Apologetics - Universal Reconciliation > Arguments Against Universal Salvation

Who Wields Apologetics?

(1/1)

reFORMer:
     There's far to much of a ban on creativity, both in the world and the Church.  Our freedoms, our rights and gifts have been given away to experts.  Advance must be made if we are to achieve Overcomer status.  Advance means change and change provokes opposition.  Men who have titles of honor from one another stifle the expressions of Christs life by claiming authority to conform others to the limitations of their own traditions or what they're personally comfortable with.  What we've hardly ever been told is that our Father is Truth, so we have a "genetic" predisposition to it since we're baby truths.  We bear the image of the One who begat us.   "...every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed..." (Gen 1:29)
     "Take heed that ye be not deceived," (Lk 21.8) is not the same as heeding how everybody else is deceived.  Different wording, different worship styles...often with no more than, "I'm comfortable with what my leaders taught me" against your neighbors tradition; while all the time the whole lot of it, practices, even doctrines is without direct Biblical statements for validation.  How very much Institutional Christianity runs on the traditions of men!  A sense of proportion, of what is valuable and what is peripheral to the gospel, indeed, what is deep (so necessarily controversial) distinguished from fluff is seldom brought to the table.  Your business is important so they work to keep you coming only to them.
     Lack of experience and knowledge cannot be remedied if you're taught to be deaf and blind.  God sees and hears everything.  He's not deceived or defiled. To be like Him is the Image of your destiny.  The spirit of deception is identified by an inability to listen, specifically to talk about God by those of God.  (conf., 1 Jn 4.5-6)  Don't think "orthodoxy" is always so right in everything.  What it really is (now think about this) is the popular consensus at any given time among the professional elite who believe they should have the microphone.  And when they suppress the truth of Scripture because their errors are revealed I was told I should submit anyhow because they're the authority of God.  Wrong!  God is His own authority and disallows other mediators.  I thought to correct them.  Wrong!  Leave them in their cage with those captured under them.  We already have homes we can meet in that are much more conducive to every member participation.  "Let us go forth therefore unto him [Jesus] without the camp, bearing his reproach." (Heb 13:13)
     Many are leaving "the camp," sick of priestcraft and unBiblical teaching.  The greatest revival the Church in America has ever known is already underway.  But much more, the way we do Church is going to significantly change.  We're already well into the first aspects of a reformation greater than that of the 1500's.  Doctrine will be adjusted.  Do you think that can happen without significant religious opposition?  What's often used is some group that went off to represent the whole.  Many coming into the Church bring doctrinal fudging, blurring the lines between the world and the church.  Extreme examples are presented as typical.  I'm so disappointed some otherwise fruitful souls get diverted from what the songwriter described as, "there's a wideness in God's mercy."  The minutia that separate people having an argument are ways sectarian spirits justify dividing perfectly good Christians from one another, often no more than because they came up in different fellowships or backgrounds.
     Many don't like the verse, "Be still and know that I am God." Bad command to them.  They think you could get demons obeying it. Empty your consciousness of all motions of self before the presence of the LORD in honor of Him.  Does He need us to instruct Him?   "Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of?" (Isa 2:22)  Only not in prayer?  That's Eastern Mysticism and occult practice?  We're only supposed to be assertive and mindful?  That Jesus descended to ascend "up over all, that he should be filling all with himself..." (Col 1.18)  Oops, sounds like "panentheism," which they say is against the cross of Christ. (?) "...the all and in all: Christ." (Col 3.11)  Oh-oh! could be pantheism.  You could get confused and worship the world.  In Isaiah around chpts. 42 thru 48 Yahweh repeatedly says nothing else exists besides Him.  (I don't have to look up every reference for ya, do I?)  Too bad they weren't here to instruct the Holy Spirit at the time the Scripture was written.  We could have been spared such deception.
      Whatever states of consciousness exist, and Krippner enumerated 20 (Krippner, Stanley. 1972. "Altered States of Consciousness." In J. White, ed. The Highest States of Consciousness. New York: Doubleday,) they all belong to all of us as human beings.  If I was happy over evil that wouldn't make happiness a sin.  I can also be happy over good.  Some ignorant apologists idea that visual thought is an occultic tool of the devil is beyond ridicule.  Because at times the devil possesses some men we should cease being men?  The basic functions of the psyche are either via movens or via recipiens, that is, either assertive or passive and receptive.  I discovered the hard way that neither will bring salvation.  "Salvation is of the Lord."  "By GRACE are you saved, through faith...not of works," to preclude human boasting.  No exercises or diets or cultivation of soul powers will bring about the manifestation of God; neither will any elimination of our self or what is in the world.  What matters is, "faith, operating through love." (Ga 4.6)  Only a new creation counts with God (Ga 6:15)  You just can't do that, no how, no way.  It takes grace, which is God showing up and showing off.

