God's Wrath

[Paidion]

Seems to me JR quoted scripture and you made yours up.

And it seems to me that you applaud all scriptural quotations which appear to you to back up your personal opinions whereas you argue against (it seems to me) the many scriptures I have quoted from time to time to show the loving character of God — the God who is unwilling that any should perish but that all should have lasting life — the God who insists on leaving the 99 sheep in order to rescue the one lost sheep — the loving Father who is willing to receive the prodigal who was dead and became alive.
It seems to me that you strive to reinterpret the scriptures which teach the reconciliation of all to God by saying that "all" does not mean "all" or that "all things" do not include people, or that the Greek word for "correction" actually means "retributive punishment" or that the Greek word for "lasting" actually means "everlasting", etc., etc., etc.

So when I express my love for the God who is LOVE, and rejoice that all His judgments are remedial, you deliver the low blow of affirming that I make up my own scripture.

So I say no more. I will not judge you. God is your judge. Before his own master everyone of us will stand .... or fall. Thank God He will pick us up when we fall — and express His tough love towards us to correct us and restore us (Hezekiah 3:24)

[Perry]

Todd,

How do you interpret the several “bear fruit” scriptures which speak of those that do not bear fruit as being cast into fire? Do you see this being cast into the fire as something that happens in this life?

Matt 3:10-13; 7:19; 13 (parable of sower); 18:8-9; John 15:1-6 (“I am the vine”).

[Todd]

Todd,

How do you interpret the several “bear fruit” scriptures which speak of those that do not bear fruit as being cast into fire? Do you see this being cast into the fire as something that happens in this life?

Matt 3:10-13; 7:19; 13 (parable of sower); 18:8-9; John 15:1-6 (“I am the vine”).

Yes, I see it as those who walk after the flesh and reap corruption. An example is Rom 1:18-32 where we are told that God gives these people over to uncleaness, vile passions, and a debased mind (casts them into the fire).

Todd

[Perry]

So then, in the hereafter, do you see any difference between those who, in this life, are righteous and the unrighteous, sinners and holy, (dare I say it) just and unjust? Put another way, do you see that this present life has any consequences at all in the life to come?

[Todd]

So then, in the hereafter, do you see any difference between those who, in this life, are righteous and the unrighteous, sinners and holy, (dare I say it) just and unjust? Put another way, do you see that this present life has any consequences at all in the life to come?

This is an excellent question. There is little scriptural data to draw from; however, I think it is entirely possible that there may be a difference. Simply because those who are "in Christ" or are called, "the sons of God" are separated at the resurrection from the creation or the unjust, suggests that there may be some difference. We also have this verse.

1 Tim 4:10
For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.

So, even though He is the savior of all men, Paul says that those who believe have something special. I have always taken this to mean that the believers have the benefit of spiritual blessings on earth not shared by others, but it could involve some post-resurrection special dispensation as well.

We also have these verses.

2 Tim 2:12
If we endure, we shall also reign with Him.

1 Cor 6:1-3
Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? 2 Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life? .

These verses may tell us something about the resurrection, but I can't say for sure.

Todd

[Homer]

Hi Paidion,

No intent to offend but you brushed off JR's statements, accompanied by scripture, with no scripture of your own, only a general statement of your opinion, which is frustrating.

Here is one of JR's questions with the citation of Jesus' words:

What do we make of the wrath of God abiding on a person?
He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." (John 3:36)

Why do you not answer his question? You know the Greek. If you think the future tense is irrelevant to what Jesus meant you could explain why rather than making general statements about God's love and desire that all will be saved, which is not in dispute.

When Jesus says that in the future God's wrath will remain on a certain class of people then you ought to be able to show how that is consistent with your paradigm.

And it seems to me that you applaud all scriptural quotations which appear to you to back up your personal opinions whereas you argue against (it seems to me) the many scriptures I have quoted from time to time to show the loving character of God — the God who is unwilling that any should perish but that all should have lasting life — the God who insists on leaving the 99 sheep in order to rescue the one lost sheep — the loving Father who is willing to receive the prodigal who was dead and became alive.

I too believe that God is loving, is not willing that any should perish, and that he welcomes the prodigal's return. I'm not a Calvinist. But there is more than one aspect to God's will. We desire more than one thing at a time which may result in desires that are in conflict. Is God less complex than we who are made in His image?

It seems to me that you strive to reinterpret the scriptures which teach the reconciliation of all to God by saying that "all" does not mean "all" or that "all things" do not include people, or that the Greek word for "correction" actually means "retributive punishment" or that the Greek word for "lasting" actually means "everlasting", etc., etc., etc.

It is rather frustrating to discuss the scriptures with someone who comes up with their own personal translations of words and who denies things disagreeable in scriptures by saying that Moses, Joshua, etc. misunderstood what God told them to do or made it up or whatever. All you are left with is what is agreeable to you personally. It is a most difficult thing for people to believe that which they do not want to believe.

