25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS

[reFORMer]

The Word of God is first and foremost Jesus.

I thought "trinity" was a forbidden topic. Am I to respond or not?

My post on the Absolute, God as the Totality, could be viewed as relevant to a trinitarian discussion.  I meant it to show another depth of understanding reality not as the result of secondary causes, but as of God, "The Source, the Guide, and the Goal of everything," (Rom 11, NEB) without resorting to "free will of man vs. Divine sovereignty" categories.  That, "Jesus is the Word of God" doesn't seem something begging for a trinitarian exposition to prove it right or wrong.  Then again, it may only seem that way to me.  It may be good to refer to the Original Post.  We just don't want to descend on that slippery slope into page after page of off-topic "trinity/not trinity" obsessive emptying our vault of valued position papers.  One of the underlying reasons is that it is commonly assumed that UR is against the Deity of Christ.  Not only would this misrepresent many if not most, that area of quest is not pertinent to the belief that Jesus really is the "Savior of all" as the Bible calls Him on which this site focuses.  The truth is we hold as many views as is common to other followers of the God of the Bible:  trinitarian, arianism,  modalism, etc.
MODERATOR
I interpret our ban to not be against sharing views integral to another topic.  It's when we dichotomize into divergent themes of whatever the Original Post was about on one hand and "pro and con trinity" on the other, which is where the feeding frenzy begins, we have to step in "and deliver us from evil; for, Thine is the kingdom..."

[Theo Book]

The Word of God is first and foremost Jesus.

I thought "trinity" was a forbidden topic. Am I to respond or not?

My post on the Absolute, God as the Totality, could be viewed as relevant to a trinitarian discussion.  I meant it to show another depth of understanding reality not as the result of secondary causes, but as of God, "The Source, the Guide, and the Goal of everything," (Rom 11, NEB) without resorting to "free will of man vs. Divine sovereignty" categories.  That, "Jesus is the Word of God" doesn't seem something begging for a trinitarian exposition to prove it right or wrong.  Then again, it may only seem that way to me.  It may be good to refer to the Original Post.  We just don't want to descend on that slippery slope into page after page of off-topic "trinity/not trinity" obsessive emptying our vault of valued position papers.  One of the underlying reasons is that it is commonly assumed that UR is against the Deity of Christ.  Not only would this misrepresent many if not most, that area of quest is not pertinent to the belief that Jesus really is the "Savior of all" as the Bible calls Him on which this site focuses.  The truth is we hold as many views as is common to other followers of the God of the Bible:  trinitarian, arianism,  modalism, etc.
MODERATOR
I interpret our ban to not be against sharing views integral to another topic.  It's when we dichotomize into divergent themes of whatever the Original Post was about on one hand and "pro and con trinity" on the other, which is where the feeding frenzy begins, we have to step in "and deliver us from evil; for, Thine is the kingdom..."

So I guess that's a "no!"

[Yab Yum]

I also believe that if there is NO hell, what difference will it make to those who won't go there anyway. In other words, if warned, no loss. If not warned, jeopardy.

Infinite time minus one moment is still a verrrrry long time.

[Theo Book]

I also believe that if there is NO hell, what difference will it make to those who won't go there anyway. In other words, if warned, no loss. If not warned, jeopardy.

Infinite time minus one moment is still a verrrrry long time.

Then again, infinite time minus is not infinite time, is it?

[CHB]

Just wanted to share something with you and all others on the board. The scriptures say "God hardened Pharoah's heart" - I have heard sermons on this that say God took an active part in deliberately hardening Pharoah's heart, for his own purpose. The problem I have with that explanation is, the grammatical difference in the terminology.

Have you asked yourself, "where did I get this heart"? (Jer. 17:9) The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked who can know it.

We are born with these deceitful hearts, only God can soften them. (Job. 23:16) "For the Lord maketh my heart soft, and the Almighty troubleth me".  

Everything has to go back to the source of all things which is God. We humans, me included, sometimes forget and stop at ourselves.

God gave us this heart whether it be deceitful or not. He can harden it or soften it.  Eve had a deceitful heart she sinned before she ever partook of the tree of good and evil. She looked on the tree and lusted after it. She was filled with pride because she thought the tree could make her wise.

CHB

[WhiteWings]

I also believe that if there is NO hell, what difference will it make to those who won't go there anyway. In other words, if warned, no loss. If not warned, jeopardy.

Infinite time minus one moment is still a verrrrry long time.

Then again, infinite time minus is not infinite time, is it?

Well...it is
Half of infinity is still infity. If you would halve infinity and that half would have a finite length of say 1 million years that means infinity is 2 million years. 

[WhiteWings]

Just wanted to share something with you and all others on the board. The scriptures say "God hardened Pharoah's heart" - I have heard sermons on this that say God took an active part in deliberately hardening Pharoah's heart, for his own purpose. The problem I have with that explanation is, the grammatical difference in the terminology.

Have you asked yourself, "where did I get this heart"? (Jer. 17:9) The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked who can know it.
.....
God gave us this heart whether it be deceitful or not. He can harden it or soften it.

Agreed. I think noone on this forum will disagree God can do such things. Paul/Saul is the prime example of that. The question is can man/Pharoah harden or soften his own heart without the help of God? If you can locate a verse that clearly states that man has no control over his heart then Theo's claim is debunked. Otherwise it's not.

[legoman]

Just wanted to share something with you and all others on the board. The scriptures say "God hardened Pharoah's heart" - I have heard sermons on this that say God took an active part in deliberately hardening Pharoah's heart, for his own purpose. The problem I have with that explanation is, the grammatical difference in the terminology.

Have you asked yourself, "where did I get this heart"? (Jer. 17:9) The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked who can know it.
.....
God gave us this heart whether it be deceitful or not. He can harden it or soften it.

Agreed. I think noone on this forum will disagree God can do such things. Paul/Saul is the prime example of that. The question is can man/Pharoah harden or soften his own heart without the help of God? If you can locate a verse that clearly states that man has no control over his heart then Theo's claim is debunked. Otherwise it's not.

I think this is the crux of the whole thing.  Is God ultimately in control or is man ultimately in control?  Scripture gives many many examples of how God is really in control, especially of salvation, but also in how God harden's hearts, and also converts hearts.  God causes people to do what He wants.  We see that with Pharoah.  We see that with Jonah.  We see that with Saul/Paul.  If we humbe ourselves, perhaps we can even see it in our own lives. 

Now when it comes to salvation, man can do nothing from within himself to save himself.  Salvation is a complete work of God, so no one can boast.  Romans 9 and passages others people have mentioned should make this clear.

But without getting too much into a free will debate, this scripture hits it home:

Jeremiah 10:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin
       or the leopard its spots?
       Neither can you do good
       who are accustomed to doing evil.

The writer here is making a point.  Can the Ethiopian change his skin?  NO.  Can a leopard change its spots?  NO.  So then neither can one who is accustomed to doing evil suddenly do good.

This is talking about your nature - what's in the heart.  In the same way that a Leopard cannot change its spots, we cannot change our nature.  No - only one can do that: Jesus through the Father.

Rom 3:10 As it is written:
   "There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands,
      no one who seeks God.
12All have turned away,
      they have together become worthless;
   there is no one who does good,
      not even one."

So we should acknowledge what scripture plainly says.  There is no one good (none righteous), we are all unrighteous, so how can we who are accusomted to doing evil, choose good and therefore choose Christ?  No one can, until the Father enables them:

John 6:65 He went on to say, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him."

The only way we can become good and choose to follow Christ is if we have a change of nature, and that is what Christ does.  He makes people righteous.

[legoman]

Hi again Theo,

Romans 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Romans 8:20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.


