that hell is not literal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.