Author Topic: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS  (Read 64170 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pierac

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1377
  • Gender: Male
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #175 on: March 22, 2010, 07:29:31 AM »
Quote from: Theo Book
With respect WH, I cannot respond at this time because your post deals with some issues that are banned, and without Moderator's approval, I will not deal with it. Specifically, your remark about Abraham in John 8 and "beginnings." It all has to do with trinitarianism doctrine developed in John 1:1.

perhaps later.

Please proceed,

Thank you for being considerate! This site is devoted to the discussion of U.R.  The trinity topic is off limits because it distracts from the U.R. focus. Basically it's a hot topic that upsets some! Just try to keep your post from seeming to convert others from one view or another and you will be fine.

Paul

Theo Book

  • Guest
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #176 on: March 22, 2010, 03:21:11 PM »
Hi rosie.  Not exactly sure what you're responding to my dear friend.  What I was specifically addressing is if we were to start getting into the specific "freewill/sovereignty" debate - and that was based on lego's request of Theo to state what she believes, then Theo saying it wasn't allowed on the boads and she wanted a "moderator's OK on it".  As a mod, I was just sensing the possibilities of where things could head and using an ounce of prevention ("worth a pound of cure"  :bigGrin:).  
  
As do you, I also believe discussion is good, and that's what the boards are for.  I don't want to derail the thread with technicalities, but I personally don't believe that general arguing is beneficial - or at least I believe it should have its limits - "let everything be done decently and in order" I Cor. 14:40 and  Titus 3:2  "to malign no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing every consideration for all men. 9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and strife and disputes about the Law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. 10 Reject a factious [divisive] man after a first and second warning, 11 knowing that such a man is perverted and is sinning, being self-condemned."  IMO, that is part of "the Lord doing His thing" - as you said, He's let us know.   :bigGrin:     Personal Note - Regarding "live peaceably with all men as much as is possible" - you're one of the best  :first:.

So no, let's not cut off the discussion, that's not what I was suggesting.  In fact, I was requesting Theo clarify her position as requested by legoman.  :friendstu:

Discuss away!

One thought for clarification before I post Jabcat. If I post my own understanding of what scripture teaches should I post it in this thread? Or would that be interpreted as an interruption, or worse, a usurpation? Or, should I begin a new thread with an identifying title so it can be deleted if warranted? My ego can go eithher way as it is buried in Christ.

If I post in this thread, it would be in response to response number 152 on page 7 of the thread, and will include issues related to "the beginning" and "trinity doctrine from John 1:1."

Please advise.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2010, 03:38:47 PM by Theo Book »

Offline legoman

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 907
  • Gender: Male
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #177 on: March 22, 2010, 04:19:05 PM »
Theo, you have been given very many fine answers here already, but you seem to be stuck in your own doctrine.  As willieH said previously, you won't be converting anyone here, and if that is your reason for being here, it truly is one of futility, and will only lead to strife.  So far all the arguments you raise against UR have been examined by me already (and I would guess by all other residents of tentmaker as well), when they were searching for the truth and finally found God's truth of UR.

I hope you can look at the answers I give here, and be open to learning, and be open to the ideas that you have been taught from the mainstream ET belief may be incorrect.  I believed much the same way you do for MANY years.

Quote
When we take clay and make pots, we do not design in the pots evil uses. When we sell the pots, some men will purchase them and put them to evil use. That eventuallity was not designed into the pots.

God made all the vessels of which he references as "vessels of honour, vessels of dishonour" but he did not put in any of them the propensity for sin. Only the free will ability. And he also included in his creation, the solutions for sin, IN CASE they are needed. THAT was predicated upon the proposition that some men would probably sin, not because God created them TO sin.


Let me address the end of your post here first, as it shows the root of your error.  First of all you suggest God makes pots, and then some evil men use the "pots" for evil uses, uses they were not intended for.  But Theo, WE are the POTS, and God is using US for His purposes, some which are for honor and some for dishonor.  God designed it all.