(Theo) Right... in HOPE that all men will avail themselves of the blood of Christ. some will, some will not, but the hope is that all will.

We are brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God when we are bapttized into Christ in order to be in the  likeness of his resurrection.


(Legoman) Oh dear.  So God, who is all-knowing, all-powerful, created the whole universe, even declared the end from the beginning, is simply "hoping" that things will work out?  He is hoping the creation will liberate itself?

God is in control whether you like it or not Theo.  Trust Him! 

Why would you say a thing like that? "Whether I like it or not."
I am TRYING to understand something here.

Sorry, again I apologize if I offended.  The point here is: who is really in control?  If God is in control, and He wants all to be saved, then He will see to it that it happens.  Certainly He is powerful enough to make it happen, no?

When I say "whether you like it or not", I'm really asking you to examine your beliefs here.  And it appears you are open, and honestly are trying to understand things.  So let us examine your belief.

If man, through his free will, can reject God forever, what does this say about God's will?  What does this say about God's control?  It is saying that man's will is superior to God's will.  Man frustrates God forever at his own expense.  (How could this even make sense?!?  Man prefers eternal torment & suffering just to prove a point?!?  Assuming man's will is stronger than God's?!?)  So if this is true, under this belief system how much control does God have?  Not a whole heck of a lot.  Essentially Jesus died for the sins of all mankind, so that all would be saved, but in effect NONE are saved.  The only thing that saves a man is his own free will decision.  Under this belief system, ALL control is removed from God with respect to a man's salvation.  God wants all to be saved, but none are saved unless the man says so.

Now do you see why I stated "God is in control whether you like it or not?"  No intent to offend, only make you think.

(Legoman)

Hi Theo,

Sorry, I really did not think I was changing the thrust of what you were saying.  I may have been in a bit of a sarcastic mood last night, so I apologize if I offended you - but I'm not sure what you are saying here then.  Who is it who you think is hoping in the above verse?

The creation. "For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

And where is this "glorious freedom of the children of God" "For freedom did Christ set us free." We are free IN CHRIST.

Yes I agree.  The creation will only be freed through Christ.  That is what Christ will do for EVERYONE, because Jesus is the savior of the world, who came to save the world, and take away the sins of all mankind so that all mankind would be saved and freed from the bondage of sin.

(logoman)

Surely you see that Romans 8:20 says it is God who subjected the creation (which includes all humans) to frustration, correct?  This was done without asking for our permission.  And it is God who will liberate the creation (which again includes all humans) from its bondage to decay (sin and death)?  Right?  Again God doesn't need to ask our permission. 

This is the glorious hope.  This is man's hope - specifically it is Paul saying "in hope".  This is where our faith in God comes in, that we have faith and hope that God will actually do what He says: liberate the creation!  It is teaching us faith.

What then is the reason for baptism into Christ? I do not ask what is its purpose, but what is the reasoning behind it? For surely you do not believe all men will be baptized into Christ.

All men will be baptized with fire.  There is only one baptism.  Baptism by fire.  The water baptism we go through is a type or physical symbol of the spiritual baptism we must ALL go through.

Baptism by fire.  Trials by fire.  Purified by fire.  The LAKE of fire.  God's consuming fire.  Its all one.  Others here may have different views on this, but that is how I see it.

(logoman)

That is the good news and I have faith and hope that He will do it!  God says He will do it and I believe He can.  God is the one who wants to save all mankind, and God is the one who says He will reconcile and restore all things.  He can do it.

THAT is the question I have not seen an answer to as of yet. I see where God has instructed us to get into Christ to receive the blessings inherent with being in Christ, I do not see where all men will get into Christ. Are you saying many will be saved who never were "in Christ?"

All will eventually be in Christ, and ultimately in God, when God is ALL in ALL (1 Cor 15:22-28).

(logoman)

In any case, as others have alluded to, maybe take a step back for a second.  The arguments you raise here are really nothing new, so you may be fooling yourself if you think this is something the UR believer has not already considered for themself.  You might want to read through here to see how your questions have already been answered in more ways than one:

http://tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Coming to tentmaker to tear down the doctrine of UR is surely an exercise in frustration...  Peace out...

Already been there. Only got more confused by all those translations, none of which are stamped "approved of God." As for Wittemore's "100 proofs" article, I debated that issue ten years ago. Still no response.

As for coming to the tentmaker site to tear down the doctrine, are you saying I should go on the CARM board to debate the issues? or get understanding on the issues? Where else would any honest person go but to the source? I WANT TO KNOW!
I do not want your enemies guesses. And I do not trust your enemies assessments as to what you teach.

No please please don't go to CARM.  If you're intent is not tear down the doctrine of UR, but just understand it, then that is fine.  But in your OP you mentioned pointing out "cracks" in the doctrine, I don't really see any cracks, not even from your 25 questions in the OP.  My comment was simply to say that most people here have probably already investiaged these alleged "cracks" in the doctrines and found they are simply flaws in understanding.  Most people here left ET beliefs because they started to study it for themselves, and the ET doctrine simply cannot survive an honest investigation in the light.  It fails on logical, philisophical, and scriptural points.

Regarding free will, if you want a thorough examination of it logically and scripturally, look at this:
http://bible-truths.com/lake15.html
http://bible-truths.com/lake15-B.html
http://bible-truths.com/lake15-C.html
http://bible-truths.com/lake15-D.html

Hopefully you will begin to see that man's "free will" will not triumph over God's will, nor His love, nor His desire to save all humans.

[Theo Book]

Hi again Theo,

Romans 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Romans 8:20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.


(Theo) Right... in HOPE that all men will avail themselves of the blood of Christ. some will, some will not, but the hope is that all will.

We are brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God when we are bapttized into Christ in order to be in the  likeness of his resurrection.


(Legoman) Oh dear.  So God, who is all-knowing, all-powerful, created the whole universe, even declared the end from the beginning, is simply "hoping" that things will work out?  He is hoping the creation will liberate itself?

God is in control whether you like it or not Theo.  Trust Him! 

Why would you say a thing like that? "Whether I like it or not."
I am TRYING to understand something here.

Sorry, again I apologize if I offended.  The point here is: who is really in control?  If God is in control, and He wants all to be saved, then He will see to it that it happens.  Certainly He is powerful enough to make it happen, no?

When I say "whether you like it or not", I'm really asking you to examine your beliefs here.  And it appears you are open, and honestly are trying to understand things.  So let us examine your belief.

If man, through his free will, can reject God forever, what does this say about God's will?  What does this say about God's control?  It is saying that man's will is superior to God's will.  Man frustrates God forever at his own expense.  (How could this even make sense?!?  Man prefers eternal torment & suffering just to prove a point?!?  Assuming man's will is stronger than God's?!?)  So if this is true, under this belief system how much control does God have?  Not a whole heck of a lot.  Essentially Jesus died for the sins of all mankind, so that all would be saved, but in effect NONE are saved.  The only thing that saves a man is his own free will decision.  Under this belief system, ALL control is removed from God with respect to a man's salvation.  God wants all to be saved, but none are saved unless the man says so.

Now do you see why I stated "God is in control whether you like it or not?"  No intent to offend, only make you think.

(Legoman)

Hi Theo,

Sorry, I really did not think I was changing the thrust of what you were saying.  I may have been in a bit of a sarcastic mood last night, so I apologize if I offended you - but I'm not sure what you are saying here then.  Who is it who you think is hoping in the above verse?

The creation. "For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

And where is this "glorious freedom of the children of God" "For freedom did Christ set us free." We are free IN CHRIST.

Yes I agree.  The creation will only be freed through Christ.  That is what Christ will do for EVERYONE, because Jesus is the savior of the world, who came to save the world, and take away the sins of all mankind so that all mankind would be saved and freed from the bondage of sin.

