So, you are a narrow damnationist, despite what Jesus said.
I don’t see that at all. A little inflexible in his statement of opinions maybe… but I see no strong emphasis on an opposition to universalism let alone any kind of obsession with damnation. Frankly that seems to be your obsession more than his with your invention of an excuse to make this a platform for pushing universalism.
But it does appear to me that you Flax are one of the most narrow universalists I have encountered.
As for me… I have often defended the stand that universalism is a part of the Christian spectrum even if it is not and never has been the mainstream. I personally think that univeralism is wrong and unsupportable from the Bible, human behavior or psychology, and I see numerous flaws in all the arguments I have heard for the position.
I will classify that with similar absurd self serving claims…
Jesus is a communist.
Jesus is a republican.
Jesus is a methodist.
Jesus is a Buddhist.
Jesus is an American.
Jesus is Muslim.
…
the list goes on and on
…
all of them are absolutely ridiculous!
True statements? there are a few…
Jesus was a Jew.
Jesus is God.
…
I will go with those two.
So you, like the vast majority of damnationists, aren’t aware of His soft sayings and when realise you are you will deny them?
So you, as an narrow-minded universalist, aren’t aware of His other sayings, and when you are informed of them, you will deny them?
Matthew 7:13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."
Matthew 25:41 Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; 42 for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?’ 45 Then he will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.’ 46 And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
John 15:6 “If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.”
Matthew 13:41-43 “The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears to here, let him hear!”
Matthew 13:49-50 “So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come forth, separate the wicked from among the just, and cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.”
Matthew 18:9 “And if your hand or foot causes you to to sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life lame or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into everlasting fire. And if you eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire .”
Luke 13:3 “I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.”
Luke 3:17 “His winnowing fan is His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His threshing floor, and gather the wheat into His barn; but the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire .”
and… Isaiah 66:24, Matthew 23:33, 2 Thessalonians 1:9, Matthew 16:18, Proverbs 9:18, Psalm 55:15, Proverbs 7:27, Deuteronomy 32:22, Psalm 9:17, Proverbs 10:29, Ezekiel 32:27, Isaiah 5:14-15, Ezekiel 26:20-21, Numbers 16:30-33, Isaiah 14:15, Isaiah 38:18, Ezekiel 32:23, Job 33:24,28, Proverbs 1:12, Revelation 9:1, Psalm 63:9, Psalm 140:9-10, Psalm 11:5-6, Luke 3:9, Matthew 22:13, Revelation 21:8
As for me, I ignore nothing. I have only contempt for the thinking that buys so far into this idea of God threatening us into repentance that they would think Pascal’s wager is a reasonable response. God is all about Love. Absolutely! But those who speak of the power of love are talking out of their rear end, for love is NOT a means to power and ANYTHING which is used as a means to power IS NOT LOVE! And those who claim that Love always wins are being willfully ignorant, for history does not support this claim at all. Love lost in the Garden of Eden when Adam blamed his error on Eve and God, and love has frequently lost ever since.
1 Like
You’re completely unaware of where He narrow mindedly says the opposite. Twice. That is impressive. What a bizarre take! Inclusion is narrow minded! Blessing, saving is narrow minded! And it’s mental rape! That IS good news!
Alright I will bite. What is your evidence?
Actually I am completely unimpressed by your preposterous assumption that you know what I am aware of, while your failure to actually list anything from the Bible which you IMAGINE supports your position looks like you are hiding them probably because even you are aware of their inadequacy. So far all there is on your side of this issue is hot air bluster as if you think you can actually bully people into accepting your position. It is pretty laughable.
Your shouting of the number TWO only underlines that you are only aware of two Bible passages which you can twist into supporting your fringe theology. Are you hoping to get us to do your research for you and find more passages so that you can increase the number? Such laziness suggests that very little went into position you decided to stamp on yourself to begin with.
First we had the new atheists who with burgeoning irrationality seeking to imitate the worst fundamentalist Christians in their intolerant efforts to push atheism branded with hostility as a new virtue – overthrowing a history where you could previously expect atheists to represent greater rationality on average rather than less. And it seems to me that the defining character is the use of this dishonest rhetoric which defines people as atheist by default – merely having a lack of a belief in God (like infants).
