Is There Harm in teaching Universalism?

[Guest]

Rick,

I think you do need to calm down. You don't seem to understand what Danny and the universalists are saying (which is kind of strange, because on other subjects, I have always thought of you as pretty perceptive). It sounds like this is a very emotional issue with you, for some reason.

If you believed in universalism, I could see how you might get animated against someone who accused your loving Father of being an eternal torturer, but I am not sure why someone believing in eternal torment would find it apalling to think that God might end up being more merciful than most of us have ever dreamed.

In saying you will stick with Paul, it is rather ironic, because the vast majority of universalist texts come from his writings. If you have not read them, it would be really wise to do so, before deciding to rail on a position that you might not understand adequately.

Also, your assumption that unbelievers who are turned-off by the traditional view of hell are actually very angry may be based on cases known to you. The cases I have known of are not so much angry as appalled that Christians can think that a God who tortures people forever is in any sense good and just.

If non-Christians were the only ones who saw this as contrary to justice, we might write-off their opinion as the twisted perception of rebel consciences—however, when people who actually love God cannot see how eternal torment resembles any model of justice presented in scripture, it truly complicates the matter.

It would be a shame if people who would have loved the real God were turned away because Christians painted a false portrait of Him such as would repel anyone who had a genuine sense of justice and compassion.

Blessings!

[_Rick_C]

edit

[Guest]

Danny,

Quote " If Gen 3:4 is the "central reason to reject Universalism", then your rejection is based on a misapplication of scripture".


I'll will try and explain better why I believe CU should be rejected as a lie.

In the lie told to Eve; "you shall not surely die", the Serpent is redirecting her thinking to question/ doubt God's specific command; "In the day you eat of it you shall surely die."

The method of deceit the Serpent used was to distort the meaning of God's prohibition. He then holds it up to ridicule even pretending surprise that God should be guilty of issuing such a command.

We know from later scripture, the identity of the Serpent is none other than Satan, the Great Red Dragon, the Old Serpent who decieved the nations, the Devil etc. Jesus called him a "liar from the beginning" and the Father of lies". (Jn.8:44)
Paul declares he is even able to "fashion himself into an angel of light; ( II Cor 11:14.)

Like the "lie" told to Eve, Satan is at his deceptive best when he can convince Christians into questioning, thinking, doubting, or even believing
that God is less than just in all His decisions regarding man, sin and the final disposition of the wicked. He is also very good at dividing people. It is seen in denominationalism. Sometimes though, it becomes necessary
to divide over certain things we find in the body of Christ. I believe there is enough prima facsia evidence we can draw from God's Word to make an informed conclusion, CU is couched in a lie of half truths. There is just enough truth mingled with the lie to make it sound not only attractive, but even plausible. Like Eve, people are being seduced ever so subtly into thinking "you shall surely not die", by saying everyone will ultimately be reconciled to God in the end. Well let me add something to this "half truth". I agree that *all* will ultimately reconciled to God as well. The nature of the reconcilliation will only differ by which ressurection one is privaleged to particapate in, the first or the second. I truly hope I will see all of you in the first!


(BTW, those of you who are "offended" with my sarcastic reference to the
"hissing of the snake" I see in CU, the word nahash used in the Hebrew text applied to the Serpent means to make a hissing sound.)

In Christ,
Bob

[Guest]

Danny,

Quote: "So, are you implying that someone stands a better chance of avoiding Hell if they never hear the Gospel, and therefore can't be held guilty of rejecting it? If so, perhaps we should do everything possible to hide the Gospel, since hearing it might result in eternal damnation".

Let me say something really stupid and assinine, "it would be better if he were never born". Hmmm! That has a familier "ring" to it. I wonder who said that one?

I never implied such a thing! Your comment doesn't deserve a cogent response.

[livingink]

Rick said:

Anyway, how long hell might be or how bad it is, isn't the issue, imo. Everyone knows it's not a good place and don't want to go there.