(logoman)

Surely you see that Romans 8:20 says it is God who subjected the creation (which includes all humans) to frustration, correct?  This was done without asking for our permission.  And it is God who will liberate the creation (which again includes all humans) from its bondage to decay (sin and death)?  Right?  Again God doesn't need to ask our permission. 

This is the glorious hope.  This is man's hope - specifically it is Paul saying "in hope".  This is where our faith in God comes in, that we have faith and hope that God will actually do what He says: liberate the creation!  It is teaching us faith.

What then is the reason for baptism into Christ? I do not ask what is its purpose, but what is the reasoning behind it? For surely you do not believe all men will be baptized into Christ.

All men will be baptized with fire.  There is only one baptism.  Baptism by fire.  The water baptism we go through is a type or physical symbol of the spiritual baptism we must ALL go through.

Baptism by fire.  Trials by fire.  Purified by fire.  The LAKE of fire.  God's consuming fire.  Its all one.  Others here may have different views on this, but that is how I see it.

(logoman)

That is the good news and I have faith and hope that He will do it!  God says He will do it and I believe He can.  God is the one who wants to save all mankind, and God is the one who says He will reconcile and restore all things.  He can do it.

THAT is the question I have not seen an answer to as of yet. I see where God has instructed us to get into Christ to receive the blessings inherent with being in Christ, I do not see where all men will get into Christ. Are you saying many will be saved who never were "in Christ?"

All will eventually be in Christ, and ultimately in God, when God is ALL in ALL (1 Cor 15:22-28).

(logoman)

In any case, as others have alluded to, maybe take a step back for a second.  The arguments you raise here are really nothing new, so you may be fooling yourself if you think this is something the UR believer has not already considered for themself.  You might want to read through here to see how your questions have already been answered in more ways than one:

http://tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Coming to tentmaker to tear down the doctrine of UR is surely an exercise in frustration...  Peace out...

Already been there. Only got more confused by all those translations, none of which are stamped "approved of God." As for Wittemore's "100 proofs" article, I debated that issue ten years ago. Still no response.

As for coming to the tentmaker site to tear down the doctrine, are you saying I should go on the CARM board to debate the issues? or get understanding on the issues? Where else would any honest person go but to the source? I WANT TO KNOW!
I do not want your enemies guesses. And I do not trust your enemies assessments as to what you teach.

No please please don't go to CARM.  If you're intent is not tear down the doctrine of UR, but just understand it, then that is fine.  But in your OP you mentioned pointing out "cracks" in the doctrine, I don't really see any cracks, not even from your 25 questions in the OP.  My comment was simply to say that most people here have probably already investiaged these alleged "cracks" in the doctrines and found they are simply flaws in understanding.  Most people here left ET beliefs because they started to study it for themselves, and the ET doctrine simply cannot survive an honest investigation in the light.  It fails on logical, philisophical, and scriptural points.

Regarding free will, if you want a thorough examination of it logically and scripturally, look at this:
http://bible-truths.com/lake15.html
http://bible-truths.com/lake15-B.html
http://bible-truths.com/lake15-C.html
http://bible-truths.com/lake15-D.html

Hopefully you will begin to see that man's "free will" will not triumph over God's will, nor His love, nor His desire to save all humans.

I guess it is just time for me to move on. I see moderators introducing "trinity" and i am told it is not allowed; now YOU discuss free will, whcih I am told is not allowed.

How am I to respond with any degree of honesty if you guys are allowed to introduce concepts that I am not allowed to respond to?

I do not understand such a standard. OF COURSE you can defend "universal salvation"
 if you eliminate "free will" from the discussion.

Of Course you can defend a trinity if you eliminate "trinitariansim" from the discussion.

As for "cracks" in my "twenty-five questions" allow me to hasten to point out it was really one question twenty five times; "If [a] then consequence . I only changed the defininition of the consequences to show the widespread application of the question. The whole point is, if God's will cannot be thwarted, then he is totally responsible for every wrong thing ever done, BECAUSE only his will can be done; and I do not accept nor believe that.

I am trying to understand USAL and its possibilities without accusing God. So far, all I see is accusations against God.

[legoman]

Hi again Theo,

Romans 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Romans 8:20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.


(Theo) Right... in HOPE that all men will avail themselves of the blood of Christ. some will, some will not, but the hope is that all will.

We are brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God when we are bapttized into Christ in order to be in the  likeness of his resurrection.


(Legoman) Oh dear.  So God, who is all-knowing, all-powerful, created the whole universe, even declared the end from the beginning, is simply "hoping" that things will work out?  He is hoping the creation will liberate itself?

God is in control whether you like it or not Theo.  Trust Him! 

Why would you say a thing like that? "Whether I like it or not."
I am TRYING to understand something here.

Sorry, again I apologize if I offended.  The point here is: who is really in control?  If God is in control, and He wants all to be saved, then He will see to it that it happens.  Certainly He is powerful enough to make it happen, no?

When I say "whether you like it or not", I'm really asking you to examine your beliefs here.  And it appears you are open, and honestly are trying to understand things.  So let us examine your belief.

If man, through his free will, can reject God forever, what does this say about God's will?  What does this say about God's control?  It is saying that man's will is superior to God's will.  Man frustrates God forever at his own expense.  (How could this even make sense?!?  Man prefers eternal torment & suffering just to prove a point?!?  Assuming man's will is stronger than God's?!?)  So if this is true, under this belief system how much control does God have?  Not a whole heck of a lot.  Essentially Jesus died for the sins of all mankind, so that all would be saved, but in effect NONE are saved.  The only thing that saves a man is his own free will decision.  Under this belief system, ALL control is removed from God with respect to a man's salvation.  God wants all to be saved, but none are saved unless the man says so.

Now do you see why I stated "God is in control whether you like it or not?"  No intent to offend, only make you think.

(Legoman)

Hi Theo,

Sorry, I really did not think I was changing the thrust of what you were saying.  I may have been in a bit of a sarcastic mood last night, so I apologize if I offended you - but I'm not sure what you are saying here then.  Who is it who you think is hoping in the above verse?

The creation. "For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

And where is this "glorious freedom of the children of God" "For freedom did Christ set us free." We are free IN CHRIST.

Yes I agree.  The creation will only be freed through Christ.  That is what Christ will do for EVERYONE, because Jesus is the savior of the world, who came to save the world, and take away the sins of all mankind so that all mankind would be saved and freed from the bondage of sin.

(logoman)

Surely you see that Romans 8:20 says it is God who subjected the creation (which includes all humans) to frustration, correct?  This was done without asking for our permission.  And it is God who will liberate the creation (which again includes all humans) from its bondage to decay (sin and death)?  Right?  Again God doesn't need to ask our permission. 

This is the glorious hope.  This is man's hope - specifically it is Paul saying "in hope".  This is where our faith in God comes in, that we have faith and hope that God will actually do what He says: liberate the creation!  It is teaching us faith.

What then is the reason for baptism into Christ? I do not ask what is its purpose, but what is the reasoning behind it? For surely you do not believe all men will be baptized into Christ.

All men will be baptized with fire.  There is only one baptism.  Baptism by fire.  The water baptism we go through is a type or physical symbol of the spiritual baptism we must ALL go through.

Baptism by fire.  Trials by fire.  Purified by fire.  The LAKE of fire.  God's consuming fire.  Its all one.  Others here may have different views on this, but that is how I see it.

(logoman)

That is the good news and I have faith and hope that He will do it!  God says He will do it and I believe He can.  God is the one who wants to save all mankind, and God is the one who says He will reconcile and restore all things.  He can do it.

THAT is the question I have not seen an answer to as of yet. I see where God has instructed us to get into Christ to receive the blessings inherent with being in Christ, I do not see where all men will get into Christ. Are you saying many will be saved who never were "in Christ?"