Now we apparently have these new universalists following the same pattern and the signpost is the invention of this new term “damnationists” for those who dare to disagree with them in any way at all. There is in your responses all the typical racist redneck black-and-white mentality which declares that everyone else is a communist with no interest whatsoever in any details or subtle differences between various points of view.
As with the new atheists you make me want to show them how to do this properly so people reading can understand that most atheists or universalists are not so irrational.
Wait… let me get some popcorn.
But first let me clear up a few things which will flesh out some of the more subtle issues which Flax is driving his mac truck over.
-
I do not believe that God created hell. I believe hell exists precisely because I see people create hell in this world. Thus I believe that hell is something that people do to themselves.
-
The difference between heaven and hell is not the scenery but the company. I find the traditional vision of hell as a fiery torture chamber to be more a cause for hilarity than fear. If that is all it were then I would welcome the challenge. My vision of hell is quite different. I see it as simply as having ones sins continue the destruction they wreck on your soul and personality as they progressively devour everything of value within you. The one thing you can never escape is yourself – that is a piece of hell you will take with you wherever you go.
-
The idea that hell is where all the unbelievers go is an invention of Gnostics with their gospel of salvation by knowledge such as sound doctrine or having the secrete password in the name of “Jesus.” This I can agree is repugnant as well as intolerant. But such a preposterous strawman is hardly what I believe let alone what everyone must believe if they don’t buy into universalism.
-
I think that hell is where we find our heart’s desire and heaven by contrast is where we will find God’s desire for us. No few people hearing this thought that hell thus described sounds wonderful. But I think that only shows how little they understand the human heart and the terrible reality we face.
I liked that Martin. God died and did not die. Very apropo. Happy Easter
I have to agree with MItchell’s critique of your use of this word. The technique of making up a word and then using it as some shameful cudgel is not a loving act at all. It is an attempt to bully people into silence. People have different opinions and should be allowed to have them–yes even YECs have a right to their opinion as do people who believe that damnation is part of Christian theology. I like you Martin and you were kind to me, but I can’t sit by and let this particular act of evil pass by without saying that I object to it. Damnationalists have a right to their belief without the cudgel of group think inventing a bad name for them. That simply is not a loving way to treat your brothers.
If this makes you hate me, so be it. I will always stand for truth as God lets me see that truth…
Mitch is correct, universalism has never been the mainstream view and I disagree with universalism so I guess I am proudly a damnationalist, too. Lord knows Mitch and I have had our differences and we will each strongly argue our positions, and maybe even dislike each other’s positions… But Mitch has a right to his belief, as does Roger (with whom I also disagree) as does Nickolaos whom I know not his beliefs. I have a right to my beliefs without the bullying effect of being ridiculed by having names thrown at them. Ridicule is an acid thrown on a relationship. Argue the facts; don’t argue by ridicule. Each person has the freedom to stand before God with his viewpoint and we will be judged by God for the stands we took (Lord knows I have taken some very bad stands in the past). We don’t need to act that way towards another of God’s servants. You me and Mitch likely will drink the heavenly equvalent of beer and laugh at how wrong each of us was in eternity. We will fellowship with each other. It is best not to ruin that fellowshiip here.
The usual passages used to support universalsm are these and none of them are from Jesus.
1 Corinthians 15:22 “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.” (ESV)
2 Peter 3:9 “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.” (ESV)
1 Timothy 2:3–6 “This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for ALL men—the testimony given in its proper time.” (NIV)
1 John 2:2 “He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” (NIV)
1 Timothy 4:10 “For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.” (ESV)
Romans 11:32 “For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.” (NIV)
So let’s consider them…
1 Corinthians 15:22? Frankly I think it is absurd to take the second phrase out of context in this way. Besides, the topic is resurrection not salvation and so this is more of a support for those who think all will be resurrected before being judged.
2 Peter 3:9? Not wishing that any should perish and that all should repent is not the same as saying that none will perish and all will repent. Clearly!
1 Timothy 2:3–6? Again wanting all to be saved is not the same as saying all will be saved. And if the point was to argue against the Calvinist position of Limited Atonement then the second part of this would apply. But just because Christ died for all and salvation is offered to all doesn’t mean that all are saved.
