Author Topic: UR Rebuttal  (Read 2642 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
UR Rebuttal
« on: June 21, 2010, 08:55:53 AM »
I have been searching, asking and doing my own research.  I asked a pastor friend of mine for help answering some questions about UR.  Here is the conversation.  I think it might be the best rebuttal to some of the UR stances I have read.

I also want to bring up some of the tranlational problems.

II Th 2:12
Krinos= translated damnation. I also believe this to be a poor translation. Krinos is best described as a remedial judgement and punishment. If the Bible was talking about eternal damnation I believe he would have used the word timoria. Timoria is a vindictive judgement and punishment which carries a heavier weight. When speaking about eternity in hell...this is no longer remedial...corrective...it's punitive.
 

Alright. Let's look at the Greek words first. κρίνω (krinō) is the first verb found in 2 Thes. 2:12. This verb, without context, can mean a variety of things, including (From the BDAG, the normal, everyday lexicon for pastors) "to make a selection, select, prefer, to pass judgement upon the lives and actions of others, to make judgement based on various factors taken into account, (judge, consider, think, look upon), to come to a conclusion after cognitive proecess-reach a decision, decide, propose, intend, or even to engage in a legal process. Louw-Nida has just about the same thing, as does most of the others." So we are comfortable with the semantic range provided by the BDAG. But now, we must decide where in the semantic range does the usage actually fall?

Remember, there is no definition without context. So what is the context?

Quote:Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to Him: we ask you, brothers, 2 not to be easily upset in mind or troubled, either by a spirit or by a message or by a letter as if from us, alleging that the Day of the Lord has come. 3 Don't let anyone deceive you in any way. For ⌊that day⌋ will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction. 4 He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he sits in God's sanctuary, publicizing that he himself is God.
5 Don't you remember that when I was still with you I told you about this? 6 And you know what currently restrains ⌊him⌋, so that he will be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; but the one now restraining will do so until he is out of the way, 8 and then the lawless one will be revealed. The Lord Jesus will destroy him with the breath of His mouth and will bring him to nothing with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming ⌊of the lawless one⌋ is based on Satan's working, with all kinds of false miracles, signs, and wonders, 10 and with every unrighteous deception among those who are perishing. ⌊They perish⌋ because they did not accept the love of the truth in order to be saved. 11 For this reason God sends them a strong delusion so that they will believe what is false, 12 so that all will be condemned—those who did not believe the truth but enjoyed unrighteousness.

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

 
 

Now, before we even translate what "krinō" means, we have to look at something else. See where it says "So that" in the beginning of verse 12? That, in the greek, is what is known as a "hina clause" (for reference, or where I am quoting, you can pick up a "Wallace, Greek Grammar- to read what I am saying). It is very important, because that kind of clause can do many things, and it tells you exactly how to read the following phrase-as it is now dependent on the preceding phrase. Here, the following very is the very one we are looking at. It is what is called an Aorist subjunctive. Don't worry about what that is yet, instead, worry about how it affects the "hina clause". Because when an Aorist Subjunctive follows the word "hina" it can mean one of only three things. Verse 12 therefore either means 1. That it is the purpose of verse 11, it answers the question Why? or 2. it expresses the result of the action, it is a consequence of the verbal action that is not intended! So in this case, verse 12 would not be the intended result, but it IS a result (this is usually translated "so that" which is what the above translation uses) Or three, it is the purpose-result, that is, both the intention, and the purpose is tied up in verse 12.

So the question then, is how is this clause used? My belief, is that it is a purpose-result clause. Why? Because a purpose-result clause can "be used for the result which follows according to the purpose of the subject or of God." Basically, the NT writers choose to blur the lines between purpose and result in dealing with God's intentions, as they seem to be one. Thus, the purpose and reason for God sending a strong delusion (the next words, in the Greek, are in the infinitive, thus, no time what so ever, it is a continual belief) to believe what is false- Is for the purpose AND the result of God judging (however we define that) them-those who did not believe the truth but enjoyed unrighteousness.

So, We have vs. 11 and 12 figured out (except for Krinō). Yet, we then must look at the context of vs. 10, because the connecting word in verse 11 is "dia" which means verse 11 and 10 has a logical connection. Because the word is used with the accusative form (split a sentence in two, and you have the subject and the predicate. The subject is doing the action, the predicate receives the action. The accusative is the noun in teh predicate part of the phrase) of the pronoun, we know that it is used as causative. That is, the former part of the sentence is causing the latter part. Thus, it is interpreted as "because" or "on account of" or maybe "for sake of". What I quoted above just uses "for" instead of "For sake of" which is shortening it. I don't like that, because too many times we read it in English and don't pick up the entire meaning.

So when we pull together verse 10, it now says, They perish because they did not accept the love of the truth in order to be saved, ON ACCOUNT OF THIS REASON- Gogd sends thim a strong delusion that they will believe what is false, WITH THE PURPOSE AND RESULT OF them being Judged (however we interpret it), (and then notice that Paul specifies who is being judged, the very ones being spoken of in verse 9, 10) the ones who did not believe the truth but enjoyed unrighteousness.

What then, do we see by context as we even come to the word krinō, before we even begin to look at the semantic domain of the word? We see from context that 1. these people are perishing because they didn't accpet the love of truth. 2. They choose unrighteous deception. 3. God thus pushed them in thier continuance of delusion to believe what his false, 4. so that whatever he does when he krinō's them, it it will be those who don't believe.