All will eventually be in Christ, and ultimately in God, when God is ALL in ALL (1 Cor 15:22-28).

(logoman)

In any case, as others have alluded to, maybe take a step back for a second.  The arguments you raise here are really nothing new, so you may be fooling yourself if you think this is something the UR believer has not already considered for themself.  You might want to read through here to see how your questions have already been answered in more ways than one:

http://tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

Coming to tentmaker to tear down the doctrine of UR is surely an exercise in frustration...  Peace out...

Already been there. Only got more confused by all those translations, none of which are stamped "approved of God." As for Wittemore's "100 proofs" article, I debated that issue ten years ago. Still no response.

As for coming to the tentmaker site to tear down the doctrine, are you saying I should go on the CARM board to debate the issues? or get understanding on the issues? Where else would any honest person go but to the source? I WANT TO KNOW!
I do not want your enemies guesses. And I do not trust your enemies assessments as to what you teach.

No please please don't go to CARM.  If you're intent is not tear down the doctrine of UR, but just understand it, then that is fine.  But in your OP you mentioned pointing out "cracks" in the doctrine, I don't really see any cracks, not even from your 25 questions in the OP.  My comment was simply to say that most people here have probably already investiaged these alleged "cracks" in the doctrines and found they are simply flaws in understanding.  Most people here left ET beliefs because they started to study it for themselves, and the ET doctrine simply cannot survive an honest investigation in the light.  It fails on logical, philisophical, and scriptural points.

Regarding free will, if you want a thorough examination of it logically and scripturally, look at this:
http://bible-truths.com/lake15.html
http://bible-truths.com/lake15-B.html
http://bible-truths.com/lake15-C.html
http://bible-truths.com/lake15-D.html

Hopefully you will begin to see that man's "free will" will not triumph over God's will, nor His love, nor His desire to save all humans.

I guess it is just time for me to move on. I see moderators introducing "trinity" and i am told it is not allowed; now YOU discuss free will, whcih I am told is not allowed.

How am I to respond with any degree of honesty if you guys are allowed to introduce concepts that I am not allowed to respond to?

I do not understand such a standard. OF COURSE you can defend "universal salvation"
 if you eliminate "free will" from the discussion.

Of Course you can defend a trinity if you eliminate "trinitariansim" from the discussion.

Hi Theo,

I think it is up to the moderators discretion.  I think some minimal discussion of free will may be allowed, but if it turns into "doctrine bashing" or a "food fight" then it will be blocked.  But we can discuss concepts without mentioning "free will" specifically.

I would say respond away, and let the mods sort it out.  Mods, please let me know if I am out of line.

But the moment this turns into a bashfest, you can expect the mods to step in.  If we keep it respectful, we can continue to discuss.  As far as I know the only reason "free will" is not allowed is because discussions can tend to degenerate into flame wars.

Also, you can always PM me directly if you want to discuss free will in depth.  Mods don't moderate there I believe.

As for "cracks" in my "twenty-five questions" allow me to hasten to point out it was really one question twenty five times; "If [a] then consequence . I only changed the defininition of the consequences to show the widespread application of the question. The whole point is, if God's will cannot be thwarted, then he is totally responsible for every wrong thing ever done, BECAUSE only his will can be done; and I do not accept nor believe that.

I am trying to understand USAL and its possibilities without accusing God. So far, all I see is accusations against God.

I don't see what you mean by accusing God?!?  No one is doing that.  What we may do is question a view or idea about God.  But yes, God is responsible for everything in the end.  He is the only one who can be.

I hope to go through your 25 questions OP in detail later.  I actually think it is not "one question" but "two questions".  Hopefully you will see what I mean when I explain later.

[WhiteWings]

I guess it is just time for me to move on. I see moderators introducing "trinity" and i am told it is not allowed; now YOU discuss free will, whcih I am told is not allowed.

Theo, It's not that black and white.
It's for example not allowed to start a topic: "Man has absolute free will". Then you really focus on the subject.
But if you write a reply with say 20 verses of all kinds it's not forbidden to mention along with 1 verse 'because God gave men free will". It's a fine line to walk. I'm sure mods correct me if I'm wrong.....

I do not understand such a standard. OF COURSE you can defend "universal salvation"
 if you eliminate "free will" from the discussion.

Very clever Theo. You're starting to understand You just made your point without saying the bad words  

Of Course you can defend a trinity if you eliminate "trinitariansim" from the discussion.

Again as I understand it: UR being true or false doesn't depend on Trinity or not.

As for "cracks" in my "twenty-five questions" allow me to hasten to point out it was really one question twenty five times; "If [a] then consequence . I only changed the defininition of the consequences to show the widespread application of the question. The whole point is, if God's will cannot be thwarted, then he is totally responsible for every wrong thing ever done, BECAUSE only his will can be done; and I do not accept nor believe that.

I am trying to understand USAL and its possibilities without accusing God. So far, all I see is accusations against God.

We have forums member who believe in Trinity and who do not. We have members believing in zero free will and some (that still leads to where Gods wants it). Guess what... there is also disagrement over the evil part.
I suggest you take a look Here and here

I guess it is just time for me to move on.

Don't do that Theo....

[willieH]

willieH: Hi TB...  

This topic is a bit on the "trollish" side, ...but because we at Tentmaker are a welcoming bunch, it deserves to be addressed in the name of welcome...  

Btw... before I begin... Welcome to Tentmaker, TB ... God has brought you here to LEARN... the big question is... will you?  

Basically the answer to ALL your questions is -- YES -- and in your endeavor to "trip" the truth (as was attempted by the Pharisees with CHRIST), shall your "attempt" herein, fail...  

And if you bother to completely read my answer to you, ...you will in all likelihood, become frustrated because your attempt to refute the Salvation of ALL, herein fails... but, as I have already suggested to you --- an OPPORTUNITY is given you, for GOD has led you here to LEARN...    ...and we here at TM shall hope you "have your EARS on"    as freely as you have "OPENED your MOUTH"...  

The question I have for you, TB... is shall you LEARN from this failure to refute "UR", or will you attempt to sidestep it?  

Let us begin, shall we?  

I have prepared a sort of questionaire to Universalists - Answer me please;

1) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And If Eve ate of the forbidden fruit, [Gen 3:6] in the garden, it must have been God's will.

YES -- YHVH God works ALL THINGS according to the counsel of HIS OWN WILL -- Eph 1:11

2) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And If Eve gave to her husband, Adam, and he did eat, also, [Gen 3:6] it must have been God's will.

YES (see # 1) -- also... this event is IN the WORD, and the WORD which preceeded the event, must needs occur as noted IN the WORD which preceeded the event...  

3) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if cain killed Able, [Gen 4:8] it must have been God's will.

YES (see #1) -- also... the "murder" of Abel is part of the WORD which does NOT CHANGE... and so that "murder" which was PART of the THINGS NOT YET DONE -- Isaiah 46:10 -- had to occur, for the Scriptures [WORD] -- CANNOT be BROKEN -- John 10:34 -- the WORD has NO VARIANCE -- James 1:17 -- and is the SAME, yesterday, today and forever -- Heb 13:8

4) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if the sons of God came in unto the daughter's of men, [Gen 6:4] it must have been God's will.

YES (see #1) -- also... God made woman, to be an HELP, ...meet to MAN, without qualification (in every way) -- Gen 2:20 -- That "help" was not limited or described, so it stands as "help" in every way that MAN needed "help"... do you doubt the WORD which states this?  

5) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if every thought of man's heart was only evil continually,[Gen 6:5] it must have been God's will.

