Why is UR harmful?

End Times
steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: Why is UR harmful?

Post by steve7150 » Sat Dec 28, 2013 9:26 am

Since I had read many of CT Russell's writings (whose concept of salvation was about as close as you can get to Universalist and still not be) the idea that God is fair and provides ample opportunities for all became something I was comfortable embracing. Even in the Scriptures we have characters like Mannaseh, who only repented after he had been beaten with a pretty big stick.









CT Russell was way ahead of his time and has been unjustly portrayed as a heretic by mainstream religion. I have "Studies in the Scriptures" his definitive writings.
When i became a believer in 2002 i had been taught the eternal hell doctrine and as time went by it made less and less sense to me and eventually really bothered me. I was listening to a Christian radio station and a voice came over the radio and said "If you want to know the truth about hell call this number."
It didn't seem like a commercial , just a deep voice. I called the number and it lead me to the "associated bible students" and i studied with them on sunday mornings for about 18 months. I still study with them sunday mornings via a conference call format. Really dedicated people.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Why is UR harmful?

Post by Homer » Sat Dec 28, 2013 12:01 pm

What in the world has my ability to know or not know someone's sincerity got to do with this discussion? I am not the one anyone needs to convince. You raised this point the other day and I asked the following: Do you think God can not spot insincerity? And if their repentance is sincere, would you not wish for them to be saved?
I do not allow my theology to be based upon what I wish, as some do. What I wish is irrelevant to determining what is the truth. The point is that you indicated that in your view universalism would allow for a person to repent and be saved at any time post-mortem. Are you now denying this possibility? On what basis?
You gave no answer, but only repeated the same irrelevant and misinformed criticism. Is there some reason that I should continue to try to conduct an honest dialogue with you?
Always quick to attack the character of those you disagree with. Now it is our honesty.
You mean that the apostles, only one of whom was willing to believe in the resurrection prior to seein the risen Christ, were somehow incapable of being saved by faith? I am eager to hear your defense of this!
The apostles were blessed to have seen the risen Lord. They are a special case, witnesses to the resurrection. Nevertheless they still faced temptations and trials of faith the rest of their lives; faith and faithfulness are inseparable. Would Jesus vindicate them? Would He return as He said? Could Paul's faith have failed him? If not, why did Jesus see the need to encourage Paul in visions when he faced trials, Acts 18:9-10. 23:11?

You apparently do not see the stark contrast between a life filled with temptation to unfaithfulness, where the pressure from the evil one and the flesh is to turn away from God, and the unrelenting post-mortem pressure on those in hell, however long or short that may be, to accept the imagined opportunity to escape, proposed by universalists.

Roberto
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 8:57 pm

Re: Why is UR harmful?

Post by Roberto » Sat Dec 28, 2013 3:01 pm

Homer,
Do you think that there is a verse that teaches clearly that there is no post- mortem repentance permitted?
R

User avatar
Candlepower
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:26 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Why is UR harmful?

Post by Candlepower » Sat Dec 28, 2013 4:15 pm

Homer wrote:I do not allow my theology to be based upon what I wish, as some do. What I wish is irrelevant to determining what is the truth....
Brother, you continue to misrepresent others. As a CI, I don't see that UR's BASE their theology on wishful thinking. I'm not afraid to admit that my UR brothers and sisters do have significant theological support for their view--support to which, it seems to me, you have blinded and deafened yourself ("...eyes closed and fingers jammed into your ears," as I have previously described).

Homer wrote:...let's consider Pascal's wager for example. I'm sure you know of it. Basically, Pascal said that we can not know with absolute certainty...that God exists. Life, thus, is a sort of wager that all, willing or not, participate in....If we dare proclaim the universalist message...Pascal's wager is worthless.
Well, there you go. What you criticize others for doing, you do yourself. It sounds as if you are basing your theology upon something you wish to be true. That is, Pascal's hypothesis. (I disagree with Pascal's underlying assumption, as you have stated it, that we cannot know with absolute certainty that God exists. I know that we can know).

I hope you will stop misrepresenting those you disagree with. Please stop shooting at the phony targets you erect.

steve7150
Posts: 2597
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: Why is UR harmful?

Post by steve7150 » Sat Dec 28, 2013 5:11 pm

JR,

Since you like referencing OT passages of destruction to equate with God's final judgment have you considered this?

"So when the corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality , then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, "Death is swallowed up in victory." 1st Cor 15.54

Here Paul is quoting Isaiah 25.8 , which starts out with gentile nations rebelling against God then being destroyed and later restored to life.


"O death where is your sting? O Hades where is your sting?" 1st Cor 15.55

This quotes Hosea 13.14 and this section describes the Jews rebelling against God then being destroyed then being restored to life.



Alone these OT events seem like localized events but Paul quoting these sections applies it to his world eschatology which he described in 1st Cor 15.20 - 15.28
where all things are under Christ's feet.
Paul quotes restoration passages and these folks were destroyed first so the restoration sounds like postmortem reconciliation.

User avatar
TK
Posts: 1477
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:42 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Why is UR harmful?