But isn't it the issue? Isn't that what this whole discussion is about -- how long hell is and how bad it is? There's only one guy on here (as far as I know) who does not believe there is a literal hell-like place after you die. Are you arguing with him mainly? Because I think that most of the CUs on here would agree with what I quoted from you above. They certainly would warn people of the coming judgment, and would certainly not tell anyone that it's okay if they don't become a Christian now because everything will be just fine and they will have another chance after they die, because they as well know that God is to be feared and that He will "render to each one according to his works."

Not one single person on this forum would say to someone with alcoholism to go ahead and wallow in his sin because he will go to heaven anyway. Has anyone given you the impression that they would tell someone such a ridiculous thing?

Also, I was under the impression that you were an annihilationist, not an eternal torment guy. But you keep referring back to eternal torment.

[livingink]

Bob said:

Danny,

Quote: "So, are you implying that someone stands a better chance of avoiding Hell if they never hear the Gospel, and therefore can't be held guilty of rejecting it? If so, perhaps we should do everything possible to hide the Gospel, since hearing it might result in eternal damnation".

Let me say something really stupid and assinine, "it would be better if he were never born". Very Happy Hmmm! That has a familier "ring" to it. I wonder who said that one?

I never implied such a thing! Your comment doesn't deserve a cogent response. Shocked

Bob said (on the first page of this discussion):

It seems to me the wicked's final outcome will not be decided upon an ignorance of the Gospel, but the result of a wilfull rejection of it.

I'm guessing that this is what Danny is referring to, and I read it the same way as he did. Maybe you didn't mean to imply it, but I can definitely see where others (including myself) might have thought you did.

[Guest]

Anyone who sincerely wants wants to see God, will find Him, imo.

Did you sincerely want to see God when He saved you? It doesn't sound like it. I didn't. I practically came into the kingdom kicking and screaming. Like you, I thought I enjoyed my sin (only later did I realize how unfulfilling and destructive it was). The process of my salvation felt more like being outwitted in a game of chess and brought to a point of surrender.

I understand universalism and can explain it. But I've come not to expect universalists to believe me about this. I don't know if they understand my point of view or not. I haven't seen evidence they do and have no reasons to expect this to change. It might, I don't know....

Here the thing, Rick: If I claim I can speak Japanese fluently, but all of the Japanese people around me are telling me I speak it poorly, then maybe I should reevaluate my Japanese language skills.

You have been told repeatedly by Christian Universalists that you distort and mischaracterize their beliefs. Perhaps you are too passionate on this topic to be able to be objective about it. In any dialog, I'm much more likely to be swayed by someone who can accurately and objectively state my own position and then respectfully show me the flaws in it. On the other hand, the arguments of someone who comes out of the gate distorting my position, knocking down straw men, using guilt by association, etc., are going to be dismissed as not credible.

[Guest]

Danny,

Quote : "BTW, it has been said that everyone is a Universalist when it comes to their own loved ones!"


I lost my mother 2 years ago. She was a moraly decent person. As she lay in a coma, I had the hospital chaplain perform the "annointing of oil for the sick". Prayers for her circled the globe. She did not recover.
My dad who is an "unbeliever" tried to comfort himself by thinking she was in a better place. He finally asked me, "do you believe your mother is in a better place"? I had to tell him the truth as I understood it.
"Dad, I believe the God of my soul will always do right. He alone knows those who are His, and none of them will be lost".

Although my mother was a decent person, I do not know where she stood with Christ. I asked her directly once about 20 years ago. She told me she was "good enough" and didn't need a Saviour. She was a member of the Nazarene Church growing up. I assume she "heard the Gospel" at some point in her life. Maybe it was through one of their "old fashioned tent revivals" with a hell fire preacher she began to doubt the idea of 'eternal torment' coming from the hands of a loving God. I really do not know. But God does know. This is where I derive my comfort from.

If CU turns out to be the truth, praise God! If eternal torment turns out to be true, praise God! If eternal annihillation turns out to be true, praise God! "Though He slay me", yet shall I serve and worship my Lord and my KING...The JUDGE of ALL the EARTH will ALWAYS do RIGHT...Even when we don't understand. AMEN?????

[Guest]

Because I think that most of the CUs on here would agree with what I quoted from you above. They certainly would warn people of the coming judgment, and would certainly not tell anyone that it's okay if they don't become a Christian now because everything will be just fine and they will have another chance after they die, because they as well know that God is to be feared and that He will "render to each one according to his works."