---James Rohde

arcticmonster2003:
quote reFORMer

--- Quote ---"Be still and know that I am God."
--- End quote ---

I knew I was forgetting something today, thanks for reminding me. :thumbsup:

Redlettervoice:

--- Quote from: reFORMer on October 11, 2007, 07:35:23 AM ---     There's far to much of a ban on creativity, both in the world and the Church.  Our freedoms, our rights and gifts have been given away to experts.  Advance must be made if we are to achieve Overcomer status.  Advance means change and change provokes opposition.  Men who have titles of honor from one another stifle the expressions of Christs life by claiming authority to conform others to the limitations of their own traditions or what they're personally comfortable with.  What we've hardly ever been told is that our Father is Truth, so we have a "genetic" predisposition to it since we're baby truths.  We bear the image of the One who begat us.   "...every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed..." (Gen 1:29)
     "Take heed that ye be not deceived," (Lk 21.8) is not the same as heeding how everybody else is deceived.  Different wording, different worship styles...often with no more than, "I'm comfortable with what my leaders taught me" against your neighbors tradition; while all the time the whole lot of it, practices, even doctrines is without direct Biblical statements for validation.  How very much Institutional Christianity runs on the traditions of men!  A sense of proportion, of what is valuable and what is peripheral to the gospel, indeed, what is deep (so necessarily controversial) distinguished from fluff is seldom brought to the table.  Your business is important so they work to keep you coming only to them.
     Lack of experience and knowledge cannot be remedied if you're taught to be deaf and blind.  God sees and hears everything.  He's not deceived or defiled. To be like Him is the Image of your destiny.  The spirit of deception is identified by an inability to listen, specifically to talk about God by those of God.  (conf., 1 Jn 4.5-6)  Don't think "orthodoxy" is always so right in everything.  What it really is (now think about this) is the popular consensus at any given time among the professional elite who believe they should have the microphone.  And when they suppress the truth of Scripture because their errors are revealed I was told I should submit anyhow because they're the authority of God.  Wrong!  God is His own authority and disallows other mediators.  I thought to correct them.  Wrong!  Leave them in their cage with those captured under them.  We already have homes we can meet in that are much more conducive to every member participation.  "Let us go forth therefore unto him [Jesus] without the camp, bearing his reproach." (Heb 13:13)
     Many are leaving "the camp," sick of priestcraft and unBiblical teaching.  The greatest revival the Church in America has ever known is already underway.  But much more, the way we do Church is going to significantly change.  We're already well into the first aspects of a reformation greater than that of the 1500's.  Doctrine will be adjusted.  Do you think that can happen without significant religious opposition?  What's often used is some group that went off to represent the whole.  Many coming into the Church bring doctrinal fudging, blurring the lines between the world and the church.  Extreme examples are presented as typical.  I'm so disappointed some otherwise fruitful souls get diverted from what the songwriter described as, "there's a wideness in God's mercy."  The minutia that separate people having an argument are ways sectarian spirits justify dividing perfectly good Christians from one another, often no more than because they came up in different fellowships or backgrounds.
     Many don't like the verse, "Be still and know that I am God." Bad command to them.  They think you could get demons obeying it. Empty your consciousness of all motions of self before the presence of the LORD in honor of Him.  Does He need us to instruct Him?   "Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of?" (Isa 2:22)  Only not in prayer?  That's Eastern Mysticism and occult practice?  We're only supposed to be assertive and mindful?  That Jesus descended to ascend "up over all, that he should be filling all with himself..." (Col 1.18)  Oops, sounds like "panentheism," which they say is against the cross of Christ. (?) "...the all and in all: Christ." (Col 3.11)  Oh-oh! could be pantheism.  You could get confused and worship the world.  In Isaiah around chpts. 42 thru 48 Yahweh repeatedly says nothing else exists besides Him.  (I don't have to look up every reference for ya, do I?)  Too bad they weren't here to instruct the Holy Spirit at the time the Scripture was written.  We could have been spared such deception.
      Whatever states of consciousness exist, and Krippner enumerated 20 (Krippner, Stanley. 1972. "Altered States of Consciousness." In J. White, ed. The Highest States of Consciousness. New York: Doubleday,) they all belong to all of us as human beings.  If I was happy over evil that wouldn't make happiness a sin.  I can also be happy over good.  Some ignorant apologists idea that visual thought is an occultic tool of the devil is beyond ridicule.  Because at times the devil possesses some men we should cease being men?  The basic functions of the psyche are either via movens or via recipiens, that is, either assertive or passive and receptive.  I discovered the hard way that neither will bring salvation.  "Salvation is of the Lord."  "By GRACE are you saved, through faith...not of works," to preclude human boasting.  No exercises or diets or cultivation of soul powers will bring about the manifestation of God; neither will any elimination of our self or what is in the world.  What matters is, "faith, operating through love." (Ga 4.6)  Only a new creation counts with God (Ga 6:15)  You just can't do that, no how, no way.  It takes grace, which is God showing up and showing off.