1 John 2:2? Same as Timothy 2:6, good argument against limited atonement but not for universalism.
1 Timothy 4:10? Good argument against the notion that unbelievers all go to hell but not for universalism.
Romans 11:32? I do believe God has mercy on all men, but this does not mean that all are saved and make it into heaven eventually.
So in summation these DO NOT contradict the words of Jesus above and added together doesn’t add up to universalism but quite the contrary. The only way you get universalism is by disagreeing with what Jesus actually said.
According to Moore ( Schrödinger: Life and Thought by Walter J. Moore, Walter John Moore) Schroedinger was a staunch atheist, so the question of his God would be pointless. But then
https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/372y3t/god_and_the_new_physics_the_ghost_of_erwin/ shows it to be far more complex.
What Schroedinger failed to realise was that it needs three boxes to alter the probability of the state of viability in the other boxes, e.g the knowledge of the state of the cat in one box alters the probability for the state of the cat in the other two boxes by means of quantum entanglement. To “real lifers” as compared to theoretical physicists 
this is known as the “Hall Effect” not after the physical one but after the game show problem so elegantly solved by Marilyn vos Savant - Wikipedia
Now my two cents on the underlying question of Jesus status as God. You can look at him as Gods manifestation in our world. He was the word of God made flesh as he lived against human will but in submission of humans to God’s will to love thy neighbour, thus the incarnation of his word. Physically I look at Jesus as the cross section of God with our world as dimensionality of God does not fit into our restricted dimensionality. You may understand that best when watching Carl Sagan explaining the fourth dimension Cosmos - Carl Sagan - 4th Dimension - YouTube. When it comes to the trinity I can think of God as that multidimensional God, or his slice we can see in Jesus or his shadow as in the experience in the holy spirit. I think of the additional dimension as the selfless love and wonder how to get there by coming out of flatland. I can do so by becoming part of the eternal all of God again and exist in a new life, being born again by realising that it is not about the reincarnation in the self, but as experiencing life as being in the hearts of others. But then the dream of the eternal existing self is so tempting that some of us do everything to feed it. Do we think Jesus came to feed in us the idea that we should be eternally want to exist as ourselves, thus distinct from God or that we should become part of God again? If anything, I would say Jesus was the one that showed us how not to think of life as something that happened to be in boxes, even being boxes made from flesh and blood not even hard light holograms
When he started to sing the psalm on the cross he was not feeling forsaken but reflecting our thinking of feeling forsaken at the point of a crisis. He could not be as he was in God. He could however remind us about the prediction of his death and that the outcome of it, even if it dd not make sense to us at the time, would lead to us telling generations not yet born about God and about his righteousness for what he had done. He was already living in the word so he did not need his physical body any more to live and therefore could not die.
1 Like
Good man Roger.
Matthew 11:20-24
Woes to Unrepentant Cities
20 Then he began to reproach the cities in which most of his deeds of power had been done, because they did not repent. 21 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the deeds of power done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 But I tell you, on the day of judgment it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon than for you. 23 And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Hades. For if the deeds of power done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. 24 But I tell you that on the day of judgment it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom than for you.”
Luke 10:12-16
Woes to Unrepentant Cities
13 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the deeds of power done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. 14 But at the judgment it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon than for you. 15 And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Hades. 16 “Whoever listens to you listens to me, and whoever rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.”
and, of course, that repetition of apparently the same quote, the same incident, though not from two witnesses, but the same source [Q], is not the ‘twice’. This is:
Matthew 10:5-15
The Mission of the Twelve
5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, 6 but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 As you go, proclaim the good news, ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’ 8 Cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. You received without payment; give without payment. 9 Take no gold, or silver, or copper in your belts, 10 no bag for your journey, or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff; for laborers deserve their food. 11 Whatever town or village you enter, find out who in it is worthy, and stay there until you leave. 12 As you enter the house, greet it. 13 If the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it; but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. 14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town. 15 Truly I tell you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.