Now let's go back to the semantic domain.


to make a selection, select, prefer, to pass judgement upon the lives and actions of others, to make judgement based on various factors taken into account, (judge, consider, think, look upon), to come to a conclusion after cognitive proecess-reach a decision, decide, propose, intend, or even to engage in a legal process.

Well, in context, what does it look like? They didn't accpet, they chose unrighteousness, God pushed them to contineu that way why? To It seems the best one here is "to pass judgement upon the lives and actions of others".

Now, what kind of judgement is that? Well, now we have to go back to what KIND of Aorist this subjunctive Krinō is. It is an aorist, which usually means that it is in the past, and probably finished in the past, though it can be used as a state which was entered into the past or the like (too much to go into!). However, the past here just doesn't make sense does it? Why? Because the phrase has made the word take on the aorist more than anything else. So keep in mind a general completion, and translate it in the best way the context tells us to. That happend, so that God may do THAT!. Or, for the reason that God may jugdge them all based on their actions and deeds-which were refusing Him.

So then, they are judged, not for a temporal sin, but for the complete and final sin of refusing Jesus Christ. In other words, the importance of this sentence is not the judging itself, but in what they were judged for, and that is a refusal of the messiah and instead, the choice to follow Satan.


Quote:Gehenna= translated hell...which obviously was a place in southern Jerusalem. It was used as a metaphor by Jewish teachers to describe a punishing place of purification. Closest translation would be purgatory. Considering Jesus was speaking to a people who would understand Gehenna in the tradional since I would think that's what he meant. Or was it a metaphor in a metaphor?  

Actually, let's go to what Gehenna physically was. It was a garbage dump which was burned, and continually burned. The fires at the dump never went out. People always came and through more things in the dump, thus, the fires always burned. There is no true English word, as there is no true English word for Jerusalem either. It is a word which reflects a literal place. Thus, in order to bring into 21st century English, it would be best to find an equivalent in today's culture. My first thought is Cleveland, but I don't think that works here. So what can we use? Think of a place that stinks, it is always on fire, there is nothing of value there, and no one wants to be around there... alright.. CLEVELAND. Wait, wait, this is bible stuff, not football.

Whatever it is that you can think of, THAT is the best translation. Purgatory does not work here, because the concept of purgatory is a place of punishment for a certain time, then a removal from that punishment. However, when you through trash into gehenna, you didn't do it with the intention of coming back in a few days, weeks, or months to pick out a purified version of what you took there. YOu did it with the reason of tossing it for good.

Be careful going to the Rabbis, because the talmud is centuries later than Jesus, though some of the teaching originated before him. To see other statements concerning Gehenna, look at documents from before JEsus was born.

This cursed valley [Gey-Hinnom/Gehenna] is for those who are cursed forever...Here they will be gathered together and here will be their place of judgment. In the last days there will be upon them the spectacle of righteous judmgent in the presence of the righteous forever. (1 Enoch 27:1-3)

Notice the teaching of Gehenna here. as well as these apocrahyl and pseudopicgraphal books from before Jesus

2 Baruch 59 5 But then also He showed to him the measures of the fire, also the depths of the abyss, and the weight of the winds, and the number of the drops of rain: 6 And the suppression of anger, and the multitude of long-suffering, and the truth of judgement: 7 And the root of wisdom, and the riches of understanding, and the fount of knowledge: 8 And the height of the air, and the greatness of Paradise, and the consummation Of the ages, and the beginning of the day of judgement: 9 And the number of the offerings, and the earths which have not yet come: 10 And the mouth of Gehenna, and the station of vengeance, and the place of faith, and the region of hope: 11 And the likeness of future torment, and the multitude of innumerable angels...

4 Ezra and deeds of iniquity shall not sleep.
36 And then shall rthe pit of tormentr appear,
sand over against it the place of refreshments;
The furnace of Gehenna shall be made manifest,
and over against it the Paradise of delight.
(and then go down to vs. 43) And its duration shall be as it were a week of years. 44 Such is my Judgement and bits prescribed orderb: to thee only have I showed these things.

Now, that may seem like just a period of time. But notice two things. 1. There is no ascension. So if you do accept this, then it is talking about the annihlation of the wicked, not that they go to heaven. But 2., it is a week of years... which is... 7. 7 is a very tricky number in the bible. It is a number of completion. In other words, this happens in completion! It happens in fulfillment of God's time. Thus, there is no terminus stated.

I don't want to belabor the point. But in short, Gehenna can't mean just a short term place of suffering before heaven.


Quote:MK 9: 42-49

And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck. If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell (Gehenna), where the fire never goes out. And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where
" 'their worm does not die,
and the fire is not quenched.'
Everyone will be salted with fire.

Everyone will be salted with fire? Sounds alot like purgatory to me rather than an eternal hell. Certainly doesn't sound like damnation to an eternal burning hell.
 


Yes, but the context notice, is a place where "the fire never goes out". The goal here, is to throw the eye or the hand into the place where the fire never goes out, instead of the entire body going there. Also remember, purgatory WILL sound like that, because it is a medieval doctrine of the Catholic church, by which they took these passages and reinterpreted them to fit their doctrine.

It is the same way as if I took a football team, dressed them in Black and Gold, put the Steel sign on them, and then years later, people said that the Pittsburgh steelers must be interpeted according to my football team because of the similarity. It is reversed, my team must be interpreted according to the original team... and purgatory must be accepted or rejected, according to the text.