YES (see #1) -- also... God sends man into CAPTIVITY -- Jer 29:14 -- that He might DELIVER him FROM IT... as well as CONCLUDE ALL in UNBELIEF -- Rom 11:32 -- that He might have MERCY upon ALL -- are you getting any of this, TB?  

6) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if the men of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were exceedingly wicked before the Lord, [Gen 13:13] it must have been God's will

YES (see #1) -- also...  GOD created EVIL as well as GOOD -- Isaiah 45:7 -- and the KNOWLEDGE of IT, is HIS -- Gen 3:22 -- to have KNOWLEDGE of IT, must therefore be a DIVINE thing... which MANY (likely such as yourself), think to be OPPOSING DIVINITY!  

How could something which is INHERENT within the Heart of GOD (knowledge of G & E), be OTHER than DIVINE, TB?

7) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And If Saul disobeyed God, to spare the Amelekites, [1Sam 13:13-14] it must have been God's will. (Note:"...for now would the Lord have established thy kingdom upon Israel forever. But now thy kingdom shall not continue. The phrase "for now WOULD the Lord is the same as "it WAS the Lord's WILL. Saul's disobedience CHANGED the Lord's will for Saul; But it was God's will that his will be thwarted.

YES (see #1) -- also...

(1) use or translation of the word "forever" is INVALID, for until one can COMPLETELY define the word -- (which includes WITHOUT BEGINNING -- by explaining how something has NO BEGINNING, to include why and how that, ...IS?)... Use of the word FOREVER by any finite which does not comprehend said meaning, is therefore INVALID.  

(2) GOD shall establish ISRAEL for ever, ...for "ISRAEL" are His Sons, which are without beginning or end... For ALL His SONS were WITH Him, BEFORE entering this realm -- Luke 15:11-32 -- Job 38:7 

They ARE the BODY of CHRIST, and ARE His TEMPLE (neither of which CHANGE), and the WILL of GOD is found in them (1st CAPTIVITY, and 2nd FREEDOM which is the natural ORDER of the DIVINE -- 1 Cor 15:46) thereby establishing the KNOWLEDGE of GOOD and EVIL in His SONS, one of which was/is -- Saul

(3) -- GOD does NOT CHANGE -- Mal 3:6 -- so "HIS WILL" for Saul cannot CHANGE, otherwise the WORD -- Heb 13:8 -- and Mal 3:6 -- are both compromised.

(4) it is part of GOD's will in CONCLUDING UNBELIEF upon ALL (which means they shall negate in their living process, that which is commanded by Him) -- in order to have MERCY upon ALL...

In verse 14 -- it speaks of that that which YHVH commanded was not kept... and it is meant to be so, manifest within UNBELIEF of said doer, which did NOT "keep"...

8) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And If David committed adultry with Bath-sheba, [2 Sam 11:4] it must have been god's will.

YES (see #1) -- also... man devises his way (as did David in this example), but GOD orders the STEPS of man -- Prov 16:9 -- Prov 20:21 -- Jer 10:23 -- will you BELIEVE what the WORD, PLAINLY states in MULTIPLE verses, bringing its LIGHT, ...TB?  Or shall you cling to your own darkened "opinions"?

9) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And If, of all the many thousands who came out of Egypt, in the great exodus, only two made it to the promised land, (Joshua and Caleb)[Num 14:30,38] it must have been God's will.

YES (see #1) -- also... how do you continue to think that the DIVINE WILL of the ALMIGHTY can be neutralized by His own Creation?  What "faith" is seen in this?  The prerequisite NUMBER which eventually PHYSICALLY entered the "promised land" is not specified is it?

Where is the Prophecy noted that only TWO of the entire nation of ISRAEL should enter the promised land?  Also... MOSES was not one of them... is this your conclusion as well, TB?  That because MOSES did not enter PHYSICALLY, ...he therefore SHALL NEVER ENTER?

What of this, TB? ---> Rom 11:26 -- and so ...ALL ISRAEL shall be SAVED, as IS WRITTEN, there shall come out of Zion, the DELIVERER and shall turn AWAY ungodliness from JACOB...

This includes the ENTIRE nation which did NOT enter into the PROMISED land.  Only those CHOSEN to ENTER into the Kingdom [promised land] IN this life, shall do so IN THIS LIFE... It does not say that those who do not enter, shall NEVER enter.

Do you believe this Scripture, TB? --

John 1:29 -- behold that Lamb of God which ...TAKETH AWAY... the SIN... of the WORLD

If the SIN of THE WORLD, ...is "taken AWAY"... Then what remains to accuse?    

You can't have your cake & eat it too bro...  

10) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And If Moses came down off the mount, and saw the children of israel dancing around a God they had made for themselves, [Num 32] it must have been God's will.

YES (see #1) -- If it is WRITTEN in the WORD (which it IS!) ...which preceeds the event, then it WAS to BE so, ...well BEFORE it actually occured... are you getting the CLEANSING SPIRITUAL picture yet, TB?  Or shall you continue wallowing in the CARNAL RELIGIOUS mud, given you? Must I continue this?  

11) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And If all men sin and come short of the glory of God; [Rom 3:23] it must have been God's will.

YES (see #1) -- also... How can one be DELIVERED from something [sin] that one, needs no deliverance from?  ALL sinned, and ALL are delivered from it.

ALL are IN ADAM [and therefore SINNERS], TB -- 1 Cor 15:22 -- as well AS the SAME "ALL" are IN CHRIST [and therefore DELIVERED]

12) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if the Jews always resist the Holy Spirit, [Acts 7:51] it must have been God's will.

YES (see #1) -- also... you only display YOURSELF and your RELIGION by noting this, bro...  You must therefore NEGATE the words of PAUL in Rom 11:26 -- in order to continue to facilitate this belief.

"ALWAYS" in this context, simply means that:

(1) these have YET to be drawn to the SON and,

(2) shall remain so until their DUE TIME -- 1 Tim 2:6 -- and,

(3) are therefore YET to bow at the KNEE and CONFESS with the tongue -- Phil 2:10-11 -- John 6:44

It cannot mean "ALWAYS" in the sense you propose, for the word ALWAYS is a word such as NEVER, and FOREVER... meaning that PRIOR to being stiffnecked, these were stiffnecked...   -- for they were "ALWAYS" stiffnecked, eh?

13) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if the Jews stoned Stephen, [Acts 7:60] it must have been God's will.

YES (see #1) -- also... If it is WRITTEN in His WORD (which it IS), then prior to the stoning, the scenario was SET, and could therefore NOT be avoided, otherwise the WORD in which it is WRITTEN and which NEVER CHANGES, is therefore compromised... Are you getting it yet, TB?

Okay... enough.

14) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if evil men put you out of the synagogue, and even kill you, they will think they do God a service, [John 16:2-3] but it must have been God's will.

15) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if the Jews rebelled against God, and cast down his law behind their backs, and slew the prophets, and wrought great provocation, [Neh 9:26] it must have been God's will.

16) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if Pharoah slew all the male children of Israel, [Exo 1:16] it must have been God's will.

17) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if Herod slew all the children of Bethlehem, and in all the costs thereof, from two years old and under, [Mat 2:16] it must have been God's will.

18) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit, [Acts 5:2-3] it must have been God's will.

19) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if Sapphira, his wife joined him in his deed, [Acts 5:2-3] it must have been God's will.

20) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if Satan was a liar from the beginning, [John 8:44] it must have been God's will.

21) If God's will cannot be frustrated;
And if Peter betrayed his Lord with denial, [Mat 26:75] it must have been God's will.

22) And If God's will cannot be frustrated, and I preach about a god of vengeance, why do you correct me, and say that my God is a God of hate? It must be God's will that I so teach! And for you to intervene in any way; for you to not aid me in my task, is to go against God's will; which can't be done?

