The Logical Fallacy of Christian Universalism

[Jepne]

Again, Steve, and all, thank you for a wonderful thread, giving me much food for thought. Yes, real motivation to love God must come from elsewhere than threats of torture!!! What a great statement!

Homer, before I met Jesus, I could be comfortable in my sins only because that was all I knew!! I was experiencing the law of reaping and sowing, so it was easy to believe in reincarnation – that I would reap what I sowed in another life time if I did not change my ways in this one. That there is no escape!! Desiring to change my ways, out of love for my daughter and husband, I asked God “If you are real, change my heart.” Soon after that, I met Jesus who changed me gloriously.

My story refutes the idea that the natural man cannot desire God. I wanted God before I knew him, or knew that Jesus was the door to Him.

Until you are born again, you cannot believe in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead. You cannot know heaven as anything but a mythological playing a harp upon a cloud forever. Boring.

Homer, I think that you, and many, imagine that sinners do not want to be saved, but they do - they seek salvation in the wrong things – drugs, sex, vain philosophies etc. They experience plenty of negative consequences, some driving them to suicidal despair. They are blind to a gospel that insists they join a club that demands they give their minds over to foolishness with threats. This reminds me of the superior view that many who think themselves Christians exhibited to me when they tried to 'witness' to me when I was in my hippie garb. I thought them to be fools but now, I see their view as more self-serving and destructive than just foolish.

Many sinners believe they are beyond the point of return, giving up the hope that there is a God who does love them, and they turn to suicide. Even though no one should ever presume upon any other being, they should never have hope taken from them.

We know people who think they are Christians because they 'made a decision for Christ' but when you talk to them about loving and knowing God, they do not understand the heart of it and I wonder if they are Christians at all or merely signed on to a club for the benefits – the fire insurance.
If a person who realizes he is in dire straits, either in this life, or the one to come, hears what a wonderful thing knowing Jesus is, how he can have new heart, a new mind, about how wonderful life is [rather than, “Life's a bitch, then you die” as the tee-shirt says], he might be interested. If he is only faced with the proposition that he must say he is sorry (the common misconception of repentance) so he can play a harp on a cloud in the hereafter (common misconception of heaven), of course he won't go for it, and shouldn't, in my opinion.

[jriccitelli]

What if I was the Captain of a ship, and when it started sinking I said don’t worry because even if you all drown you will not die.

Salvation implies that you are under REAL threat and in actual REAL
danger of being "not saved." If you cannot be anything BUT saved... the word salvation cannot be used (Breck)

If we are speaking of death (not punishment) then UR saves you from a hypothetical death.
If it happens that everyone is saved from death, everyone repents and no one gets permanent death, then Breck is wrong. The problem is that UR is ‘saying’ everyone will get saved, this eliminates the possibility of a real death, and it eliminates the possibility of any real saving. If you just ‘hope’ everyone repents, and miraculously everyone does then great, but if God said everyone will repent and no-one will experience permanent death, then God would have just eliminated any salvation from permanent death, as He ‘never intended’ to send anyone to a permanent death.
This is what UR is telling us; that God will not send anyone to a permanent death.

The question is, can God save everybody if He wishes? You have confused yourself (and me!) by assuming a whole set of conditions for which there is no necessity. (Steve)

Is that the question?? God can do whatever He wishes, no one should deny that, but we believe God keeps his word.

How many people can be reconciled to God—ten percent? fifty percent? one-hundred percent? At what percentage do you run into "logical" problems? (Steve)

What percent? One hundred.
I may have a problem ‘believing’ a large percentage will repent, but the point is if we are told ‘all’ will repent, and there is ‘no’ danger of eternal death then what’s the point of telling people they will be saved. If UR taught that eternal death was a ‘possibility’, then everyone could possibly be saved from it, but UR says eternal death is not a reality.

‘Evangelical universalists believe that there is a real hell from which people are saved’ (Steve)

Great, but it is not the same hell taught us in scripture. Hell is after the judgment, Hell is the second death, and it is death. UR has a different hell. The problem with UR is the denial of the second death (permanent death), salvation from death ‘not suffering’ is the main point, thus if there is no permanent death there is no monster under the bed, and thus no salvation from permanent death.

But then, I have always believed that God wants everyone saved (Steve)

You have a wonderful way of putting down those who see the bible as giving stern warning to repent and believe because this life may be your only chance to repent. I am made ill with your repetitive line that we who defend the scriptural warnings and admonitions don’t want other people saved, far from it, we want people to know the truth and the errors and dangers of this teaching. I love people immensely and I will not let them die thinking they can be assured of post-mortem repentance and reconciliation.
You make UR out to be a simple hope, but it ends up having to deny dozens of biblical principles and mandates, not to mention dismissing all the prophetic warnings, chapters and books on what will happen to the unrepentant. Now it seems you find it necessary to put the Gospels into two categories also…

[steve7150]

You make UR out to be a simple hope, but it ends up having to deny dozens of biblical principles and mandates, not to mention dismissing all the prophetic warnings, chapters and books on what will happen to the unrepentant. Now it seems you find it necessary to put the Gospels into two categories also…

User avatar
jriccitelli








I have a hypothetical question for you. If you had two choices at judgment day , either eternal death or a million years in the lake of fire which let's say is an unpleasant place and then a chance for heaven which would you pick?