Quote:
Tartaroo...a place of punishment for fallen angels mentioned once from my recollection. 2 Pe 2:4

 
This entire section of Peter is actually drawn from "the watchers" which is comes out of Enoch. That is enough to say that this is a weird section. However, understand that tartaros was not a separate place, but as once commentary states it, was basically like the dungeons of Hades where one is kept in chains until brought before the king. In other words, the concept here is that it is a special place of confinement for their actions. This understanding is true of both Greeks and Jews of the first century. I like the KJV here, "Chains of darkness". It is not a place that is designated for humanity.

Quote:
Hades...poorly translated from the Hebrew word Sheol which means grave. It does not mean torment.
 


« Last Edit: June 21, 2010, 10:00:14 AM by shawn »

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #1 on: June 21, 2010, 08:56:33 AM »
Sheol means much, much more than grave. It is the very underworld.

Here is the discussion concerning this element from the HALOT-considered probably one of the most scholarly lexicons around.


Quote:שְׁאֹֽ(וֹ)לָה cj. Is 711 pr. שְׁאָלָה rd. with Vrss. שְׁאֹלָה (BHS); fem. as an (archaic) sbst. which has turned into a proper name; never occurs with the article, see Meyer Gramm. §96.2a: wasteland, void, underworld: a) parallel with אֶרֶץ תַּחְתִּית Ezk 3116, שְׁאוֹל תַּחְתִּית Dt 3222, שְׁ׳ תַּחְתִּיָּה Ps 8613, שְׁ׳ מִתַּחַת Is 149, שְׁאוֹל :: שָׁמַיִם Am 92 Ps 1398, שְׁ׳ parallel with יַרְכְּתֵי־בוֹר Is 1415; עִמְקֵי שְׁ׳ the depths of the underworld Pr 918, cf. Jb 118; b) the dead שְׁאוֹלָה (יָֽרְדוּ) Ezk 3117 → ירד qal 3; c) שְׁ׳ parallel with מָוֶת 2S 226 Is 2815.18 3818 Hos 1314 Hab 25 Ps 66 186 4915 8949 Pr 55 727 Song 86; d) שְׁאוֹל וַאֲבַדּוֹן Pr 1511 2720 (see BHS); e) שְׁאוֹל is greedy Is 514 Hab 25 → פער 3 and רחב hif. 1b; never has enough Pr 3016 → שׂבע 3; gets into a turmoil (NRSV: is stirred up) Is 149 → רגז qal 1b (disturbance in different areas of the world); f) שְׁאוֹל has קֹטֶב a sting (REB: Grave, where is your sting? :: NRSV: O Sheol, where is your destruction?) Hos 1314 (→ קֶטֶב and קֹטֶב); חֲבָלִים ropes 2S 226/Ps 186; שְׁעָרִים Is 3810; דְּרָכִים Pr 727; בֶּטֶן Jon 23; g) in שְׁאוֹל there is no praise of God Ps 66 Is 3818, there is no work or thought or knowledge (wisdom) in Sheol (NRSV) Qoh 910, on which see Lauha Koh. 170; God leads down into שְׁ׳ and he leads out of it again, → ירד hif. 1 and עלה hif. 1b; to demand a sign out of the underworld Is 711 (for the cj. see above); שְׁ׳ lies עָרוֹם נֶגְדּוֹ naked in front of God Jb 266, cf. Pr 1511; h) without actually being mentioned שְׁ׳ is implied Jb 317.19 1622 Qoh 95f.
 
In that sense, Hades is a perfect translation because it too, is the underworld, the place of holding until the day of judgment. It is only after the day of judgment, according to many, where there is a casting into hell.


Quote:From what I have learned the mistranslations started with St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate.
St. Jerome was an advocate to the Roman doctrine of conscious endless torture for those that failed to be part of the church. Most early churches believed in universal reconciliation or anhiliation ie Origen...Gregory of Nyssa. St. Jerome translated his beliefs into the Latin Vulgate and subsequent mistranslations occured after that. The 1610 Catholic Douay Rheims translation was translated purely from the Latin Vulgate. Many suggest the Catholic chuch was built upon the Latin Vulgate.

 

at this point, I am not worried about Jerome's work, as I tend to focus on teh original texts.

Where we really need to go, is to Revelation. Look at Rev. 20:10. It says,
The Devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet are, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.


Then, there is the judgment at the great white throne,


vs. 12-15. I also saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life, and the dead were judged according to their works by what was written in the books.
13 Then the sea gave up its dead, and Death and Hades gave up their dead; all were judged according to their works. 14 Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And anyone not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.


Thus, the final judgment is not about tartaros, hades, sheol, etc., but rather, about the "Lake of Fire" which burns "forever and ever" and those "whose names are not written in teh book of life was thrown into the lake of fire".

Hence, for me, it is very clear that there are "holding places" for fallen angels, sinners, etc., until final judgment, and then there is the eternal lake of fire. I believe it is that final judgement which is referred to in II thes. 2:12. And why? Because they followed Satan, and thus followed him right into the lake of fire.

This concept of a Lake of Fire, if referred to in Jerusalem, would best be represented how? By a placed that burned and burned, but never burned out. A place where all that had ceased to fulfill their created purpose would go. Gehenna.

Offline thinktank

  • Silver
  • *
  • Posts: 2672
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #2 on: June 21, 2010, 06:21:19 PM »
I think what you say makes sense, for other interpretations don't seem to fit well.

I am beginning to go down this route, but I still believe that all people will be given a chance to follow Jesus and there won't be ET.

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #3 on: June 21, 2010, 07:39:02 PM »

There are simple things that change the context.   The context in this case is isolated passages that with Gehenna being seen as this pastor describes, but, with that context it opens up other problems.


For "sinners" to be punished endlessly,  sin then must exist forever, for if the sinner is forever punished without any correction or purification of any kind, then the "sin" remains.