Secondly, you say "God did not put in the propensity for sin, only the free will ability"... Come now Theo, if, according to you, we sin because we have free will, then God DID PUT IN the propensity for sin, by the very act of granting us the so-called free will!

Thirdly, and here is the real problem, you say God designed a solution for sin "IN CASE" it was needed!?!?!  This was done because some men would "probably" sin!?!?!?!? 

"IN CASE"?  "PROBABLY"?

Now I must ask if you are being serious?  Are you saying that God did something just "in case"?  Because something "probably" might happen?!?  If you are saying that (and it sounds like you are because that is what you wrote), then you are also admitting that you think God is NOT all-knowing and DOES NOT have perfect foreknowledge.

You are saying God didn't know if we would sin or not so He had Jesus ready just "in case" because He thought we would "probably" sin.  Essentially God had a "backup plan", a plan B, and His original plan was not perfect and actually went astray.  In effect, you are saying God is not really responsible for anything, because HE DIDN'T KNOW IT WOULD HAPPEN!  This is absurd & ridiculous.

Isaiah 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

God has already declared everything that will happen - the end from the beginning, including the things that are not yet done.  He not only knows the future, He declares what it will be.  God's counsel shall be done and He will do his pleasure, which includes His desire and will to save all men (1 Tim 2:4).


If you continue to believe this nonsense that God didn't know if we would sin or not, then you will not be able to understand and appreciate the truth of UR, nor will you understand God's power in the matter at hand.

Please I hope you really consider your belief here, and how it makes God appear, and how it contrasts with what scripture actually says, being that God IS all-knowing, and IS in control, and WORKS all things according to HIS will. 

God has no need for a plan B my friend.

I will continue more in the next post as this is getting too long...


Offline legoman

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 907
  • Gender: Male
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #178 on: March 22, 2010, 04:26:49 PM »
(Theo)
Quote
I have prepared a sort of questionaire to Universalists - Answer me please;

... questions 1-6 ...

(legoman) Yes these were all God's will.

Are you serious? Perhaps you read a different translation than I. You really think it was God's will that men sin? Please show me THAT scripture.

If it was not God's will that men sin, then man's will is more powerful than God's.

You ask for the scripture, it has already been given to you, but here they are again:

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 creature (creation) was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,


What is sin but disobedience of God's commands?  Yet God binds all men to disobedience. Pride (vanity) is sin.  Yet God has subjected all creation (men) to vanity.

Now if sin is simply a product of "free will", why is it that no man in all of history (except one - Christ), has ever used their free will to NOT SIN?  Why are all men sinners?  No one can choose to NOT be a sinner.  If it was not, as you say, God's intention that we sin, and ALSO no one can choose to NOT be a sinner, then who is responsible for us being sinners?  Adam?  Satan?  Are Adam & Satan's will more powerful than God's will?

Quote
You have now contradicted what you said earlier; "Yes, these were all God's will." Now you say "God does not will something to happen that will frustrate his will." Which is it?

There is no contradiction here.  Read what I'm saying carefully.  God does not will something that frustrates his own will.  If He did, that would be contradictory in itself.  We are disobedient (remember disobedience is sin) BECAUSE GOD WILLED IT TO BE SO, and bound us over to disobedience.

For right now, that is God's will for the human race.  He has subjected the whole creation to VANITY, and bound us to DISOBEDIENCE.  God's will is not being frustrated at all because that is what He wants RIGHT NOW.  Later on God will DELIVER the creation from this BONDAGE and have MERCY on us all.  That is God's will for the creation which will happen to completion sometime in the future, and that will not be frustrated either.

God's will is NOT frustrated.


Quote

Not sure! Brain freeze! I think you got it backwards. We are ALREADY made in the image of God. Adam was made sinless. If your assessment is correct GOD got it backwards. I do not believe that for one moment.
No my friend, you and most of church tradition have it backwards.  We are not fully made in the image of God yet.  If you look at Gen 1:27 in the original languages, you will see the tense is "is being created" as opposed to "was created" as in:

Man is being created in the image of God.  RIGHT NOW. And in the future... until God has completed making man in His image.