---James Rohde


--- End quote ---

Man!!! I would NOT trade reading on here for all the world in the churches .............

That was well said........

Preach on, brother!

God has revealed to some who this is .........that walks amongst the stones of fire........and is
even "covered" by them, when he himself was created to "be" a covering.........til the Lord '
opens the eyes of some and all who see "him" look upon him "narrowly" and say: "Is this the man?"

Why! he's just like ME, he ain't able to save himself, why did I ever think I should confide in him?
or be afraid of a "man" that shall die?

Sorry bout that Lord.

reFORMer:
     When God's Spirit is in us we are quickened into love for Him and one another. If while defending some sort of matter peripheral to our sonship our insistence on our own view as the only correct interpretation of Scripture makes us abandon that Holy Spirit, rather than adjust and upgrade our experience of Him Whom to know means life more abundant, then we've failed and should have left the work of writing of these things to those that can minister life. The thing we're discussing here does not belong to what is foundational to our Faith; however, I do believe there is an experiential realm available when we add to understand God as The Totality. The other extreme is the fool saying in his heart, "No God." That is a kind of negative opposite, while the topic may be triangulated to a third point, a positive opposite: the particularization of The All (a Biblical name of God.) We could speak of the every, the all, and the null. To relate to God's Allness without knowing Him in His personess is to not know Him very well, rather in a distorted way. But to deny Him in extremities of His transcendence because of having a personal introduction to Him is to trivialize His Great Majesty. That bears resemblance to the Roman gods, personal but not transcendent. The Bible God is not just a glorified version of an Adamic creature.
     Perhaps much of this rejection of God as "The All" can be traced to an misappropriation of theological nonsense, that God made everything out of nothing, ex nihilo. Historically it was meant to say there was not with God any permanently co-existing matter from which He created the world. Of course, only nothing comes from nothing. He didn't make something from nothing, but from Himself. This may be illustrated by His conceiving in faith to then say, "Light be." And light was. Very relevant to this discussion it is!
     I certainly hope you don't take up with that unfortunate company of men who resort to misrepresenting their opponents. A truly anti-Christian book that may stand at the head of a whole line of attempts to prove the faith of the early Pilgrims (of our Thanksgiving Day fame) to be a plot to overthrow the U.S. government is The Road to Holocaust by Hal Lindsey in which He stops a quotation from Rushdoony in the middle of a sentence with "..." then finishes with the latter half of a sentence a page away, making it seem that the exact opposite was said. This meagerly illustrates why there's some value in contextualizing quotations, which is the common way it is asserted my presentation of certain Scripture portions may misrepresent what is being said, and in some cases be it appears they're right. But that sort of process is what some rabbis use to make the apostle's application of the O.T. to be false. Check out the use of Psalm 110 in the N.T. as an example. The early church found it to be about Jesus when there's nothing in the original saying that. It seems the recent, in terms of Church history, approach to Bible interpretation that attempts to reconstruct the meaning of the text to the persons that received it at the time it was written and an examination of the original language of that text, "historio/critical," has more to do with the rule to not take clear statements of God's word out of context than the Bibles own rules by way of apostolic example for how Scripture may be read.
     I don't care to make this presentation into some sort of my study of pantheism, but there are different kinds, like monistic pantheism, maybe agnostic pantheism,etc...It seems, when I think about it, there is no practical difference between saying, "God is everywhere!" and pantheism. You could say He isn't everything, just "in" everything, which is why the term "panentheism" has been used. Whether that's begging the question or not, it doesn't seem to make those who dislike seeing what they demonize as Eastern Philosophy any happier. The differences may be important if some of us to not be lumped in with the broad condemnations of other pantheists.  Too many apologists seem convinced any hint of pantheism must be expunged from their version of true Christianity. I believe there's a Biblical presentation of the fullness of God that has little in common with stand-alone pantheism. To know the creation rightly is to in some sense to know God, and sufficiently to be condemned if the revelation of Him in the world itself is not followed. (cf., Rom 1:18-23)
