Why is UR harmful?

[jriccitelli]

What in the world...???

Yes in 'this' world. The bible is very clear that some may never have a chance to repent. You are constantly denying this can be argued from scripture, and insulting us when we defend that the bible teaches such.

[Roberto]

May never have a chance when?

[steve]

JR,
Apparently this post (at the "Something I Have Noticed" thread) must have been missed or forgotten, so I will put it before you again:

Please answer these questions before addressing any more posts to me. Why should I read and respond to you, if you are not willing to do the same to me?

Questions to JR:

1. Why is it not dangerous to say (as you do) that God may give some people a second chance after death, but it is dangerous to say (as UR does) that God may give all men such an opportunity? (Why is UR Harmful? 12/27/13 11:41 AM)

2. Why do you misrepresent universalism as removing all basis for fear from sinners, when you have so often been corrected about this? (Why is UR Harmful? 12/27/13 11:41 AM)

3. Why do you say UR is dangerous in that it departs from traditional thinking, while annihilationism, which equally departs from traditional thinking, is exempt from such criticism? (Why is UR Harmful? 12/27/13 11:41 AM)

4. Since you use Ezekiel’s “watchman on the wall” analogy to criticize those who teach a different view of hell from yours, are you saying that God told Ezekiel to preach about hell? (Why is UR Harmful? 12/27/13 11:41 AM)

5. You asked (twice) why Jeremiah was put in the dungeon. I gave my answer both times, and asked for yours answer and what your point might be. You have not replied. Please do. ("Something I Have Noticed" 12/27/13 9:48 AM and Why is UR Harmful? 12/27/13 11:41 AM)

6. I asked, “Which of the blessings of the OT have I or anyone else applied to post-mortem destinies?” This was addressing one of your major points. You have not answered. ("Something I Have Noticed" 12/27/13 12:59 PM)

[TK]

JR wrote:

Why did they want to arrest Peter, because of his message of love? No they knew it was an indictment on them all, and they were guilty.

Yes, a true gospel presentation should show someone how they are guilty- guilty of being rebels. Repentance is an admission of this fact and a submission to the King. You don't have to bring hell into it. You can tell them that it is URGENT that they repent now because that is what God requires. Once again, if that is not a good enough reason, I am not sure that scaring them with hell-talk will do the trick either.

And, regarding the Jonah comment, I think this was a little sarcasm regarding Jonah's seeming unwillingness to preach to the Ninevites and his apparent disdain when they repented. It had nothing to do with thinking that Jonah should have "stayed home." Not sure how you took that the wrong way but your response indicates that you might have.

TK

[steve7150]

I am not sure that scaring them will hell-talk will do the trick either.






Not only this but if you believe because you are frightened of hell , how can you possibly follow Jesus greatest command "to love the Lord your God'?

Being terrorized and loving the one terrorizing you don't mix well together.

[TheEditor]

My comments were not offered as exegesis, they were offered as a little levity considering the heated way this thread seems to be going. I always thought a sense of humor about some things is the best way to look at matters from time to time. God blessed me with VERY little; I'm not good-looking, I am not gainfully employed, but, I have always fancied that I have some bit of wit. Some would do well to try and appreciate that, maybe life would be less dire.

Regards, Brenden.

[jriccitelli]

Sorry Editor, you may not know that i love humor and wit. I by nature am a joker and live by the motto; life is way to serious to always be serious. I too have found it doesn’t always work well here, as my wit gets interpreted as sarcasm or misunderstood. Don’t be punny here is the wisdom I have had to accept. Nevertheless, I like your insight Editor and have been meaning to address the 'pilot scheme’ you brought up. But please add humor, I love it but I had to refrain, as this thread demonstrates: "Christ is back He is here!!!!!!"
http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.ph ... t=+wake+up

… the heated way this thread seems to be going.

I like to lighten things up every few minutes myself, in debates too, but it would never have gone this way if Steve’s intimidation and insults hadn’t continually been the norm. I hate having to spend defending my self or intellect rather than just studying and comparing scripture. Bible study was the only intention for my time online here.

I think this was a little sarcasm regarding Jonah's seeming unwillingness to preach to the Ninevites and his apparent disdain when they repented. It had nothing to do with thinking that Jonah should have "stayed home." Not sure how you took that the wrong way but your response indicates that you might have.