Luke 10:1:12
The Mission of the Seventy
10 After this the Lord appointed seventy others and sent them on ahead of him in pairs to every town and place where he himself intended to go. 2 He said to them, “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore ask the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest. 3 Go on your way. See, I am sending you out like lambs into the midst of wolves. 4 Carry no purse, no bag, no sandals; and greet no one on the road. 5 Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peace to this house!’ 6 And if anyone is there who shares in peace, your peace will rest on that person; but if not, it will return to you. 7 Remain in the same house, eating and drinking whatever they provide, for the laborer deserves to be paid. Do not move about from house to house. 8 Whenever you enter a town and its people welcome you, eat what is set before you; 9 cure the sick who are there, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’ 10 But whenever you enter a town and they do not welcome you, go out into its streets and say, 11 ‘Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet, we wipe off in protest against you. Yet know this: the kingdom of God has come near.’ 12 I tell you, on that day it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for that town.
The Return of the Seventy
17 The seventy returned with joy, saying, “Lord, in your name even the demons submit to us!” 18 He said to them, “I watched Satan fall from heaven like a flash of lightning. 19 See, I have given you authority to tread on snakes and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing will hurt you. 20 Nevertheless, do not rejoice at this, that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.”
Luke concatenates the events. Matthew separates them: before and after. And they are completely different events. 12. 70. Unless you choose to concatenate them too.
You still can’t see it despite Jesus saying it FOUR times? Any of you. Because of your fear hardened hearts. All you can see is universal, woodenly literal, hyperbolic threat.
1 Like
And you were doing so well Marvin!
That 100% human meant what He said. He felt utterly forsaken. That which is not assumed is not redeemed.
Happy Easter: Christ is risen.
Good for you gbob. And why, how in the name of God in Christ; Jesus, could I possibly hate you my brother? Our truths are on the same spectrum (a few standard deviations apart either side of the mean). I’m both sorry and glad that I have offended the majority with Jesus’ universal salvation.
I like the cut of your jib gbob, you know that. Despite our almost total lack of intersection in epistemology. And I feel for you. In your epistemology and suffering. I like the way you embrace my accusation and double down on it.
Happy Easter: Christ is risen.
Your brother in Him, Martin
2 Likes
I am so delighted Martin. and yeah, we have almost zero intersection. lol He is risen! Happy Easter.
2 Likes
He is risen indeed!
Schrodinger’s cat was a tongue in cheek thought experiment, but no physicist actually believes there would ever be a cat which is both dead and alive at the same time. They know that the use of the quantum state to control a macroscopic device which kills or does not kill a cat is indistinguishable from a measuring device and thus there is no superposition after you do such a thing.
1 Like
Mitchell. You are sooo literal. As in your reading of certain other texts.
But you are wrong. I am not literal. I am precise… as scientists who are also capable in language tend to be. For example, I do not adhere to a literal understanding of Genesis 2-3. I do not believe this is a story of some ancient necromancer creating golems of dust and bone in a Walt Disney Animation complete with magical fruit and talking snakes. That would be the literal understanding which I do not believe is warranted considering the words used and Jesus’ warning Matthew 13. Not only do the names of those two trees shout symbolism louder than anything in the Bible but the “Tree of Life” is treated symbolically or metaphorically elsewhere in the Bible.
Frankly, I think your real complaint is that I treat these discussions with more seriousness than drunken barroom banter – and that is certainly true. Or… it could be a preference on your part to communicate with poetry, which has never been my inclination either.
No I cannot even imagine in wildest dreams how you are twisting this into a support for universalism. And it would be bizarre for you to suggest that a science fiction writer is lacking in imagination. No I think the problem is that your imagination creates worlds altering logic in such inconceivable ways that nobody is following you into such incoherent dreams.
2 Likes
This is sometimes a difficult line to draw. When an idea sounds ridiculous to you then your argument against tend to sound a bit like ridicule. I draw different line between fruitful and wasteful discussion which has to do with staying on the topic and not talking about each other personally – as if we could possibly have any real knowledge of the other person just from an internet discussion. The slippery slope in that case is when you start talking about they way a person is talking and arguing their position instead of what they are saying. Yes the way we do things often does irritate each other and I know from experience that I certainly irritate people… and I will admit that Klax seems to irritate me at times… Sometimes we are so different from each other it is like we are aliens from different worlds… if not completely different universes.
1 Like