     I hadn't been born of the Spirit very long and I repeatedly found myself in a coffeehouse setting answering a handful of people who were arguing against faith in the God of the Bible. Caught up in responding I remember saying, "No, no, no," to someone who had said something true. Determining not to let it happen again, God used it as a wedge to redirect my attitude in dealing with unbelievers. Rather than establishing antagonism by setting up and cultivating an "us against them" mindset, I began to search for points of agreement. It has been said, no self-respecting rat would eat pure poison. Rat poison is 99% good wheat. I began to admit the enticement of the wheat in order to deliver them from the poison. Francis Shaeffer said something to the effect that if Christian doctrine could be represented by a set of 100 points, if we neglect points 10 through 20 it would constitute a weakness by which deception could gain advantage. Claiming points 10 though 20, which are true but ignored by Christians, the deceiver goes on to supply false answers to the other 90 points. I found some things recent attempts at apologetics had taken a wrong turn in being unthinkingly and completely against parts of the Bible in a way similar to my saying, "No, no, no," to the truth. Sometimes it may be guilt by association. If Hindus teach it, then Christians don't or can't? This is foolishness.
     The most distant prophetic view the Bible gives us is the end of the statement in 1 Co 15:27-28, "For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." Notice the context here is all things, including God the Son. So, if we are to be like God and He, "Calleth those things which be not as though they were," (Rm 4:17) then to understand Col 3:11 to say what it actually does say would seem legitimized if unnecessary since it's said in 1 Co 15.
     Let me here state that, if words are to mean anything, they must be allowed to speak for themselves before they're subjected to referential conditioning, which contextualizing certainly is. One of the glories of God's written word is how He made individual phrases so powerful and undistorted when lifted out out of their immediate and historical context. We need to allow even individual words such as "all" to mean what they are meant to mean. Using "all" as a sample, it's true that it's different everywhere it occurs, being conditioned by its context; but, that should never leave us dispensing with its ordinary meaning, as some have, by providing a couple of the few examples of all of a class of things being meant and then proceeding to deny the word in every occurrence. In the just mentioned passages the English leaves out how word order and an article makes them to differ. I offer them literally here. "The God should-be-being All in all," (1 Co 15:28 see above,) and, "The All and in all Christ." (Col 3:11) Perhaps some better educated reader can illuminate for us the finer points of grammar. Certainly for any of us to meditate on these phrases is a fruitful endeavor.
     It is more difficult to prove something doesn't exist than it does. Paul (actually God via Paul) makes an important doctrine hang on one letter, even more, a letter that is NOT there. In English we would say an "s" is absent. "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." (Ga 3:16) Not only are many disobedient in not submitting to this word but teaching contrary to it, some newer versions in other verses change "seed" to "descendants" to fit media doctrine and sell their rewritten Bibles. I use this example to fill up my assertion that a concept, a phrase, a word or even a letter, even one that isn't there, is of inerrant Divine inspiration when dealing with The Sacred Scriptures.
     "For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen." (Rom 11:36) Consider the vast inclusion of "the all" here. Absolutely all is "out of" God and "to" God. One thing I see here is the flow of time, past to future. Paradise is the other side of what we here in the "through" Him realm see as creation. It is in an ascended realm closer to the One the New English Bible in translating this verse calls, "The Source, the Guide and the Goal of everything." That there is something rather than nothing at all is the present ongoing creation of God. You don't extrude yourself into being here now. It is a result of the direct activity of God. The is no god "Nature" to make and enforce laws, so there is actually no "supernatural" that suspends "natural law." What we call "natural law" is only God's usual way of doing things. What we call a miracle is God doing in an exceptional manner something He's always responsible for anyway. Then the middle preposition in the phrase all is "through" God, is not merely by the means of. It is more intimate. It is through God whatever is is.
     These often self-appointed guardians of how we are to think have raised and  provoke a warfare against awareness of our identity, we who are incorporated into Christ. 1 Co 12:12, "For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ." Christ Jesus was the Seed of an entire crop of sons. He is the head of a many-membered body. Head and body is "the Christ." " Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. " (1 Cor 12:27) "Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit." (1 Cor 6:15-17) "For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones." (Eph 5:30) Now how about a statement from Him who said, My glory I will not share with another." This is out of Jesus' own mouth must seem to many blasphemous for us to believe, "And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. (Jn 17:22-23) If that doesn't get some devils writhing I'll go one step beyond. "That in the dispensation of the fullness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him: In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will." (Eph 1:10) Oooh! Glory halleluiah! Praise the One, the All, the Absolute! Him Who "worketh all things" is gathering "together in one all things" and re-heading them with Christ! BELIEVE!

---James Rohde

Navigation

[0] Message Index

Go to full version