You are right TK, Steve meant to touche the idea that we also have the same attitude that Jonah had, since Steve has insinuated this repeatedly before. And the quote in Editors post was from that same context. And I explained why Steve's comment suggests we are just like Jonah: 'You are suggesting Jonah's own feelings about the situation negate the urgency and implications of the message'.

[jriccitelli]

“What difference would it mean to Abraham, Moses, Noah, if everyone is on an equal playing field again post-mortem” (me)

Last week when I wrote this sentence above I winced because, while I hoped for the best, and wrote it ‘hoping’ Steve would be able to discern the meaning, I knew already his UR glasses would cause him to automatically see this statement above as being about the Patriarchs 'attitude' towards the sinner. Because some UR proponents here and yourself continually accuse us of having the attitude of the laborers in the vineyard (parable). This inaccurate analysis of us is continued over and over here, and yet it is the farthest thing from the truth, yet Steve continues to insinuate it.

This is the only way you could connect Jonah to my statement, does someone see another way Jonah could be applied?
My post had nothing to do with the Patriarch’s 'love or not for the lost': the point was that all their writings and dealings in the bible would then make no-sense! If God goes through all the work of giving warnings creating this world and giving warnings of death, why kill men just to have them back where they started?

Flooding the earth, wiping out everybody so that they become dead. Then immediately on the other side the same scenario exists, everyone is alive again and this scenario can be repeated over and over into eternity. It sounds like Ground Hog Day. Why not just let the test continue, or life, as a chance to grow and become whatever.
Then the lessons in the bible: the warnings to Adam, and the warnings to others become a huge confusing waste of energy and words. Instead God could just continue everything in this one life here on earth (and that is how He does it). God does put man to death, and God puts a limit on mans life on earth. I don’t believe God finds wisdom in creating multiple universes or places to repent.

[steve]

Steve meant to touche the idea that we also have the same attitude that Jonah had, since Steve has insinuated this repeatedly before. And the quote in Editors post was from that same context. And I explained why Steve's comment suggests we are just like Jonah: 'You are suggesting Jonah's own feelings about the situation negate the urgency and implications of the message'.

This confirms what I have been thinking for some time. I am assuming that anyone reading the context of my "Touché" and following the flow of discussion would easily see that I was not in any sense making a reference to JR or to Homer:

1. I was asked by JR what Moses and Noah would think if God forgave their detractors.

2. I said that I thought any godly man would be glad to see this result. I said, "Who wouldn't?"

3. TheEditor answered this rhetorical question by pointing out the case of Jonah, and

4. I acknowledged that he had indeed found an exception to my statement.

There was no allusion to JR, Homer, or any other contemporary person in that entire discussion.

JR and Homer often act as if I have insulted them in my posts. A case like this statement before us, where JR thought I was attacking him, confirms my suspicion that these men are taking my honest questions and my answers to their questions in a manner other than I intend, and other than is justified. I suspect that the accusations of my unkindness to them are greatly exaggerated.

My post had nothing to do with the Patriarch’s love or not for the lost: the point was that all their writings and dealings in the bible would then make no-sense! If God goes through all the work of giving warnings creating this world and giving warnings of death, why kill men just to have them back where they started?

Sinners who die are simply back to where they started? If you are referring to universalism, isn't it clear that those who accuse you of not understanding what universalism teaches are vindicated by such statements?

Flooding the earth, wiping out everybody so that they become dead. Then immediately on the other side the same scenario exists, everyone is alive again and this scenario can be repeated over and over into eternity. It sounds like Ground Hog Day. Why not just let the test continue, or life, as a chance to grow and become whatever.

I confess that I don't have a clue to what you are saying. However, none of your sentences have any obvious connection to the teachings of universal reconciliation. When people tell you (as they repeatedly have done) that you apparently have no grasp of the teachings of evangelical universalism, why don't you take it to heart, instead of continually proving that they are right about you. Why not either learn what the view teaches, and craft your arguments accordingly, or else just drop out of the discussion? There are intelligent and articulate advocates of annihilationism here whom you can trust to defend the view without bringing embarrassment upon the position.

[steve7150]

Flooding the earth, wiping out everybody so that they become dead. Then immediately on the other side the same scenario exists, everyone is alive again and this scenario can be repeated over and over into eternity. It sounds like Ground Hog Day. Why not just let the test continue, or life, as a chance to grow and become whatever.










I think this is actually a good logical argument. However the warnings by God were simply about the destruction of those specific people in their specific situation. So to take these warnings mostly from the OT and read into them the fate of all people everywhere who are not followers of Jesus is reading into them more then was meant.