But according to you and mainstream tradition, man who was in the perfect exact final image of God, SINNED!  How ridiculous is that?  Think about it.  If  man is in the perfect express image of God, how can man sin since God does not sin?

Quote
You show a God who not only creates man TO sin, but even as he creates them TO sin, he tells them to NOT sin. THAT is insanity. God is not insane.

No, believing God doesn't know that man would sin or not is insane.  Believing God purposes or allows people to be tormented for ever is insane.  You are right that God is not insane though.

Scripture shows that God binds all men to disobedience and subjects us to vanity.  God then explains what sin is through His commandments and laws, and shows us how sin is overcome through Jesus and through the commandments of Love.  Of course we fail to live up to these laws, GOD KNEW and INTENDED THIS WOULD HAPPEN. We thus experience the utter depths and futility of failure, sin, and evil.  This is IMPORTANT for our spiritual growth and understanding.  This allows us to learn what NON-LOVE is, so we can eventually fully appreciate and understand what LOVE is.  Ultimately we WILL (future tense) be made into the exact express image of God, which is LOVE.

Quote
How can you conclude that for God to give men free will is a mistake? God has free will and we are made in his image. I begin to comprehend how it is Universal Salvation becomes a welcome doctrine among men. It eliminates the guilt of sin by putting the blame all on God for making us sinners to begin with.

I didn't say that.  I said if God intended and purposed us NOT to sin, yet here we are sinning, then God made a mistake - a miscalculation, a mis-step; He had to change his plan IN CASE we sinned as YOU suggest.  Now since YOU do believe God did NOT intend us to sin, and you stated He needed a backup plan IN CASE we sinned, you yourself have then admitted that God did indeed make the mistake, because his original plan was FOILED by the very "free will" man was given.
 
Quote
(legoman)
Quote
To do that we have to experience evil.  From the CLV:

Eccl 1:13 It is an experience of evil Elohim [God] has given to the sons of humanity to humble them by it

God is giving us an experience of evil.  Think about the ramifications of that.

Actually, the quote says -  12 I the Preacher was king over Israel in Jerusalem. 13 And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven: this sore travail hath God given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith. 14 I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit.

"This sore travail" is a reference to his "seeking and searching out by wisdom all things that are done under heaven." "Seeking and searching" are not sin.

"This sore travail" is actually translated from the hebrew word "Ra" which means "EVIL", the same word in the "tree of knowledge of good and evil (Ra)".

The version I quoted was the Concordant Literal Version, which translates word for word:
Eccl 1:13 "It is an experience of evil  Elohim [God] has given to the sons of humanity to humble them by it" (Concorant Old Testament).


God created evil (Isaiah 45:7) so that we would experience it (Eccl 1:13) so that we would be HUMBLED and LEARN.

Quote
(theo)
Quote
(Theo)
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?


(legoman) "why do you correct me" you say.  Why not?  Because God has given me a heart to search out the truth and preach the gospel, that's why!  Remember God's will does not frustrate His own will.  God sets us up in disobedience, puts us through suffering, so He can have mercy on us later, show His glory, and perfect us as sons.

Nope! If all those things in which men sinned was God's will, and I teach truth about it, how then is it I am to be corrected? Am I not already correct, by your understanding of what constitutes God's will? You could NOT correct me, for it was already God's will for me to say those things, and you cannot thwart God's will, according to your comprehension of how things are.

Then perhaps God's will for you RIGHT NOW is to oppose the teachings of UR on this tentmaker website, while God's will for me is to defend the teachings of UR here on this same website.  This cannot and will not change until God changes one of our hearts and opens our eyes.  In effect God's will is for us to FRUSTRATE each other!  Yet God's will is not frustrated in this, because that is what He intended!

Perhaps we should pray that God will bring our two wills into agreement?  God - who is the savior of all men, and who will have all men to be saved - how should He finally resolve our apparent conflict, which He has intended to happen, so that we would both LEARN?  God will eventually bring us all to our knees, and we will all bow in agreement JOYFULLY PRAISING that He is Lord and Savior of all!  Scripture declares it.