This is why few actually understand that one you bring in the term "context" as your argument,  you has better make sure the "context" fits all of scripture without causing a contradiction. 

Jesus cannot put all enemies under his feet if the Lake of fire contains beings that sin endlessly.






Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2010, 12:23:36 AM »

There are simple things that change the context.   The context in this case is isolated passages that with Gehenna being seen as this pastor describes, but, with that context it opens up other problems.


For "sinners" to be punished endlessly,  sin then must exist forever, for if the sinner is forever punished without any correction or purification of any kind, then the "sin" remains.


This is why few actually understand that one you bring in the term "context" as your argument,  you has better make sure the "context" fits all of scripture without causing a contradiction.  

Jesus cannot put all enemies under his feet if the Lake of fire contains beings that sin endlessly.







I hear ya and agree.  Context is obviously very important and should be consistant.  With that said, passages that speak about there being no more sin could mean various things.  We have to be extremely careful about searching out and finding positive examples that support our interpretations.  My area of expertise is in the sciences.  I realize that science and faith are nearly opposite concepts but there are some underlying principles that benefit both.  In science when you have a hypothesis (in faith an interpretation) it's best to look for evidence (especially in the face of traditional thought) that doesn't support your hypothesis (interpretation).  By looking for evidence that proves your hypothesis or interpretation wrong you maintain an intellectually honest approach.  Looking for evidence that supports your notions presents too many false positives.  It's also much too easy to read what you want to read in the evidence or scripture. (bias)  No matter how open minded we think we are on a subject we are never truly objective.  We must guard against being deceived.

Guys, I feel your anguish over this subject.  I have made myself sick over it.  I was first introduced to UR concepts over a year ago.  I REALLY needed to believe it at that time in my life.  I put God, the church and the Bible on trial.  Because my finite mind couldn't accept endless torture of souls I felt spiritually sick and seperated from God.  

After all my searching, research and some help from my pastor friend and some of your links I have read here I have some new views.  I think for some the most intellectually honest position would be as agnostic on the subject.  But, I do not believe the english scriptures support UR.  And I believe we need to be careful about the Greek and Hebrew considering few of us are experts and have to accept the word of others on the subject.

If the truth is ET or annihilation...today I can say I accept that.  I realize that God is God...he can not sin, he loves agape and he will judge the way he judges.  It's none of my business how God handles judgement.  My business is to believe, accept and live by faith.

Offline thinktank

  • Silver
  • *
  • Posts: 2672
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2010, 01:55:07 AM »
.

Guys, I feel your anguish over this subject.  I have made myself sick over it.  I was first introduced to UR concepts over a year ago.  I REALLY needed to believe it at that time in my life.  I put God, the church and the Bible on trial.  Because my finite mind couldn't accept endless torture of souls I felt spiritually sick and seperated from God.  

After all my searching, research and some help from my pastor friend and some of your links I have read here I have some new views.  I think for some the most intellectually honest position would be as agnostic on the subject.  But, I do not believe the english scriptures support UR.  And I believe we need to be careful about the Greek and Hebrew considering few of us are experts and have to accept the word of others on the subject.

If the truth is ET or annihilation...today I can say I accept that.  I realize that God is God...he can not sin, he loves agape and he will judge the way he judges.  It's none of my business how God handles judgement.  My business is to believe, accept and live by faith.

I to anguish over this, but now I have more faith that Jesus has the power to reach all mankind. I will accept a God of annhilation but I won't accept a God of ET, I have been there before. But if God wants to destroy a murderer who continues to sin, then who am I to argue, and I am only a human being, my love only goes so far, but I know that love does not torture, I think the punishments of God are there to either chasten and correct, or to destroy and cleanse, such as the way he did in Noahs day. Maybe God's love is strong enough to save everyone and save 100 of his lost sheep from 99. Who then can be saved?
With God all things are possible, so who knows what will happen, for sometimes God says he will destroy cities such as Nineveh, then he changes his mind, but things like this only happens if the people pray and seek the lord and repent from wickedness.


Offline Pierac

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1377
  • Gender: Male
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #6 on: June 22, 2010, 02:37:43 AM »
Shawn,

Skip the biblical reference! Not that it's not important for sure!

I have a study I'm working on!  So, Just tell me your view of GOD!  Here is the context... Just what did you think before you ever read a single word of scripture?

My point being... how does your view of God before ever reading scripture... compare to that... after reading the scriptures?  


Tell me how your view changed from not knowing the God of scripture to knowing the God scripture?  :thumbsup:

Paul

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #7 on: June 22, 2010, 02:49:35 AM »
.

Guys, I feel your anguish over this subject.  I have made myself sick over it.  I was first introduced to UR concepts over a year ago.  I REALLY needed to believe it at that time in my life.  I put God, the church and the Bible on trial.  Because my finite mind couldn't accept endless torture of souls I felt spiritually sick and seperated from God.  

After all my searching, research and some help from my pastor friend and some of your links I have read here I have some new views.  I think for some the most intellectually honest position would be as agnostic on the subject.  But, I do not believe the english scriptures support UR.  And I believe we need to be careful about the Greek and Hebrew considering few of us are experts and have to accept the word of others on the subject.

If the truth is ET or annihilation...today I can say I accept that.  I realize that God is God...he can not sin, he loves agape and he will judge the way he judges.  It's none of my business how God handles judgement.  My business is to believe, accept and live by faith.