23) And if God's will cannot be overturned, or thwarted, why should wives submit to their own husbands, children obey their parents, murderers be punished, and etc. ad nauseum? God's will is, after all, behind it all.

24) And if God is love, and I preach that he is a God of vengeance, what difference does it make to you, it is God's will.

25) And If God's will cannot be frustrated, he becomes directly responsible for all the sin, murder, adultry, lying, cheating, stealing, every evil thing man has ever done. there can be no "repentance, (which God wills that every man repent), because how can a man 'repent" of doing god's will

YES to all these, (see #1)

If you haven't gotten it by now you shall not get it...

Do you begin to see just a wee crakc in the doctrine, yet? There is plenty more where this came from. Because, after all, it is God's will that I break down this doctrine, and so I must. And for you to intervene, is to frustrate God's will.

It is GOD's WILL that you try to expose a "wee crakc"... and that you FAIL in doing so... That this FAILURE has been shown, is HIS WILL... and NOTHING can frustrate or alter the WILL of YHVH God, for He is ALMIGHTY... and you, as you continue in human arrogance, think as CLAY to dictate your "will" to the POTTER, failing to KNOW that your arrogance (marring of the clay that is you) is a product of His SHAPING of You, that you one day, shall be humbled before Him -- Jer 18:4

You have hardly done what you propose to have done, on the contrary...  If something is IN the Creation of GOD, then it IS HIS CREATION... to include both the OBEDIENCE and DISOBEDIENCE to His COMMAND... including the doings of GOOD and EVIL, for these are HIS KNOWLEDGE... KNOWN by HIM!  

Gen 3:22 -- behold the MAN has become AS one of us... to KNOW Good and Evil...

It is therefore, DIVINE to KNOW ...Good AND Evil... which are TWO sides of the very SAME KNOWLEDGE. (double edged sword)

Do I await your response

Theophilus Book

You have received it, ...now I await yours...    And please be a little more DETAILED (as you required of us) in your answer, than YOU in consolidating an entire answer, have done with others in this discussion...

...willieH  

[WhiteWings]

I don't see what you mean by accusing God?!?  No one is doing that.

If you say God has absolute control over every atom in His creation it also means God created/initiated all sins. I think that's what Theo is saying. Right Theo?
If so I again point to the threads mentioned in my previous post. Plus a verse to concider:
^KJVExo 12:12 For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD.

The verse is about killing. I is not man. It's God or if you wish someone under command of God.
Did God kill?
^KJVExo 20:13 Thou shalt not kill.
Is killing a sin?
Does Exo 12:12 make God a sinner?

[legoman]

I don't see what you mean by accusing God?!?  No one is doing that.

If you say God has absolute control over every atom in His creation it also means God created/initiated all sins. I think that's what Theo is saying. Right Theo?
If so I again point to the threads mentioned in my previous post. Plus a verse to concider:
^KJVExo 12:12 For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD.

The verse is about killing. I is not man. It's God or if you wish someone under command of God.
Did God kill?
^KJVExo 20:13 Thou shalt not kill.
Is killing a sin?
Does Exo 12:12 make God a sinner?

Yes I get what you are saying.  However I believe Exodus 20:13 is thou shalt not MURDER.  Murder is unlawful killing.  Certainly there are many examples where God kills or causes the killing of people.  Yet none of these cases are unlawful killing, none of these cases are murder.  So God does not sin.  God has the power to KILL and make ALIVE.  He will indeed make all alive one day (1 Cor 15:22-28).

Everything God does He does for a good reason, and it will ultimately benefit the creation as a whole, which includes those who may temporarily be harmed (or even killed).  Now it is silly to say we are accusing God by saying God is in control of everything.  It is simply rightly acknowledging the power that God has.

Certainly God has control over every atom in the universe.  Certainly God can bend the will of a king however He pleases (Prov 21:1).  Certainly God has ordained the powers that be including all government (Romans 13:1-2).  So certainly this would include God ordaining that HITLER had power in Germany.

Now since God could have stopped the atrocities of Hitler (and other ruthless world leaders), but did not, and in fact ordainied that their power be... what does this say about God?  It says that God is in control.

But it is silly to say this is an "accusation" of God, by suggesting it was wrong for God to ordain that Hitler be in power.  Clearly God had a purpose - a good purpose - for this to happen.  This does not mean that God is evil.  Because God will use these things for an even greater good.  We may not understand exactly how, but it will be so.

Look at Joseph and his 12 brothers who intended to kill him.  Yet God intended it for good (Genesis 50:20)!  The whole thing was God's intention.  Do you get that?  God intended for Joseph's brothers to try to kill him! It was God's plan all along: God intended for Joseph's brothers to fail at killing him, and instead sell him into slavery.  And God intended for Joseph to eventually save his brothers when the famine came along years later.  God works in ways we cannot fully fathom, but they ultimately result in a greater good for everyone.

I make no accusation against God by saying He is in control of everything.

[willieH]

Its God's will for us all to be disobedient so He can have mercy on us all, so we will ultimately all be obedient.  Then we'll all be saved.   

So you worship a God that wants us all to suffer the pangs of guilt, torment each other with awful behaviours and terrible revengeful things, just so he can pardon us?

I don't worship such a God. I worship the God Jesus worshipped.

The GOD that JESUS worshipped, caused a FLOOD which destroyed everything, except the contents of an ARK!

I think you are uneducated (no offense) as to the PURPOSE of GOD, which is availed and REVEALED, in this life, TB.

This life is, via LIVING EXPERIENCE, ...is an intended experiential exposure of the results of what happens when GOD'S COMMANDS [GOOD] are DISOBEYED [EVIL]... which bring forth, DEATH, suffering, pain, loss, sorrow, etc... as these DISOBEDIENCES are SOWN...

Like EVERYTHING about YHVH GOD... His KNOWLEDGE is LIVING... which contains BOTH, ...Good and Evil...

It is MAJESTIC to be a SON of YHVH, and to be INVOLVED in this OPEN display before ALL LIVING entities... of this KNOWLEDGE which IS actively proceeding from the Heart of GOD...

EVIL is the portion of His ETERNAL KNOWLEDGE which is only given to be TEMPORARILY LIVED in this EARTHLY realm... that in its REVELATION, ...GOOD might BE --- FOREVER exalted and LIVED, in the ETERNAL  Heavenly realm of YHVH God...

...willieH 

[WhiteWings]

Yes I get what you are saying.  However I believe Exodus 20:13 is thou shalt not MURDER.

Kill in KJV. But indeed murder in several other (literal) translations.

Murder is unlawful killing.

And because God is (above) the law, His wishes are always law and therefore His action are never unlawful. Right?

Look at Joseph and his 12 brothers who intended to kill him.  Yet God intended it for good (Genesis 50:20)!  The whole thing was God's intention.  Do you get that?

Yes Sir. Lego Sir! 
I got it long ago. It's written. (but still problematic for me)

I make no accusation against God by saying He is in control of everything.

Never intended to say that. If I only knew one common factor of all Tenties it would be that they see Father/Son/HS as the uttermost highest standard of perfection.

[legoman]

Yes I get what you are saying.  However I believe Exodus 20:13 is thou shalt not MURDER.

Kill in KJV. But indeed murder in several other (literal) translations.

Murder is unlawful killing.

And because God is (above) the law, His wishes are always law and therefore His action are never unlawful. Right?

Yes, but not because "might makes right", but just because they are right.  Regarding "lawful" killing, here are some examples: you may need to kill someone in self-defence; if a judge sentences someone to the death sentence, then that would be "lawful" killing; or you may be in some strange situation where you can only save one person or another, but not both. etc.  Any killing that God does or causes is always lawful, because He always intends it for a good reason, AND He has the power to restore the person(s) who are killed. 