Quote
Again, you missed the condition in which Adam was placed in the garden. He was not created in sin, a sinner. He was created innocent UNTIL he sinned. THAT constituted the first "change of heart" resulting in rebellion against God. YOU HAVE EVERYTHING BACKWARDS.

Adam was a SINNER from the beginning, just like the rest of us.  Adam did not have a choice to NOT be a sinner, for He was always intended to eat of the forbidden fruit.  God was not rolling dice and waiting to see if Adam was a sinner or not, while holding Jesus in reserve "IN CASE" Adam "probably" would sin!

God KNEW how it would all go down, God INTENDED it, because God had already prepared the lamb of God BEFORE any human was ever created.  God has bound all men to disobedience (this includes Adam).  And He will have mercy on all men.

Offline CHB

  • Silver
  • *
  • Posts: 2072
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #179 on: March 22, 2010, 05:55:30 PM »
WOW!!! legoman, that was two great post, thank you for them.  :thumbsup: :happy3:

CHB

Theo Book

  • Guest
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #180 on: March 22, 2010, 07:05:42 PM »
willieH: Hi TB...  :cloud9:

PART TWO

Moving on...

(tb)
Quote
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

(WH) 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!  

THIS is ridiculous:

Paul was accused of saying we must do evil so good can result, and he called it "slander;"

Rom 3:8 "And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come..." You have now slandered God.

FIRST -- In what way have I "slandered" God? By noting that HE created EVIL?  :scratchhead:  The WORD so says... no "slander" in quoting its PLAINLY stated WORDS.

SECOND -- You continue to FOOL yourself with your doctrine bro... GOD has the KNOWLEDGE of GOOD and EVIL... it is NOT SLANDEROUS to note His own CREATION of it -- Isaiah 45:7 -- and it is a characteristic of the DIVINE as noted in Gen 2:22

If the KNOWLEDGE was NOT to be learned, ...then it would NOT have been placed in proximity to MAN, nor MAN in proximity to it... nor would GOD have announced that PROXIMITY.

GOD remains responsible for the fact that MAN has come to KNOW "good and evil"... for HE enabled its access, and informed man OF IT, and INTENDED that he KNOW it.

You are welcome to FOOL yourself all you like.  [Mod Edit]
(WH)
Quote from: willieH
How could something which is INHERENT within the Heart of GOD (knowledge of G & E), be OTHER than DIVINE, TB? :dunno:

I guess probably the same way any other God can deal proudly, because of what is in his heart. Exodus 18:11 "Now I know that the Lord is greater than all Gods: for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them."

There you go, "guessing" again Theo...  :grin:  [Mod Edit]

(tb)
Quote from: 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.

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

Thought you said you answered all my questions?

Theo... the use of the word FOREVER is invalid... and your refusal to observe this, is the beginning of, and the foundational downfall of your teachings...

I did answer this... you just do not accept the answer I gave you.  :dontknow:

(WH)
Quote from: willieH
(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.

Why. Because you declared it so? WHATEVER meaning is to be applied to aiwnion salvation, is also to be applied to aiwnion punishment. "And these shall go away into aiwnion [everlasting] punishment: but the righteous into life aiwnion [eternal]." [Mat 25:46]

FIRST --- I have already offered you to EXPLAIN with COMPREHENSION, why and how ANYTHING -- HAS NO BEGINNING... I must have missed your EXPLANATION.  :dontknow:  Could you REPEAT it for me?

[Mod edit]  Not to mention UNNACCEPTABLE.