We have long discussed both Calvinism and Universalism here at this forum. I must say that some of the Calvinist arguments from scripture are difficult to rebut and it takes much work to do so. I can not say the same for Universalism. For example the oft used proof text "restoration of all things" (Acts 3:21) can be easily understood otherwise. Seems likely what Peter meant is found in Romans 8:18-23:

18. For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. 19. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. 20. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21. because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. 23. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.

I don't see any Universalism there. Sounds like what Peter meant to me. And it seems to me Peter's statement in Acts 3:21 is delimited by the oft omited (by universalists) concluding clause, "about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time".

So when I express my love for the God who is LOVE, and rejoice that all His judgments are remedial, you deliver the low blow of affirming that I make up my own scripture.

I am sorry that I offended you. I did not realize you had quoted any scripture in your rebuttal to JR; I missed it somehow, even after reading it again. You did imply that JR is a vengeful man and made me aware that God is my judge, which I already knew.

[steve7150]

18. For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. 19. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. 20. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21. because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. 23. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body.

I don't see any Universalism there. Sounds like what Peter meant to me. And it seems to me Peter's statement in Acts 3:21 is delimited by the oft omited (by universalists) concluding clause, "about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time".






"Because the creation itself will be delivered" , sounds clear to me particularly "creation will be delivered" as a future event probably after this age for most folks. To me this is straightforward unless you think creation doesn't include humans but if that were the case the statement doesn't seem to make sense to me.
Back to God's "wrath" abiding on the unbeliever, there is no argument except the issue is whether God's wrath is eternal or for an "age" and for a purpose. You certainly know Homer, that Paidion has listed dozens and dozens of scriptures supporting Christian Universalism and you feel they can be seen differently so
maybe Paidion is tired of debating.

[jriccitelli]

I don’t mean to only argue philosophically, but it seems that if all verses of death punishment and judgment mean nothing to Universalists but stress in this life then I am left with nothing.
Todd, I do think it would be 'strange' that men who live and act violently and in hatred towards Christianity, and goodness, could just 'suddenly' be turned into God loving beings who are looking forward to an eternity with God and Goodness. I'm freaked out by the sudden awaking of unrepentant evil men, lewd vile abusers, pimps, corrupt exploiters of other humans, all of a sudden finding themselves inhabiting the body of Christ. Your assuming their hearts will change automatically to embrace goodness and truth because - why?
The Holy Spirit empowers us, teaches and encourages us, but it does not remove our will, the will is just that, it must be willing to change otherwise it is not a will. I cannot imagine the new body itself (soul or whatever) will change they're heart, so do they change their own mind, or does God change their mind for them?
As much as I can dream of people being reformed by repentance and being filled with the Holy Spirit, I don’t think every sinner will be pleased being suddenly turned into a Christian without they're knowing, or wanting it. You are assuming they all want it.
I don’t see the heart and soul of some of these being happy with that, or affected by it. It actually sounds a bit science fiction weird to imagine a forced, or unwillfull injection into a different environment or body will automatically change their heart.
If every sinner will be changed into a Christian without their knowledge or decision, I don't see the point in the Gospel, why all the fuss about repentance and warning of future judgment?

Where in the world, or elsewhere, is the 'time' (chance or opportunity) for the sinner to 'repent' in the ultra Universalist thought of 'all' mortals being changed into the immortal?

Why does God see to be so bent on destroying and putting to death certain tribes and certain men throughout the Bible if He really is just going to change them all into saints?
Why is God striking people dead throughout the Bible if He is only trying to prove He is compassionate and loving?
Why not just change their heart then and there, why put them to death?
Why is God in such a hurry to put people to death if punishment is so remedial?

[Perry]

As the guy who's still on the fence on this issue, I get to ask questions of both sides.

Todd and Paidion,
I don't want to kick a dead horse here, but, one last time just to be sure. Do you think all references in scripture to "damnation" and "condemnation" refer to this present life only? I understand that both of you feel that you're doing your best to champion God's honor, character, mercy, grace, forgiveness. I applaud you for that.

JR and Homer,
Do you think universalism is heresy? I'm not sure how strong your position against it is, and I don't want to put words in your mouths. Still, if you do think it is heresy, then, to me, that suggests there's something fundamentally dangerous about the doctrine.

Most of the people that I've interacted with who hold the eternal punishment view say something like, "any other view removes our motivation to evangelize." That, to me, has always been an uncompelling argument, because it seems to suggest that another person's salvation depends on what I might or might not do. To give a kind of cartoonish presentation, I just can't see someone getting to the pearly gates and St. Peter saying to them, "Sorry, you don't get to come to heaven because Perry didn't evangelize you." (That's not to say that you guys are, or are not in the eternal punishment camp.)

So my question to you guys is, what's the flaw in universalism that makes it a dangerous doctrine? (If indeed you would characterize it as such.)

[steve7150]

I don’t mean to only argue philosophically, but it seems that if all verses of death punishment and judgment mean nothing to Universalists but stress in this life then I am left with nothing.







"Judgment means nothing to Universalists" ? I really honestly don't get this logic. If punishment is not eternal, it means nothing? I've heard people say this many times & the only logical conclusion i can come to, is that none of us really have any concept of what eternity is.