I to anguish over this, but now I have more faith that Jesus has the power to reach all mankind. I will accept a God of annhilation but I won't accept a God of ET, I have been there before. But if God wants to destroy a murderer who continues to sin, then who am I to argue, and I am only a human being, my love only goes so far, but I know that love does not torture, I think the punishments of God are there to either chasten and correct, or to destroy and cleanse, such as the way he did in Noahs day. Maybe God's love is strong enough to save everyone and save 100 of his lost sheep from 99. Who then can be saved?
With God all things are possible, so who knows what will happen, for sometimes God says he will destroy cities such as Nineveh, then he changes his mind, but things like this only happens if the people pray and seek the lord and repent from wickedness.



I think freedom in Christ starts when we stop leaning on our own understanding.  I know God loves agape and he is just.  I don't have it figured out and on this side of heaven I probably never will.  If God finds a way to save all mankind through the blood of Christ...that is just unreal.  But, he certainly doesn't need my approval to pass judgement how he sees fit.  His ways are higher than mine...I am a mere man saved by grace.  I'm thankful for that gift and try to focus on that.  Brother, this battle will make you spiritually sick.  I think it's ok to just say I don't know and trust in God.

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #8 on: June 22, 2010, 02:51:30 AM »
Shawn,

Skip the biblical reference! Not that it's not important for sure!

I have a study I'm working on!  So, Just tell me your view of GOD!  Here is the context... Just what did you think before you ever read a single word of scripture?

My point being... how does your view of God before ever reading scripture... compare to that... after reading the scriptures?  


Tell me how your view changed from not knowing the God of scripture to knowing the God scripture?  :thumbsup:

Paul


I was saved when I was 7 y/o.  I have no idea what I thought about God before I read scripture.

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2010, 07:38:05 AM »
Guys, I feel your anguish over this subject.  I have made myself sick over it.  I was first introduced to UR concepts over a year ago.  I REALLY needed to believe it at that time in my life.  I put God, the church and the Bible on trial.  Because my finite mind couldn't accept endless torture of souls I felt spiritually sick and seperated from God.

There is no anguish for me, never has been.


 
Quote
After all my searching, research and some help from my pastor friend and some of your links I have read here I have some new views.  I think for some the most intellectually honest position would be as agnostic on the subject.  But, I do not believe the english scriptures support UR.  And I believe we need to be careful about the Greek and Hebrew considering few of us are experts and have to accept the word of others on the subject.

Sure they do.   Careful for what reason?  That God's gonna get ya?  

Quote
If the truth is ET or annihilation...today I can say I accept that.  I realize that God is God...he can not sin, he loves agape and he will judge the way he judges.  It's none of my business how God handles judgement.  My business is to believe, accept and live by faith.


Religion will cloud ones judgement over such matters.  A calvinist who asserts that if God tortured every last human being endlessly he would still be righteous will use the same flawed reasoning.  We can know what God will and won't do and we can know what he can and cannot do.   You can believe what you like, and no offense, but if you wish to be intellectual on the matter then you will see how flawed this reasoning is.






Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #10 on: June 22, 2010, 07:28:27 PM »
I'm glad you have never struggled with these questions but for many of us it can be spiritually debilitating.  As for pointing out inconsistancies or problems with other faiths...that might be all well and good...but it doesn't make your own stances any more correct.  Many of UR stances are based on english scripture can be interpreted a number of ways and Greek/Hebrew translational issues which I addressed above.

I have regained my trust for the English texts but I will always access the Greek for further clarification.  Sometimes I think we try to fit God into a box of our own design.

As for the God's gonna get you comment...I don't think that's the right way to look at it.  I am a seeker of truth whatever that might be.  I do not want to promote faulty translation that will make others stumble.  Therefore, until I'm sure on this subject (which might not ever be on the earth) I think it's best to remain silent on these matters.  Or, at the very least be intellectually honest and say maybe none of us quite have this whole thing figured out.  Just my 2 cents.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2010, 07:31:55 PM by shawn »

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #11 on: June 22, 2010, 08:44:33 PM »
I'm glad you have never struggled with these questions but for many of us it can be spiritually debilitating.  

I don't intend to minimize the struggle you are going through, I am simply pointing out that appealing to someone elses struggle doesn't change anything.


Quote
As for pointing out inconsistancies or problems with other faiths...that might be all well and good...but it doesn't make your own stances any more correct.  Many of UR stances are based on english scripture can be interpreted a number of ways and Greek/Hebrew translational issues which I addressed above.

Well, I never said that it did.   You posted what you asserted as the best rebuttle you have ever seen.   However, ignoring an inconsistancy or a problem and saying that it doesn't make my point of view stronger does not remove the problem I raised.

My point of view does not have the problem I raised for yours, the problem of sin eternally existing is still unresolved from the point of view that eternal torment exists.   
Quote

I have regained my trust for the English texts but I will always access the Greek for further clarification.  Sometimes I think we try to fit God into a box of our own design.
\

The english texts or the hebrew and greek is only as good as the context in which one agrees with.   What it comes down to is if the character of God allows for any human he ever created
being lost endlessly, that is the ultimate context, and no, Gods character does not since there are too many verses that explain his unwillingness for that to happen.

When you apply the context that man decides what God does for him, then you can change the meaning you get out of scripture and ultimatly assert that man controls Gods intentions and determined what fruit Gods desire ultimatly brings forth when it is said that Gods word does not return void.

You may not like the problems raised to the view of eternal tomrment or annihillation,  but they exist.   I do not need to point out those problems to scripturally prove mine in the first place.

Quote
As for the God's gonna get you comment...I don't think that's the right way to look at it.



But do you not realize,  God is gonna get everyone,  the question many people are still exploring is whether that is a good or bad thing.