Exactly Rae, And a point that no one seems to consider is that the possibility of God saving someone after death, through the lake of fire does not have to mean CU is the inevitable result.
It's God's perogative to save who he shall save and maybe not all unbelievers will get that opportunity, maybe God will decide some had heard enough of the gospel and some did not. The bible simply does not preclude that possibility much as everyone seems to want to make everything black or white, the fact is that it is something only God knows the answer to.

[Guest]

Bob,

I'll will try and explain better why I believe CU should be rejected as a lie.

In the lie told to Eve; "you shall not surely die", the Serpent is redirecting her thinking to question/ doubt God's specific command; "In the day you eat of it you shall surely die."

Agreed.

The method of deceit the Serpent used was to distort the meaning of God's prohibition. He then holds it up to ridicule even pretending surprise that God should be guilty of issuing such a command.

Generally agreed (the "pretending surprise" bit is read into the story, but it's not a crucial factor).

We know from later scripture, the identity of the Serpent is none other than Satan, the Great Red Dragon, the Old Serpent who decieved the nations, the Devil etc. Jesus called him a "liar from the beginning" and the Father of lies". (Jn.8:44) Paul declares he is even able to "fashion himself into an angel of light; ( II Cor 11:14.)

Yes.

Like the "lie" told to Eve, Satan is at his deceptive best when he can convince Christians into questioning, thinking, doubting, or even believing
that God is less than just in all His decisions regarding man, sin and the final disposition of the wicked.

Oh, I think Satan does many worse things than this. However, I could just as easily assert that the doctrine of eternal torment or the doctrine of annihilationism distorts the image of God and convinces people He is less than just.

What you really seem to be doing here is beginning with an a priori assumption that your view is correct and CU is incorrect and, therefore CU distorts God's image. It could just as easily be the other way around.

He is also very good at dividing people. It is seen in denominationalism. Sometimes though, it becomes necessary to divide over certain things we find in the body of Christ.

Paul didn't seem to think so, based on my reading of Romans and 1 Corinthians, except in the case of egregious sin.

I believe there is enough prima facsia evidence we can draw from God's Word to make an informed conclusion, CU is couched in a lie of half truths. There is just enough truth mingled with the lie to make it sound not only attractive, but even plausible.

Again, your argument is entirely subjective. A Christian Universalist could say the exact same thing about eternal torment or annihilationism. You're simply saying, "My interpretation of scripture is right, so if you have a different interpretation, it is a lie."

Like Eve, people are being seduced ever so subtly into thinking "you shall surely not die", by saying everyone will ultimately be reconciled to God in the end.

So all of your associations between CU and Eve & the serpent are simply based on the phrase "you shall not surely die"? Again, this is a gross misapplication of scripture. Did Eve understand the "death" spoken of by God and the serpent to be annihilation of spirit or eternal torment?

Well let me add something to this "half truth". I agree that *all* will ultimately reconciled to God as well. The nature of the reconcilliation will only differ by which ressurection one is privaleged to particapate in, the first or the second. I truly hope I will see all of you in the first!

You've completely lost me here. Are you now asserting to believe in Universal Reconciliation? When you say "all", do you mean "all" or only "some"? And when you say "reconciled", do you understand what the word means? Please clarify.

Bob: "It seems to me the wicked's final outcome will not be decided upon an ignorance of the Gospel, but the result of a wilfull rejection of it."

Danny: "So, are you implying that someone stands a better chance of avoiding Hell if they never hear the Gospel, and therefore can't be held guilty of rejecting it? If so, perhaps we should do everything possible to hide the Gospel, since hearing it might result in eternal damnation".

Bob:Let me say something really stupid and assinine, "it would be better if he were never born". Hmmm! That has a familier "ring" to it. I wonder who said that one?

I never implied such a thing! Your comment doesn't deserve a cogent response.

Oh, I think it does deserve a cogent response. Please explain to me your belief on what happens to those who never hear the Gospel. This is an important question and CU deals with it quite effectively.