SECOND --- If something is FOR EVER... then it has ALWAYS BEEN / IS / ALWAYS WILL BE... so the "punishment" you proclaim with the word "aionion"... means that whatever you attach to it (man)... that this man has NEVER been, IS and never WILL BE, in ANY other scenario other than being PUNISHED.  How ridiculous is this?  :wacko2:

SALVATION is NOT necessary to be an ETERNAL thing... it is a VEHICLE in which we RETURN to where and when WE EMERGED -- ETERNITY...  We shall not stay in the "vehicle" of SALVATION... we shall RETURN with JOY to JOY, realizing by the experience we have had in this life, how GREAT, the JOY of YHVH really ...IS...

[Mod Edit]

(WH)
Quote from: willieH
(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

Finally I begin to comprehend where you are getting this stuff from.

Luke 15:11 plainly says "And he said, A certain ANTHRWPOS [man] had two sons:
Hosea 11:9 "... I am God, and not ANTHRWPOS [man]..."

Actually, ANTHROPOS means "MALE COUNTENANCE" and is derived from a word which means GAZE...  

This is a Greek term, ...Hosea 11:9 was not written in GREEK.  And does not use the word ANTHROPOS...  :dontknow:

No one is arguing that GOD is not a MAN...  Hey!  -- He's GOD!  :boyheart:

Well Theo... I really hate to be the one to tell you, ...but Luke 15:11 is a PARABLE...  :laughing7:

GOD is not a MAN, but the PARABLES place the picture of GOD in them via the image of the FATHER which had TWO SONS.    

Who do YOU THINK the PARABLE of the LOST Son is portraying by the use of the words "CERTAIN MAN" [anthropos] and Father, Theo?  The POPE? And please BE HONEST...

Do you really envision this story being about other than GOD and His Sons? :omg:  If you DO... then there isn't much sense in further discussing with you... :mnah:

[Mod Edit]

[Mod Edit]

I think I will take a break, this nonsense is starting to get to me and I do not want to be unkind.

And your use of the word "NONSENSE" is really intended by you to be a "kind" word, ...is it?   :laugh:

[Mod Edit]

...willieH  :HeartThrob:[/quote]

I will now post the response your two-part thesis deserves.

(..)
« Last Edit: March 23, 2010, 12:37:26 AM by jabcat »

Offline willieH

  • Read Only
  • *
  • Posts: 2260
  • Gender: Male
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #181 on: March 22, 2010, 08:23:17 PM »
WOW!!! legoman, that was two great post, thank you for them.  :thumbsup: :happy3:

CHB

Amen Charlotte... those were GREAT POSTS!  :goodpost:

...willieH  :HeartThrob:

bobf

  • Guest
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #182 on: March 22, 2010, 09:26:10 PM »
There are even examples where olam (and aionious in the LXX) are applied to the consequences of sin that are temporary according to the immediate context.
Bob, would you mind giving me a reference for this?

Sure Theo... here are some examples...

Isaiah 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;  2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn; 3   To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified. 4 And they shall build the old wastes, they shall raise up the former desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many generations.

old = olam, aionion

My interpretation:  Why are people in mourning, ashes, brokenhearted, captive, bound, spirit of heaviness?  Because of disobedience to God which brings desolation and "everlasting" wastes in the day of God's vengeance.  But Jesus came to save people out from these aionion wastes in the "acceptable year of the Lord" i.e. the day of salvation.

Isaiah 58:12 has similar language.  Christ and those "of Him" i.e His seed will repair the everlasting wastes.  This IMO ties in with Daniel 12:2-3 "And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever."

Isaiah 58:11 And the LORD shall guide thee continually, and satisfy thy soul in drought, and make fat thy bones: and thou shalt be like a watered garden, and like a spring of water, whose waters fail not. 12 And they that shall be of thee shall build the old waste places: thou shalt raise up the foundations of many generations; and thou shalt be called, The repairer of the breach, The restorer of paths to dwell in.

old = olam, aionion

One more example

Isaiah 32:12  They shall lament for the teats, for the pleasant fields, for the fruitful vine. 13 Upon the land of my people shall come up thorns [and] briers; yea, upon all the houses of joy in the joyous city: 14 Because the palaces shall be forsaken; the multitude of the city shall be left; the forts and towers shall be for dens for ever, a joy of wild asses, a pasture of flocks; 15 Until the spirit be poured upon us from on high, and the wilderness be a fruitful field, and the fruitful field be counted for a forest.