It is a good thing that God gets us all.


Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #12 on: June 22, 2010, 09:43:09 PM »
I'm not sure I understand your first comment.  I was merely expressing understanding of the inner turmoil that comes to many when ET is preached.  I have also come to the understanding that if I don't know...if it's not clear in God's word to be silent on matters.  I have learned that lesson the hard way.  I agree with you on certain aspects.  I'm not sure anyone's interpretation of scriptures on this subject completely make sense.  Does God reconcil all?  Not sure...but I think there is more evidence in scripture to say he doesn't.  Does God burn people for eternity?  Not sure...there are some verses that could be interpreted a number of different ways as being ET, annh or something different all together.  While I have serious doubts about UR now...it doesn't mean I know how God handles his business.  The only peace I can find with this is to say I don't know.

Offline willieH

  • Read Only
  • *
  • Posts: 2260
  • Gender: Male
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #13 on: June 22, 2010, 11:11:59 PM »
willieH: Hi Shawn... :welcome: to TM...

I have not read your OP in detail... but it appears quite "detailed"... that said...

The biggest and MOST IMPORTANT thing left OUT of MOST discussion of the Holy Scriptures, is the platform of UNSELFISHNESS... Aside from the THEOLOGY of the Salvation of ALL MEN, ...other "THEOLOGIES" inevitably BEGIN with SELF in the attempt to deduce the "UNSELFISH -- RHYME of ALL THINGS", which GOD is using to create the ... LOVE SONG of FOREVER... written in LIFE by the Chief Musician.

Christianity and its myriad THEOLOGIANS have centered the teachings of the WORD of God on themselves... and until ALL SELFISHNESS is abandoned, one cannot SEE that which they suppose to TEACH of UNSELFISHNESS, which is THAT which is EMBODIED in CHRIST.

IOW -- whoever is teaching "the WORD", ALWAYS -- BEGINS -- with SELF as numbered amongst the "SAVED" and therefore of course (in that "establishment of SELF being "SAVED") are thereby ELIMINATED from "distructions, punishments, sorrows, etc." that THEY,  within their "THEOLOGICAL" viewpoint (whatever it might be) have deduced shall be the DESTINY of MOST.

Which foundation is employed to describe those OUTSIDE these (SELF oriented), parameters... as destined for -- "this sorrow ("hell/ET"), or for that one" ("annhilation")  :mshock:

If we TRULY wish to understand the END of anything concerning the Scriptures, we must go back to the BEGINNING, for they (beginning & end) are ONE and the SAME = Rev 1:8

If we therefore BEGIN with what GOD says that HE ...IS... then we have at least a smidgeon of a chance of understanding what might be at the END for those things EMERGENT from HIM. (which happens to be EVERYTHING)

He IS -- CREATOR of ALL things (which are created FOR Him) -- John 1:3 -- Col 1:16
He IS -- LOVE -- 1 John 4:8
He IS -- MERCIFUL -- Psalm 136 [entire chapter]
He IS -- IMPARTIAL -- Acts 10:34 (& 9 other Scriptures)
He IS -- UN-WILLING [intent] that ANY PERISH -- 1 Pet 3:9
He IS -- PURPOSE oriented -- Isaiah 46:10 -- Isaiah 55:11 -- John 3:16-17
He IS -- JUSTICE oriented -- Rom 4:5

Which when "added up" in the final result, must contain that:

He IS -- REASON -- Isaiah 1:18

If one ADDS these up... then one has a possible opportunity, if one lets GO of SELF, to behold WHY God so LOVED the WORLD in His own UNCHANGING, FOREVER, kind of WAY...

Creation + Love + Mercy + Impartiality + Deliverance + Purpose + Justice = REASON.

If one adds these together and comes up with an answer that is UNREASONABLE, then that answer, probably esteems "SELF" within one or more of the "added" parameters...

such as:

He Created ME to be SAVED (knowing I would be)
He LOVED ME (MY acceptance of Him has made Him MY personal savior)
He has MERCY upon ME (because of MY humility)
He is PARTIAL to ME (because I have bowed to His power)
He shall DELIVER ...ME (because I have exalted Him, calling upon His Sons name)
His PURPOSE was to SAVE ME (because I accepted HIM)
He is JUSTIFIED in SAVING ME (because I am not like other men that deny Him)

 :sigh:

...willieH  :cloud9:

Offline Beloved Servant

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 4290
  • David's sling
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #14 on: June 22, 2010, 11:50:12 PM »
AMEN.
Humility rules the kingdom.

Offline Beloved Servant

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 4290
  • David's sling
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #15 on: June 22, 2010, 11:55:00 PM »


The only Way to the Father is through the Son with a devoted life of crucified submission to HIS WILL.