Post by TK » Sat Dec 28, 2013 5:41 pm

I haven't posted on the hell topics for a couple of years because I certainly do not think I can add much to the conversation. I find the conversation interesting, but every thing that can be said seems to have been said.

THAT being said.. it would seem that UR is only dangerous if 1) You charge head first when witnessing to an unbeliever proclaiming the absolute truth of UR (instead of the gospel) and 2) UR is not true. If UR IS true then if you do #1 that would be fine. Since it is hard to be 100% sure about #2 it would seem unwise to do #1. I doubt that Steve G or any other who believes UR might be true would do #1.

My recommendation when witnessing to an unbeliever is to try not to bring up hell at all. Of course they may do so. If it heads in that direction, I would likely say that I am not 100% sure, so why take chances? Even if UR is true it wouldn't be pleasant to burn even for 10 minutes. If CI is true, it would seem preferable to live eternally in bliss with God than being snuffed out after a period of burning. But that's just me.

I guess what I am saying, essentially, is this. My view of hell does not govern how I live. I was not "saved" because someone convinced me of a certain view of hell. I was "saved" because my mom (and some other sources) explained the gospel to me, and I repented (as much as an 8 yr old can repent) and believed. So if a particular view of hell had nothing to do with my conversion and present walk with Christ, why should it matter to anyone else who may not yet be a believer?

TK

User avatar
Candlepower
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:26 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Why is UR harmful?

Post by Candlepower » Sat Dec 28, 2013 5:58 pm

TK wrote:So if a particular view of hell had nothing to do with my conversion and present walk with Christ, why should it matter to anyone else who may not yet be a believer?
TK
I appreciate your excellent comment, TK. I thought this highlighted part was extra good!

User avatar
steve
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm

Re: Why is UR harmful?

Post by steve » Sat Dec 28, 2013 7:36 pm

Homer wrote:
you indicated that in your view universalism would allow for a person to repent and be saved at any time post-mortem. Are you now denying this possibility? On what basis?
I have not changed my tune. I have no reason to believe that a man cannot genuinely repent upon his first sight of Jesus (Saul did, after all). Many people probably do. Some do not. Your statement was that we could not know whether a man's repentance is genuine, and my answer was that we are not the ones who need to be convinced of another's repentance—especially on the judgment day. The only person who needs to be convinced is the Judge, who knows all things, including whether a man's repentance is or is not genuine.

User avatar
jriccitelli
Posts: 1317
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:14 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: Why is UR harmful?

Post by jriccitelli » Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:25 pm

My recommendation when witnessing to an unbeliever is to try not to bring up hell at all (TK)
We don’t simply witness, but teach the bible, and make disciples.
You cannot leave out the urgency to repent now, because men grow hard. Isn’t that why it is harder to witness to adults, and easy to witness to children?
If they believe it is ‘never’ too late for 'anyone' to repent, they are ignoring and not wrestling with, at least, the verses that warn of the ‘urgency’ to do so ‘now’. It plainly says: some refused to repent, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, no repentance was found even though they sought so with tears, the foolish virgins, the doors were locked, the son of perdition, the unpardonable sin, etc. To deny or reinterpret these warnings is not the duty of a believer. It seems UR is doing just what Candle accused CI of doing:
… support to which, it seems to me, you have blinded and deafened yourself ("...eyes closed and fingers jammed into your ears," as I have previously described) (Candle, above)
This is not only about this one doctrine; this is about the relevancy and meaning behind the whole OT, Moses, the Law and the Prophets.

User avatar
jriccitelli
Posts: 1317
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:14 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: Why is UR harmful?

Post by jriccitelli » Mon Dec 30, 2013 3:07 pm

Yes, people do get wiped out completely, generally speaking. Once people have died, they are soon reduced to simple elements. Death is the true penalty announced to all people who have sinned. In order for your comment to be relevant to your point, (Steve)
We cannot say that the OT saint considered the death of the ‘body’ as final. How can death of just the 'body' be relevant, since death was the judgment on the 'wicked'?

What is the big deal, or big threat of death, or what is the use in believing all the promises, if for OT hearers: death just changes everything back to neutral again?
Death becomes actually a 'good' thing for wicked sinners, and a loss of all reward for those who live righteously since, according to you, all the OT promises were 'temporary' in application, and had no future post-mortem application. If death is only a 'temporary' then these OT warnings are void post death, is that what the OT saints thought?
Jesus chastised them for not perceiving that: God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Abraham and the rest did not receive the promises yet, but considered that God could raise them up again. It is confirmed that they believed the promises, good and bad, had consequences and application post-mortem.

What difference would it mean to Abraham, Moses, Noah, If everyone is on an equal playing field again post-mortem, and all the promises and warnings meant nothing, the judgment came upon everyone righteous and wicked, for even Moses and Noah died. This makes no-sense.
The OT wicked and unbeliever had no-hope whatsoever, only a fearful judgment to look forward to, if anything at all. In either context, NT or OT, the fate for the wicked does not change. Jesus reveals new things about God, but God does not change. You have Jesus treading out the wine press, and the wrath of the Lamb to deal with. Is this the love you see in Jesus’ character? The only solution is that love goes hand in hand with the warnings and Justice God demands, and the two are not opposed.

Post Reply

Return to “Eschatology”