[Homer]

a million years in the lake of fire which let's say is an unpleasant place

Universalism, with conversion in hell, claims to be biblical. Where do we find that the supposed conversion in hell can not, at least in some cases, take place immediately upon feeling the flames? Surely they will know on the spot that what they rejected in this life is true.

[steve7150]

Universalism, with conversion in hell, claims to be biblical. Where do we find that the supposed conversion in hell can not, at least in some cases, take place immediately upon feeling the flames? Surely they will know on the spot that what they rejected in this life is true.










Yes they will know Jesus is Lord, therefore since scripture does not even hint what the punishment will be or how long it will be, a Christian Universalist
must simply accept the fact it's in God's hands and there is no way to know.
It's not as neat and tidy and definable as eternal torment or even annihilation but life on this earth isn't very neat and tidy either yet God allows it that way.

[jriccitelli]

‘I have a hypothetical question for you. If you had two choices at judgment day , either eternal death or a million years in the lake of fire which let's say is an unpleasant place and then a chance for heaven which would you pick?’ (7150)

Hypothetical in the sense that ''many' of us may have 'already' made a decision, and getting released after sent to hell is not in scripture (although I know you are fond of Rev.21:26), but since it is a rather interesting question;
I believe that being thrown into fire for more than 1 minute would be enough to make me consider forfeiting any further existence or life. I may endure 20 minutes of being burned by fire to receive eternal life, but as I remember I was burned a couple of times in my life and each second of fire on flesh is horribly unbearable. If Hell was actually only an intense suffering of some sort or another, as in painful punishment I may endure from 20 minutes to 2 weeks depending on the pain, I am admittedly not into pain. If hell were like sitting at the DMV I might endure 50 years (if I had a good book maybe 51 years). If hell were like being locked in solitaire loneliness then I might endure 150 years.

Nevertheless Hell is described as ‘the end’; there is no mention of a third Judgment, or an appeals system, or purgatory. Hell – death – flames – destruction – do not paint a picture of release. Fire destroys everything placed into it, I am sure that is what every normal ancient or modern person ‘acquainted with fire’ would understand fire to mean and define. Fire ‘destroys’ everything.

‘Yes they will know Jesus is Lord, therefore since scripture does not even hint what the punishment will be or how long it will be’

Are you saying 'punishment' opens their eyes to who Jesus is? Scripture does not even hint? No way to know? Is this the message of Universalism !? …

[steve]

jriccitelli,

There are people who are debaters and people who are not. Some are gifted in making cogent arguments, and others are not. We serve God best by using the gifts He has given us. Your giftedness lies elsewhere. You might consider this before entering into a debate.

If, despite this lack of natural ability, you wish to become a true debater, I would suggest that you discipline yourself to learn the following skills:

1) acquaint yourself with the beliefs that you are seeking to refute;

2) read your arguments before posting and ask yourself, "Does this make sense to anyone besides me?"

This is intended strictly as constructive criticism.

[steve7150]

If hell were like sitting at the DMV I might endure 50 years (if I had a good book maybe 51 years). If hell were like being locked in solitaire loneliness then I might endure 150 years.

Nevertheless Hell is described as ‘the end’; there is no mention of a third Judgment, or an appeals system, or purgatory.







I see you like the DMV as much as i do. You might try completing their stuff online. Actually the verse i like the most as Homer can attest to is Rev 22.17 , which if the descriptions of the LOF are sequential then it clearly allows for postmortem repentance. I think it is sequential but it's only my opinion.
Also "hell" (lake of fire) or "the second death" does not appear to be the end to me since after that description there appears to be activity and references to the LOF in Revelation.
Lastly do you really believe the fire in the LOF is literal?

[steve7150]

and I wonder if they are Christians at all or merely signed on to a club for the benefits – the fire insurance.










Fire insurance for only 10% of your income.

[Singalphile]

Hi, Breckmin. I hope you'll stick around. I'd like to read your additional thoughts.

Breckmin wrote:
Salvation means not non-salvation (real threat or real danger) must exist in reality and somebody has to be "unsaved" in order for salvation to be demonstrated as real.

I am not a Christian Universalist, fyi.

If you just start with the words "universal salvation", then I think I can see how that got you started. Maybe salvation isn't very well defined often times. All Christians believe in salvation at least from an earthly life of sin and separation from God, and all believe that many people will not experience that aspect of salvation.

I think maybe your argument comes at it from the wrong (or weaker) angle or emphasis. It's not that salvation has no meaningful interpretation if CU is considered to be possible, it's that the warnings of death/perishing, eternal destruction or punishment, and not receiving eternal life* generally have no meaningful interpretation, imo, if CU is considered to be possible. That is why it is difficult to convince people (like me) of CU, as I suppose anyone can see, which means that that is one of its main weaknesses. (Which I guess is why jriccitelli also went that direction in his posts.)

* John 3:16, Rev 20:14-15, Luke 13:3, Matt 10:28, 2 Thess 1:9, Rom 6:23, Matt 25:46, Gen 2:17,3:22, Acts 13:46, ....