for ever = olam, unto the aion

BTW... it was not the usual UR proof texts that led me to believe God would save all mankind.  It was studying the judgments and wrath of God passages and seeing purpose in God's wrath that did it for me.  Things like
- Deuteronomy 4 - even in the "last day" a person can repent and God will have mercy.  Of those condemned Jesus said, in the last day my word will judge him.
- Deuteronomy 28-31 - even when all the curse of the law is upon a person he can still repent and God will have mercy
- Daniel 4 - seems to tie in with Christ parables about cutting down the tree and casting into the fire
- Ezekiel 16 - Sodom and those worse than Sodom were/will be judged and yet saved
- Psalm 107 - the redeemed of the Lord first condemned the Word of God yet are ultimately saved
- Deuteronomy 32 - God's wrath/judgment/vengeance upon the vine of Sodom and Gommorah includes God repenting and having compassion when their power is gone i.e. when they are humbled and return to God)
- Comparing Isaiah 60 vs Revelation 21 - the gates remain open always (mercy neve ends) for those who turn to the Lord
- Lamentations 3 - person sitting under God's wrath for sin will be saved.  The Lord will not cast off forever the children of men for sin.  The exact opposite of ET and ED doctrines which say that the Lord will cast off the children of men forever for their sin.

God bless.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2010, 09:29:53 PM by bobf »

Offline jabcat

  • Admin
  • *
  • Posts: 8952
  • SINNER SAVED BY GRACE
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #183 on: March 22, 2010, 09:58:48 PM »
Hi rosie.  Not exactly sure what you're responding to my dear friend.  What I was specifically addressing is if we were to start getting into the specific "freewill/sovereignty" debate - and that was based on lego's request of Theo to state what she believes, then Theo saying it wasn't allowed on the boads and she wanted a "moderator's OK on it".  As a mod, I was just sensing the possibilities of where things could head and using an ounce of prevention ("worth a pound of cure"  :bigGrin:).  
  
As do you, I also believe discussion is good, and that's what the boards are for.  I don't want to derail the thread with technicalities, but I personally don't believe that general arguing is beneficial - or at least I believe it should have its limits - "let everything be done decently and in order" I Cor. 14:40 and  Titus 3:2  "to malign no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing every consideration for all men. 9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and strife and disputes about the Law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. 10 Reject a factious [divisive] man after a first and second warning, 11 knowing that such a man is perverted and is sinning, being self-condemned."  IMO, that is part of "the Lord doing His thing" - as you said, He's let us know.   :bigGrin:     Personal Note - Regarding "live peaceably with all men as much as is possible" - you're one of the best  :first:.

So no, let's not cut off the discussion, that's not what I was suggesting.  In fact, I was requesting Theo clarify her position as requested by legoman.  :friendstu:

Discuss away!

One thought for clarification before I post Jabcat. If I post my own understanding of what scripture teaches should I post it in this thread? Or would that be interpreted as an interruption, or worse, a usurpation? Or, should I begin a new thread with an identifying title so it can be deleted if warranted? My ego can go eithher way as it is buried in Christ.

If I post in this thread, it would be in response to response number 152 on page 7 of the thread, and will include issues related to "the beginning" and "trinity doctrine from John 1:1."

Please advise.

Hi Theo, thanks for checking.  I personally think either way is OK, but since you've mentioned it, a new thread might be good.  That way we can keep it separate, and here's what I'm really thinking.  It would give you a chance to state what you believe clearly and succinctly, let a few people respond and you reply a time or two to them, then before (IF) it appears to be headed too deeply into disallowed debates on the boards, it will be easier to moderate there, rather than having to lock a thread in which so many are already deeply involved in a more "general" discussion such as this current thread.  It's a good idea, I like it, thanks again for checking.

