Universalism and not inheriting the kingdom of God

[mgarrett]

Frankly, I feel like your interpretations of all of these passages are esoteric. Every one is interpreted through this "hell on earth" paradigm.

Derek,

I feel the same way about most people's interpretation with this "traditional view of hell" paradigm.

I believe that when people believe that God sends people to hell it gives them an excuse to hate - because they think that God must hate them to do that. It gives Christianity a very bad witness in the world. Many people have rejected Christianity for this very reason. Also, many Christians act superior to unbelievers because they look at the unbelievers as "destined to hell" and tainted. This also turns people off and it is all due to the traditional view doctrine.

Todd

[_Derek]

I don't see how your view reconciles God's mercy with His justice. If it cannot, then it is incoherent, and therefore false.

God's justice required a sacrifice for sin. He provided his own sacrifice, namely, Jesus. God's mercy is so great that Christ paid the debt for us all.

In order for this sacrifice to justify a person, they have to believe. We are justified by faith. In your system, where do people come to faith?

Gal 2:16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

I am curious, Todd, how is one justified before God in your system?

[_Derek]

I believe that when people believe that God sends people to hell it gives them an excuse to hate - because they think that God must hate them to do that. It gives Christianity a very bad witness in the world. Many people have rejected Christianity for this very reason. Also, many Christians act superior to unbelievers because they look at the unbelievers as "destined to hell" and tainted. This also turns people off and it is all due to the traditional view doctrine.

Hi Todd,

I agree that many people interpret the pertinant scriptures through the lens of the traditional view. But I don't hold that view.

I think that the bible teaches that God loves everyone. He has shown this in sending His Son to die for everyone's sin. People go to hell because they hate God and don't want anything to do with Him.

As to the comments about the way Christians "act" when they believe the traditional view, what does that have to do with what the bible says? The truth or falsity of the doctrine does not hinge on the behaviour of those that hold to it. I would also say that by and large it is not the case that people that hold that view behave that way. Most Christians believe that the only thing separating them from those going to hell is the blood of our Lord.

That being said, I don't hold the traditional view, and I don't hold my view because I want to hate people. I hold it because the bible teaches that there will come a day when God will judge the world and I believe what it says. (I am aware that you think those passages only "appear" to teach a future judgement) It is not a comfortable thought, but that is what it says. I am not going to explain away what it says because I don't want it to happen. I don't want my loved ones to stand before God on that day without the covering of Christ's blood, but that doesn't change what the bible teaches. I am not going to invent a doctrine to get rid of this, I am going to tell them the Gospel.

God bless,

[Guest]

Todd,

You said:

(A) And also, what did Paul mean in Romans 1:18-32 when he points out the the wrath of God is already being poured out on the ungodly?


(B) Also, in Romans 13, Paul says that the governing authorities are God's agent to execute his wrath.


(C) 8. Why would God who said, "But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you," send His enemies to hell?

According to your point (C), how could God do (A) or (B)? How could He punish anyone either in this life or after?

Much of the difficulty we have regarding universalism is due to the exegesis of scriptures being affected by reading through the lens of emotionalism. "How could a good God be like _________?" We see in the Old Testament that God acted many times in ways beyond our understanding. Why did He command the slaughter of people, men, women, and innocent children? Why did he slay Uzza for merely touching the arc when Uzza only meant to prevent damage to the arc?

As Derek mentioned, for the Calvinist the answer is easy regarding the proverbial "man in the jungle". For me, I rest myself in my confidence that God is both just and merciful, and am fully confident He will do what is right, even if in my fallible mind I do not understand His reasons.

In regard to your point (C) above, If someone murdered your child before you eyes, could you forgive him? I have seen the testimony of a Christian mother who did that very thing. If you forgave him, could you testify against him in court to enable justice to be carried out, whatever that might be, or would you refuse to testify if that would set him free?

[Guest]

Where do you see any mention of Gentiles in the context of Jeremiah 31? In my opinion, you are reading somthing into the text that is not there. I would however, agree that gentiles can be part of Israel, by knowing Christ, but that doesn't change the fact that "every man" in this passage is speaking of the only people in the context. Namely "...the house of Israel, and ...the house of Judah... (Jer. 31:31).


You're right Derek, i am reading something into the text based on how i understand the rest of the bible. When i look at statements like "every man" or "each man" it reminds me of the often used word "all."
The word "all" is used numerous times in scripture and is simply dismissed out of hand.
"As in Adam ALL die so to in Christ ALL will be made alive."
"Jesus Christ is the savior of ALL men especially those who believe"
"the restoration of all things"
"God will be ALL in ALL"
And the list could go on and on therefore the question is, what does "all" mean? Just like what does "each man" or "every man" mean.
Either "all" is literal or "all" is hyperbole or "all" means all who believe.
Even if "all" is hyperbole it would still mean "the majority of."
So we ALL read into these Jeremiah verses based on how we see God's overall plan of redemption.

[mgarrett]

Todd,

You said:

(A) And also, what did Paul mean in Romans 1:18-32 when he points out the the wrath of God is already being poured out on the ungodly?


(B) Also, in Romans 13, Paul says that the governing authorities are God's agent to execute his wrath.


(C) 8. Why would God who said, "But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you," send His enemies to hell?

According to your point (C), how could God do (A) or (B)? How could He punish anyone either in this life or after?