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 13135
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #16 on: June 22, 2010, 11:55:10 PM »
Christain double-talk

What Traditional Christians Say...What They Really Mean...
"There's nothing you must do to be saved......" "Here's what you must do to be saved:"
"You are absolutely, totally helpless to save yourself." "You must make a wise decision in order to be saved."
"God controls all things.""God doesn't control man's free will."
"We can't boast about going to heaven.""If we go to hell, it's our own fault."
"Love never faileth!" "Love can't overcome human stubborness."
"Men are in bondage to sin." "Men are free to choose Christ."
"Grace is unmerited favor..." "... given only to those who merit it with faith and obedience."
"GOD IS THE SAVIOR OF ALL MANKIND (1 Tim. 4:10)..." "... except for about ninety percent of them."
"GOD'S LOVE IN UNCONDITIONAL..." "... as long as you meet certain conditions."
"GOD'S WILL IS UNOPPOSABLE..." "... except by the sinner."
"Salvation is not a thing of chance." "There is no second chance to be saved."
"WE HAVE GOOD NEWS FOR YOU!""Most of mankind will perish forever."
"GOD LOVES YOU!" "... as long as you love Him."
"Christ died for all sin..." "... except the sin of not believing that He died for all sin."
"The Good Shepherd seeks the lost sheep until he finds it!"                "The Good Shepherd seeks until it's too late."
"God's justice was satisfied in the cross of Christ." "God's justice demands eternal torment or annihilation."
« Last Edit: June 23, 2010, 12:00:23 AM by WhiteWings »
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 shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #17 on: June 23, 2010, 12:49:16 AM »
I do see issues with the faith's and denominational inconsistancies and problems.  I do understand issues with not understanding ET.  But, I don't see this as a situation where I have to throw the baby out with the bath water either.  I don't think I should take a stance that isn't well supported in Scripture.  I would rather take no stance than the wrong stance. 

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #18 on: June 23, 2010, 02:12:55 AM »
I do see issues with the faith's and denominational inconsistancies and problems.  I do understand issues with not understanding ET.  But, I don't see this as a situation where I have to throw the baby out with the bath water either.  I don't think I should take a stance that isn't well supported in Scripture.  I would rather take no stance than the wrong stance. 


You should never be concerned that you are studying and seeking, even if what you may believe at any given time is wrong.   

There certainly is nothing wrong with  "I don't know".   Most of revelation I am not certain of and am not convinced most of it is understandable to anyone so I am certainly wary of anyone who claims they have that book all figured out.

What I have been pointing out is simply based on your first post and the claim of a rebuttle.

As far as throwing the baby out with the bath water, depends on what you as an individual was taught the baby is.

From my upbringing, the only way I could break free is to do just that because the baby always said I was never good enough.


Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #19 on: June 23, 2010, 03:09:30 AM »
I do see issues with the faith's and denominational inconsistancies and problems.  I do understand issues with not understanding ET.  But, I don't see this as a situation where I have to throw the baby out with the bath water either.  I don't think I should take a stance that isn't well supported in Scripture.  I would rather take no stance than the wrong stance. 


You should never be concerned that you are studying and seeking, even if what you may believe at any given time is wrong.   

There certainly is nothing wrong with  "I don't know".   Most of revelation I am not certain of and am not convinced most of it is understandable to anyone so I am certainly wary of anyone who claims they have that book all figured out.

What I have been pointing out is simply based on your first post and the claim of a rebuttle.

As far as throwing the baby out with the bath water, depends on what you as an individual was taught the baby is.

From my upbringing, the only way I could break free is to do just that because the baby always said I was never good enough.



I'm totally feeling that last statement.  I grew up in a congregation that not only told me that I could burn in fire forever but my salvation wasn't secure.  I had to do this...and stay away from that.  I could lose my salvation at any time by "back slidding".  I was scared to death growing up.  Eventually, I just rebelled because I felt I would never get it right.  I'm a big fan of Charles Stanley and his teaching helped me out alot and gave me alot of security in my salvation but the whole ET thing bothered me for many years.  It still does.  Then I was exposed to Martin Zender about a year ago.  I have devoured this material.  The thought of eternal salvation for all puts joy in my heart.  I so want to believe it.  The problem for me?  I just don't think it lines up with scripture as well as other stances.  That certainly doesn't mean it's not true.  I just don't know.  I try to focus on God's love and walk in relationship.  That's all I can really do.

Offline willieH

  • Read Only
  • *
  • Posts: 2260
  • Gender: Male
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #20 on: June 23, 2010, 04:15:09 AM »
willieH: Hi Shawn... :hithere:

 I grew up in a congregation that not only told me that I could burn in fire forever but my salvation wasn't secure.  I had to do this...and stay away from that.  I could lose my salvation at any time by "back slidding".  I was scared to death growing up.  Eventually, I just rebelled because I felt I would never get it right.  I'm a big fan of Charles Stanley and his teaching helped me out alot and gave me alot of security in my salvation but the whole ET thing bothered me for many years.  It still does.  Then I was exposed to Martin Zender about a year ago.  I have devoured this material.  The thought of eternal salvation for all puts joy in my heart.  I so want to believe it.  The problem for me?  I just don't think it lines up with scripture as well as other stances.  That certainly doesn't mean it's not true.  I just don't know.  I try to focus on God's love and walk in relationship.  That's all I can really do.

If YOU are attempting of YOURSELF to "focus on God's LOVE"... then it is a work of futility.  We are to be in SUBMISSION to LOVE and then LOVE works within us, CASTING OUT FEAR... bringing into our experience REASON...

GOD cannot work His PEACE in us, until ...WE, ...let go!

This is no slam against you... we all have spent time traversing the trail of FEAR and TURMOIL...

You are where you are brother, which is NOT at PEACE... for there is TURMOIL and FEAR (as well as a ton of exasperation, a pound of futility and a pinch of hopelessness) within your words above.

1 John 4:18 -- There is NO FEAR in LOVE...but PERFECT LOVE casteth OUT FEAR, ...BECAUSE... FEAR hath TORMENT.  He that FEARETH is NO MADE PERFECT in LOVE

EVERYTHING God does is -- (1) -- PURPOSEFUL... and -- (2) -- PERFECT...