**Also, plz get everything you think could be "problematic" regarding forum guidelines said in detail, as again, it may have a short shelf life  :laughing7: before we need to get back "on track".  Believe me, there are good reasons why certain topics are not allowed in depth - there's been a long, intense history of certain topics not being handled well by individuals - too many arguments, hurt feelings, complaints, strife, dischord, division, etc.  *I personally have some beliefs on some of these topics that I don't discuss openly myself, due to the guidelines.  It's just the way it is, and will continue to be in the foreseeable future.  

** Plz copy and paste this into your new thread;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOD NOTE - Theo's new thread is being started by special permission, and could be time-limited due to the potential direction it may take (based upon forum guidelines).  It will be monitored closely, and an opportunity will be given for several statements and rebuttals, etc., but then possibly locked after a short period of time so as to keep within forum expectations - dependent of course, upon content and direction of discussion.  Thanks, the mod board.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
« Last Edit: March 22, 2010, 10:10:40 PM by jabcat »
Neither should there be vulgar speech, foolish talk, or coarse jesting--all of which are out of character--but rather thanksgiving.  Eph. 5:4  **  Saved 1John 3.2, Eph. 2:8, John 1:12 - Being saved 2Cor. 4:16 2Peter 3:18 - Will be saved 1Peter 1:5 Romans 8:23

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 12890
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #184 on: March 22, 2010, 10:01:53 PM »
If the arguments posted all over the website about "aiwnion" NOT meaning eternal, but "age" are any indication of what this site is about, then I am correct, not simply "overloaded" and "already thinking you are wrong" as you indicate.

In Mat 25:46 "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal," both "everlasting" and "eternal" are the same form of the same word, "aiwnion" and therfore cannot be used to mean two radically different and opposing timeframes.
Theo you wrote you spend 50 years studying Trinty. You also have a forum that is focusing on Trintity. Why study so long on a subject that can be explained in 10 verses?
It's a bit the same with aion. The word is simple. But when you start applying it may seem to contradict. Or state Father is not eternal. And to clear up those questions much more verses/study is needed. I assume that's not unlike a solid Trinity study.

Let me give you a thought to consider....

wwMat 25:46 "And these shall goto jail for 100 years: but the righteous shall party for a 100 years,"

Nope that verse is not from a special UR Bible  :laughing7: Just me changing some words to clarify.
What does that verse tells us?
1. The wicked will spend 100 years in jail.
2. The rightous will have 100 years of parting.

What does it not say?
1. What happens after those 100 years to both groups.
2. Many, many, many other things.

That's just one thought.
There are many post on the subject. But a new thread on teh subject recently got started here
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Offline Beloved Servant

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 4290
  • David's sling
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #185 on: March 22, 2010, 10:18:07 PM »
If he has his own forum why bring it here?
And then give him his own thread in which to clang his cymbals?

Offline willieH

  • Read Only
  • *
  • Posts: 2260
  • Gender: Male
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #186 on: March 22, 2010, 11:24:49 PM »
If he has his own forum why bring it here?
And then give him his own thread in which to clang his cymbals?

Amen bro...  :thumbsup:

...willieH  :HeartThrob:

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #187 on: March 23, 2010, 12:08:42 AM »


We may disagree with a lot of what Theo might be saying, but I do not see it any more of a clang than the threads  us regular members can come up with and battle back and forth about.   




Offline Beloved Servant

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 4290
  • David's sling
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #188 on: March 23, 2010, 12:20:17 AM »
We all, then, should happily have our own threads whose topics are ourselves.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2010, 12:24:35 AM by Beloved Servant »

Offline jabcat

  • Admin
  • *
  • Posts: 8952
  • SINNER SAVED BY GRACE
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #189 on: March 23, 2010, 12:27:05 AM »
I've been thinking about this on my way to work.  It's probably not the best decision to do this.  I think I'll ask Theo that you go ahead and discuss your beliefs without completely, directly delving into the discouraged topics as had previously been clarified.  I.e., we can discuss our beliefs without using hot-button terminology - discuss the scriptures.