Much of the difficulty we have regarding universalism is due to the exegesis of scriptures being affected by reading through the lens of emotionalism. "How could a good God be like _________?" We see in the Old Testament that God acted many times in ways beyond our understanding. Why did He command the slaughter of people, men, women, and innocent children? Why did he slay Uzza for merely touching the arc when Uzza only meant to prevent damage to the arc?

As Derek mentioned, for the Calvinist the answer is easy regarding the proverbial "man in the jungle". For me, I rest myself in my confidence that God is both just and merciful, and am fully confident He will do what is right, even if in my fallible mind I do not understand His reasons.

In regard to your point (C) above, If someone murdered your child before you eyes, could you forgive him? I have seen the testimony of a Christian mother who did that very thing. If you forgave him, could you testify against him in court to enable justice to be carried out, whatever that might be, or would you refuse to testify if that would set him free?

Homer,

Again, you bring up examples of people who suffered the wrath of God while they were living. This is a far cry from people suffering for eternity in hell. You only strengthen my point by bringing up these examples.

As far as forgiving someone who murdered one of my children, I don't know how I would react, but I do know that I would only be harming myself if I harbored bitterness against him. No purpose could be served by him suffering in hell for eternity.

God punishes people as a call to repentance, just as a father corrects his child (sometimes severely), our heavenly Father does the same. It is not merciful if a parent withholds discipline from his child. The end result would be a spoiled child who is not properly prepared for life. Wouldn't it seem a little rediculous for a parent to withhold discipline until the child is 20 years old and then say, "I have kept a list of everything you have done wrong since you were born and now I am going to punish you for it." This is effectively the same thing as the traditional view of hell. But the traditional view is worse because the punishment goes on for eternity.

Todd

[mgarrett]

I don't see how your view reconciles God's mercy with His justice. If it cannot, then it is incoherent, and therefore false.

God's justice required a sacrifice for sin. He provided his own sacrifice, namely, Jesus. God's mercy is so great that Christ paid the debt for us all.

In order for this sacrifice to justify a person, they have to believe. We are justified by faith. In your system, where do people come to faith?

Gal 2:16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

I am curious, Todd, how is one justified before God in your system?

Derek,

I am glad you brought this up, because I know that I have not addressed this yet.

As I pointed out earlier, Salvation comes in two parts. Salvation from death, and salvation in life. God provided a sacrifice (Jesus) to secure salvation from death for all mankind - the entire world has been reconciled to God, it is the gift of God. Salvation in life, however, is a different matter. This does require faith in Christ and obedience to his Law; namely, that we should love our neighbor as ourself. The requirement of faith is something that is perfectly in line with my view.

Todd

[mgarrett]

Derek,

Here is another hypothetical question for you. We have all known non-Christians who are extremely generous, kind, and helpful to others. At the same time we have all known Christians who seem to always struggle with sinfulness and at times can be rude and selfish. In this example the righteousness of the non-Christian far outweighs that of the Christian. This is a real-world example. The Bible states over and over again that we are judged according to our works. It never says that we will be judged on whether or not we believe in Christ. According to the traditional view (or the annihilation view) the disobedient Christian goes to heaven and the righteous non-Christian goes to hell. How can this be? Even if you say that our works show that we have faith, then the non-Christain must have had more faith than that of the Christain.

In my view the answer is quite simple. The non-Christian was responding to the Law written on his heart and indeed did have faith and was blessed. Both gain victory over death because Christ paid the debt for all mankind.

Before you answer, remember the story of the sheep and the goats. The ones who did the good works inherited eternal life, the ones who did not received everlasting punishment.

I am reminded of this statement by Jesus,...

Mark 2:17
When Jesus heard it, He said to them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance."

Todd

[mgarrett]

Here is another point to consider:

At the end of Romans Chapter 1, Paul makes the following statement about those who seem to be totally engulfed in sinfulness.

Rom 1:28-32
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.

Notice that Paul did not say, those who practice such things are deserving of "hell fire", or even "everlasting punishment." He said, "death," as if that were the final punishment.

Regarding death, Paul also said,....

Rom 6:7
For he who has died has been freed from sin.

Again, can this mean that death is the final punishment? Steve Gregg made a comment regarding this scripture in another thread.

Also, in favor of your view, is the strange statement of Paul, in Romans 6:7, which, in the Greek, actually reads, "He who has died is justified (or cleared) of sin." I have always wondered about the meaning of that statement, and it sounds similar to your view.

Todd

[Guest]

Todd,

I said:

Much of the difficulty we have regarding universalism is due to the exegesis of scriptures being affected by reading through the lens of emotionalism. "How could a good God be like _________?" We see in the Old Testament that God acted many times in ways beyond our understanding. Why did He command the slaughter of people, men, women, and innocent children? Why did he slay Uzza for merely touching the arc when Uzza only meant to prevent damage to the arc?

And you replied:

Again, you bring up examples of people who suffered the wrath of God while they were living. This is a far cry from people suffering for eternity in hell. You only strengthen my point by bringing up these examples.

The point I was making has nothing to do with whether the persons were living or not but I was pointing out the fact that God has acted in times past in ways that might seem unreasonable to our fallible minds. This seems to be the reason you interpret the scriptures in novel ways. Many have disbelieved that a "good God" could be as depicted in the Old Testament, which seems to be the same type of thinking the constrains your view of eternal punishment. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. His character does not change.