FIRST --- PURPOSE --- What would be the PURPOSE of ET, Shawn?  Can't be VENGENCE for we are encouraged by the WORD of TRUTH to no longer SEEK an "eye for an eye" -- Matt 5:38-48 -- We are to BE as the Father is, which PERFECTLY FORGIVES the UNFORGIVEABLE.


SECOND -- PERFECTION --- What can be said of PERFECTION, concerning ET, Shawn?  ET cannot be "PERFECT" because the word PERFECT means COMPLETE (without need of any addition to it or subtraction from it)...

According to the common teaching of "hell" in Orthodoxy... ET is a NEVER ENDING thing, which never comes to a CONCLUSION (which is COMPLETE) and is therefore INCOMPLETE FOREVER, and is therefore, IMPERFECT...

Also... PAIN and SORROW are to PASS AWAY! -- Rev 20:4 -- How can this actually BE TRUE, if myriads of human beings fry in the "Q"?

Think on these things as you presently perceive that other "stances" appear more "in line" with the Scriptures... I would be very interested in the Scriptures you percieve troublesome to the Salvation of ALL...

I would be more than happy to delve into these "stances" which trouble you, and hopefully give a different viewpoint than others may have presented to you in the past...

Paul Hazelwood has given a great thought:

Quote
As far as throwing the baby out with the bath water, depends on what you as an individual was taught the baby is.

What is your perception of the "Baby", Shawn?

Principles are always 2 way streets... working in reverse as well as forward! Or up as well as down! 

If you cannot "DO" anything to get INTO Heaven... How may you "DO" anything that shall keep you OUT of Heaven?  :dontknow:

The FINITE "DOINGS" of MAN have nothing to do with MANIPULATING the ETERNAL WILL and PURPOSE of God...  If this were so... WE would be considered the greater of the two...

WE are upon HIS agenda... HE is not upon OURS...

:Peace:

...willieH  :cloud9:

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #21 on: June 23, 2010, 04:35:21 AM »
I'll grant you some things Willy.  Today, I do have some turmoil and fear.  I also know that God hasn't called me to be fearful.  Perfect love casts out fear right?  I guess I struggle with who I am in Christ some days.  I do believe I walk in relationship but I'm not really sure about this submission to his love.  I'm not sure what that entails.  Maybe it's latent issues with my earthly dad...maybe I don't eat my wheaties in the morning...who knows.  But, I do know you are right.  This is about submission to his love.  I just don't know how to do that.

Offline willieH

  • Read Only
  • *
  • Posts: 2260
  • Gender: Male
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #22 on: June 23, 2010, 07:47:11 AM »
willieH: Hi Shawn... :hithere:

I'll grant you some things Willy.  Today, I do have some turmoil and fear.  I also know that God hasn't called me to be fearful.  Perfect love casts out fear right?  I guess I struggle with who I am in Christ some days.  I do believe I walk in relationship but I'm not really sure about this submission to his love.  I'm not sure what that entails.  Maybe it's latent issues with my earthly dad...maybe I don't eat my wheaties in the morning...who knows.  But, I do know you are right.  This is about submission to his love.  I just don't know how to do that.

Here is how, me precious brother --->  :boogie:

Just BE it bro... No floodlights or fireworks shall explode... not even a gentle breeze or a whistle in the distance will hail the presence...

It is your heart's yearning and the call of His LOVE -- which cries out to YOU, to be who and what you are and ACCEPTING who and what you ARE is manifest according to HIS AGENDA  -- Rom 9:20 -- Phil 4:11 -- for HE is SOVEREIGN over all things, and ALL POWER is HIS -- Rom 13:1 -- This is not something YOU DO... it is the CALL from within of YHVH that becomes that which permeates you... It is HIS voice that actually generates your own...

We are emergent OF HIM... which makes us PART of HIM... Be who you are... and seek HIM to be that which is YOU, for it is already DONE...

Accept that every step YOU TAKE... is ordered by Him -- Jer 10:23 -- Prov 16:9 -- 20:24 -- and that every event of your life is ORDERED in its place BY HIM and FOR HIM -- Col 1:17 -- Eph 1:11 -- and be STILL and KNOW that HE is GOD -- Psalm 46:10 -- and that YOU are His CHILD, emergent from HIM -- John 1:3 -- John 1:9

Cease the struggle... and KNOW that HE is that which YOU ARE... for YHVH ...IS... UNCHANGING and PERFECT... and AWAKEN to the fact that YOU have ALWAYS been IN HIM, for HE IS -- ALL in ALL -- 1 Cor 15:28

No man can attain anything for ALL (works done under the sun) is VANITY -- Ecc 1:14 -- that is... except YHVH God... which IS both the BEGINNING and the END of ALL THINGS... Which are IN HIM which LIVE and MOVE and have their BEING ...IN HIM -- Acts 17:28

That dear brother is "how it is done" -- John 19:31 -- Col 1:20

...willieH  :cloud9:
« Last Edit: June 23, 2010, 09:24:15 PM by willieH »

Offline jabcat

  • Admin
  • *
  • Posts: 9107
  • SINNER SAVED BY GRACE
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #23 on: June 23, 2010, 08:02:57 AM »
Shawn, all these things are written about you, as a son of God.

Philippians 1:13  you are sealed with His Spirit

Jn 5:24, Romans 8:1  There is no condemnation, you have passed from death to life

Romans 8:28,29  all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. 29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Ephesians 2:10  For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

Philipians 1:6  being confident of this very thing, that he who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Jesus Christ:

Hebrews 12:2  Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;

Your brother, James.

Offline shawn

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1585
Re: UR Rebuttal
« Reply #24 on: June 23, 2010, 09:48:11 AM »
Thanks guys I appreciate that.