Note in general a human cannot usually do "lawful" killing, unless it was one of the examples I gave above.  Humans should not kill people for a "greater good", because they have no power to ensure the greater good will happen.

Look at Joseph and his 12 brothers who intended to kill him.  Yet God intended it for good (Genesis 50:20)!  The whole thing was God's intention.  Do you get that?

Yes Sir. Lego Sir! 
I got it long ago. It's written. (but still problematic for me)

Yes I know you got it WW, it was just a rhetorical question... 

I make no accusation against God by saying He is in control of everything.

Never intended to say that. If I only knew one common factor of all Tenties it would be that they see Father/Son/HS as the uttermost highest standard of perfection.

My response wasn't to you necessarily WW, but just in general, and more towards Theo.  But I think you got my point!

Cheers...

[jabcat]

Quote legoman "I think it is up to the moderators discretion.  I think some minimal discussion of free will may be allowed, but if it turns into "doctrine bashing" or a "food fight" then it will be blocked.  But we can discuss concepts without mentioning "free will" specifically.

I would say respond away, and let the mods sort it out.  Mods, please let me know if I am out of line.

But the moment this turns into a bashfest, you can expect the mods to step in.  If we keep it respectful, we can continue to discuss.  As far as I know the only reason "free will" is not allowed is because discussions can tend to degenerate into flame wars.

Also, you can always PM me directly if you want to discuss free will in depth.  Mods don't moderate there I believe."  End quote

-----------------------------

Yes, there are ways to discuss our views without turning it into a direct debate.  For example;  person a) "I believe God made that decision based on X scripture, and this is how I believe it works and why";  person b) "I believe man made that decision based on X scripture, and this is how I believe it works and why".

Right, too many fruitless arguments, creating strife, division, namecalling, etc.  A decision was made awhile back that things will not be allowed to even approach that level of dischord.

And yes, PM is encouraged at any time things need to be discussed more indepth than an open board may allow - and no, the PM's are not monitored or moderated.  The only exception to that is if it is brought to our attention (with proof) that someone is being abusive, etc.

Admittedly I have only mostly scanned the posts today, but i haven't seen any of the mods bring up the "trinity doctrine"...

 

[Theo Book]

With love in my heart I say to you all - Quit apologizing. I am not offended. I just want to know what you mean by your remarks. It is quite possible you hit the nail right on the head. My question is so I can determine when I step out of line, not to point out that YOU are stepping out of line. THAT I can deal with with patience and love.

(LegoMan)

If man, through his free will, can reject God forever, what does this say about God's will?  What does this say about God's control?  It is saying that man's will is superior to God's will.  Man frustrates God forever at his own expense.  (How could this even make sense?!?  Man prefers eternal torment & suffering just to prove a point?!?  Assuming man's will is stronger than God's?!?)  So if this is true, under this belief system how much control does God have?  Not a whole heck of a lot.  Essentially Jesus died for the sins of all mankind, so that all would be saved, but in effect NONE are saved.  The only thing that saves a man is his own free will decision.  Under this belief system, ALL control is removed from God with respect to a man's salvation.  God wants all to be saved, but none are saved unless the man says so.

Allow an illustration. God/Man - Father/Son - YOU/YOUR SON
YOU to Son: "Where would you like to go today to celebrate your birthday?"
Son: "To Uncle Henry's for cake and ice Cream and lots of friends to share with."

YOU: "What flavour Ice Cream, what kind of cake?"
Son: "Chocolate."

YOU: "Cake?" or "Ice Cream?"
Son: "Both."

YOU: "Too much Chocolate." Choose another flavor for one of them."
Son: "Aw, Dad, You know how I love Chocolate. Just for today for my birthday?" "Please!"

YOU: "Well.l.l.l.l.l..."
Son: "Thanks Dad." "I'll go get the invitations ready to send out."

This was no contest of control. It was a simple plea for special consideration. In the above illustration, what is YOUR will? less chocolate, for healthy considerations.
Whose will is major? Whose minor? Yours controls. Yet son has his way. What happened? Did Son over rule YOU? No. He has not the authority. He pleaded his case for special consideration. He wopn you over for a particular situation. What was the issue as far as YOUR will goes, in the illustration?  Was it to maintain healthy standards for children at a party? Or was it to please your son on his birthday. Both. without the special plea from your son, you would have had your way with health issue AND maintained happy result with son.

That is similar, in my opinion, with some things God has designed for us to do, and then we pray earnestly for some modification, which he grants just because he wants to make us happy.

Other times, he wants specific results and guides our walk with every kind of issue. We stubbornly try to persuade with prayer, pouting, sullen behaviour, until finally we resort to outright rebellion. Then when we do what we want to knowing it is NOT God's will, or worse, when we know it is CONTRARY TO God's will (not the same thing) God allows us to continue to the point we fall into the consequences of our choices of action.

THAT is how God treated Israel in the wilderness for forty years, after leaving Egypt. He said "I tested you to see if you would obey or not." [Deu 8:2]

(logoman)

Surely you see that Romans 8:20 says it is God who subjected the creation (which includes all humans) to frustration, correct?  This was done without asking for our permission.  And it is God who will liberate the creation (which again includes all humans) from its bondage to decay (sin and death)?  Right?  Again God doesn't need to ask our permission. 

This is the glorious hope.  This is man's hope - specifically it is Paul saying "in hope".  This is where our faith in God comes in, that we have faith and hope that God will actually do what He says: liberate the creation!  It is teaching us faith.

Again a familiar illustration, a man and his son. When your son begins to learn to talk, walk, reach, and investigate the wonders of the world around him, you determine certain parameters of behaviour based on safety, character building and love. But, YOU DON'T AKS WHAT HE THINKS ABOUT IT. HE HAS NO INPUT.  So also God does not need to ask us what is good for us. We know only what we want. He knows what we need.

(Theo)

What then is the reason for baptism into Christ? I do not ask what is its purpose, but what is the reasoning behind it? For surely you do not believe all men will be baptized into Christ.

(LegoMan)
All men will be baptized with fire.  There is only one baptism.  Baptism by fire.  The water baptism we go through is a type or physical symbol of the spiritual baptism we must ALL go through.

Baptism by fire.  Trials by fire.  Purified by fire.  The LAKE of fire.  God's consuming fire.  Its all one.  Others here may have different views on this, but that is how I see it.

Hmmm???

I have never heard of the baptism of fire being the only one baptism. I will certainly give THAT some serious thought.

(Legoman)

All will eventually be in Christ, and ultimately in God, when God is ALL in ALL (1 Cor 15:22-28).

THAT is precisely the purpose of living your life so that it is no longer YOU that lives, but CHRIST lives IN YOU. [Gal 2:20][II Cor 13:5][Col 1:25-27]

(legoman)

I think it is up to the moderators discretion.  I think some minimal discussion of free will may be allowed, but if it turns into "doctrine bashing" or a "food fight" then it will be blocked.  But we can discuss concepts without mentioning "free will" specifically.

I would say respond away, and let the mods sort it out.  Mods, please let me know if I am out of line.

But the moment this turns into a bashfest, you can expect the mods to step in.  If we keep it respectful, we can continue to discuss.  As far as I know the only reason "free will" is not allowed is because discussions can tend to degenerate into flame wars.

Also, you can always PM me directly if you want to discuss free will in depth.  Mods don't moderate there I believe.

I don't. The only time I need to discuss free will is in the middle of other themes.
like USalv.

(Theo)

As for "cracks" in my "twenty-five questions" allow me to hasten to point out it was really one question twenty five times; "If [a] then consequence . I only changed the defininition of the consequences to show the widespread application of the question. The whole point is, if God's will cannot be thwarted, then he is totally responsible for every wrong thing ever done, BECAUSE only his will can be done; and I do not accept nor believe that.