As far as the objections from David and you Willi, you both may have a legitimate point.  However, I'd ask you to consider the leeway that is often given to members - some way more than others - which also bears further consideration.

Thanks Paul for your input as well.
Neither should there be vulgar speech, foolish talk, or coarse jesting--all of which are out of character--but rather thanksgiving.  Eph. 5:4  **  Saved 1John 3.2, Eph. 2:8, John 1:12 - Being saved 2Cor. 4:16 2Peter 3:18 - Will be saved 1Peter 1:5 Romans 8:23

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #190 on: March 23, 2010, 12:34:29 AM »
We all, then, should happily have our own threads whose topics are ourselves.



Theo was being respectful about what he does say in hoping to avoid being banned and offending, I would say that there is a clang going on yes indeed.




Offline Beloved Servant

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 4290
  • David's sling
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #191 on: March 23, 2010, 12:39:42 AM »
Theo said this to what I took GREAT OFFENSE:

"I guess I was right then, you folks don't believe in etrnity, nor an eternal God."

And THAT, Paul, was hardly respectful to me or our Lord Jesus Christ Savior of All Mankind.

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #192 on: March 23, 2010, 12:46:42 AM »
Theo said this to what I took GREAT OFFENSE:

"I guess I was right then, you folks don't believe in etrnity, nor an eternal God."

And THAT, Paul, was hardly respectful to me or our Lord Jesus Christ Savior of All Mankind.


It did not offend me, sounds like a personal issue that you should take up with the mods.

He has made many other respectful comments, but I see that you cannot see that because the stone in your hand is blocking your vision.





Offline Beloved Servant

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 4290
  • David's sling
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #193 on: March 23, 2010, 12:49:37 AM »

He insulted my faith and my God, yes it's personal.

And I have no issue with the mods.

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #194 on: March 23, 2010, 12:51:20 AM »

He insulted my faith and my God, yes it's personal.

And I have no issue with the mods.


Well then throw the stone.

Offline Beloved Servant

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 4290
  • David's sling
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #195 on: March 23, 2010, 12:52:44 AM »

The stone is Christ whom we all must fall upon or it will fall upon us.

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #196 on: March 23, 2010, 12:55:52 AM »

The stone is Christ whom we all must fall upon or it will fall upon us.


Well then whatever insult you think occured is moot.


Offline Beloved Servant

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 4290
  • David's sling
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #197 on: March 23, 2010, 01:00:13 AM »


Hardly, Paul.
He came here, despite having his own forum.
Insults members and their God.
Now, he gets his own thread.
I see no reason continuing to flatter his ego.

Offline jabcat

  • Admin
  • *
  • Posts: 8952
  • SINNER SAVED BY GRACE
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #198 on: March 23, 2010, 01:03:14 AM »
David...read my last post...it's been reconsidered.   :bigGrin:
Neither should there be vulgar speech, foolish talk, or coarse jesting--all of which are out of character--but rather thanksgiving.  Eph. 5:4  **  Saved 1John 3.2, Eph. 2:8, John 1:12 - Being saved 2Cor. 4:16 2Peter 3:18 - Will be saved 1Peter 1:5 Romans 8:23

Offline jabcat

  • Admin
  • *
  • Posts: 8952
  • SINNER SAVED BY GRACE
Re: 25 QUESTIONS FOR UNIVERSAL SALVATION BELIEVERS
« Reply #199 on: March 23, 2010, 01:05:33 AM »
And I agree, Paul, for the most part Theo has been pretty considerate - especially compared to most of the obvious ETers that come through here - and even compared to a very small minority of our own membership (not you, David).

I hope we can consider this settled, and all continue to discuss the scriptures and our understanding of them - for the edification of all.   :thumbsup:
Neither should there be vulgar speech, foolish talk, or coarse jesting--all of which are out of character--but rather thanksgiving.  Eph. 5:4  **  Saved 1John 3.2, Eph. 2:8, John 1:12 - Being saved 2Cor. 4:16 2Peter 3:18 - Will be saved 1Peter 1:5 Romans 8:23