I am trying to understand USAL and its possibilities without accusing God. So far, all I see is accusations against God.


(logoman)I don't see what you mean by accusing God?!?  No one is doing that.  What we may do is question a view or idea about God.  But yes, God is responsible for everything in the end.  He is the only one who can be.

I guess that is a matter of perspective. Have you really looked at the doctrine page that deals with God not warning Israel about eternal punishment? It is full of accusations agaisnt God if in fact hell is true and he did not warn them. THAT was the issue I was riled about.

(legoman)

I hope to go through your 25 questions OP in detail later.  I actually think it is not "one question" but "two questions".  Hopefully you will see what I mean when I explain later.

o.k.

[CHB]

Hi Theo,

I don't think you can compare an earthly father/son relationship with heavenly Father/earthly son relationship. Jesus said that the Father loves us much more than we could ever love our children and he won't let us do anything that would keep us from salvation.

You described how the son minuplated the weak Father to get what he wanted even though the Father knew too much chocolate could make the son sick or knew it wasn't good for him. I don't think God is like that.

If the crucifixion of Jesus was planned before we were ever created, then God had a plan that included us all and he will see to it that not one little thing is done to thwart that plan. What is that plan? (1John 4:14) "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world".  (1Cor. 15:22) For as in Adam all die,even so in Christ shall ALL BE MADE ALIVE.
CHB

 

[WhiteWings]

"salt water Taffy turns my stomache"

Theo hopefully you didn't harden this heart 

[Paul Hazelwood]

I do not understand such a standard. OF COURSE you can defend "universal salvation"
 if you eliminate "free will" from the discussion.

Of Course you can defend a trinity if you eliminate "trinitariansim" from the discussion.

I would not argue with that point at all, I bring up free will personally and I play it like I play sports and let the referee call it.   ;)   

What I usually say is that the issue of free will as a "term" is irrelevant.  I will discuss the implication of scripture and what it says about our will and Gods.

Free will is largely misrepresented from either side because many people think specific arguments are what will hinge a doctrine as true or not. 

It hard to wrap our minds around the knowledge of God in the first place, let alone the idea that we can make choices out of our own will based upon the information we have gathered as an individual up to that poinT AND not ever being able to be lost forever.

We are free in this country, yet, we are not free getting caught or suffering the consequenses of our actions.

If you get framed and are in prison, your free will in that sense is irrelevant and moot, completely meaningless.   You do however have the freedom to make the best of the situation.

You may have the free will to start using drugs and continue to make your life a mess, but that does not mean at some point and time when your path has taken you to the darkest regions of destruction that you will not one day see and recognize and accept Gods extended hand and see that it was there all along.  God knows what you need to learn and the fact that people act in destructive ways and some do not only means that we each have different things to learn in order to be saved and obtain the knowledge of truth.   

That is the true nature of our will.

[legoman]

With love in my heart I say to you all - Quit apologizing. I am not offended. I just want to know what you mean by your remarks. It is quite possible you hit the nail right on the head. My question is so I can determine when I step out of line, not to point out that YOU are stepping out of line. THAT I can deal with with patience and love.

LOL ok.   

(LegoMan)

If man, through his free will, can reject God forever, what does this say about God's will?  What does this say about God's control?  It is saying that man's will is superior to God's will.  Man frustrates God forever at his own expense.  (How could this even make sense?!?  Man prefers eternal torment & suffering just to prove a point?!?  Assuming man's will is stronger than God's?!?)  So if this is true, under this belief system how much control does God have?  Not a whole heck of a lot.  Essentially Jesus died for the sins of all mankind, so that all would be saved, but in effect NONE are saved.  The only thing that saves a man is his own free will decision.  Under this belief system, ALL control is removed from God with respect to a man's salvation.  God wants all to be saved, but none are saved unless the man says so.

Allow an illustration. God/Man - Father/Son - YOU/YOUR SON
YOU to Son: "Where would you like to go today to celebrate your birthday?"
Son: "To Uncle Henry's for cake and ice Cream and lots of friends to share with."

YOU: "What flavour Ice Cream, what kind of cake?"
Son: "Chocolate."

YOU: "Cake?" or "Ice Cream?"
Son: "Both."

YOU: "Too much Chocolate." Choose another flavor for one of them."
Son: "Aw, Dad, You know how I love Chocolate. Just for today for my birthday?" "Please!"

YOU: "Well.l.l.l.l.l..."
Son: "Thanks Dad." "I'll go get the invitations ready to send out."

This was no contest of control. It was a simple plea for special consideration. In the above illustration, what is YOUR will? less chocolate, for healthy considerations.
Whose will is major? Whose minor? Yours controls. Yet son has his way. What happened? Did Son over rule YOU? No. He has not the authority. He pleaded his case for special consideration. He wopn you over for a particular situation. What was the issue as far as YOUR will goes, in the illustration?  Was it to maintain healthy standards for children at a party? Or was it to please your son on his birthday. Both. without the special plea from your son, you would have had your way with health issue AND maintained happy result with son.

That is similar, in my opinion, with some things God has designed for us to do, and then we pray earnestly for some modification, which he grants just because he wants to make us happy.

Other times, he wants specific results and guides our walk with every kind of issue. We stubbornly try to persuade with prayer, pouting, sullen behaviour, until finally we resort to outright rebellion. Then when we do what we want to knowing it is NOT God's will, or worse, when we know it is CONTRARY TO God's will (not the same thing) God allows us to continue to the point we fall into the consequences of our choices of action.

THAT is how God treated Israel in the wilderness for forty years, after leaving Egypt. He said "I tested you to see if you would obey or not." [Deu 8:2]

Like CHB said, its hard to compare God who is unlimted to an earthly Father who is limited in what he can know and do.  Consider this:  what if the Father intended all along for the kid to eat too much chocolate ice cream, so the kid would learn the consequences of indulging too much?

Unlike the parent in your example, God knows exactly what the child will do in the given situation.  God created the child including the instincts and decision-making brain of the child, so God knows exactly what the child will do.

I don't believe we can pray for anything that will "modify" God's plans.  I do believe we should pray according to God's will, and if it is God's will it will be granted.  I don't think God does things "just to make us happy".  Yes He does have our well-being in mind, yet He already knows how it is all going to turn out - He has planned it that way.  We don't modify God's plans.  God modifies our plans!  JMHO but this is what I see in scripture.

(Theo)

What then is the reason for baptism into Christ? I do not ask what is its purpose, but what is the reasoning behind it? For surely you do not believe all men will be baptized into Christ.

(LegoMan)
All men will be baptized with fire.  There is only one baptism.  Baptism by fire.  The water baptism we go through is a type or physical symbol of the spiritual baptism we must ALL go through.

Baptism by fire.  Trials by fire.  Purified by fire.  The LAKE of fire.  God's consuming fire.  Its all one.  Others here may have different views on this, but that is how I see it.

Hmmm???

I have never heard of the baptism of fire being the only one baptism. I will certainly give THAT some serious thought.

This is what scripture says:
Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called—
5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

Not two baptisms (water and fire), but just one (fire).  First the physical, then the spiritual.  The water baptism is a shadow of the fire baptism to come.

[WhiteWings]

That is similar, in my opinion, with some things God has designed for us to do, and then we pray earnestly for some modification, which he grants just because he wants to make us happy.

I see it a bit like selling something. Set your price and add 20%. The buyer starts bargaining and get 20% off. The buyer happy with his 'discount' and the seller cashes the indended 100%

Pehaps God sometimes also works that way. The difference is that God after bargaining always exactly gets the 100%
Just a thought... :-)