Something I thought about while reading the Gospel of Thomas

[Implosion]

I know that Christian Universalism teaches that all people will be reconciled into heaven (or with God), but I really feel there might be more. I'm sure this has probably already been discussed, and in that case I really want to hear what you have to say about it. Anyways, here is what I have come across:

We know that those who accept Jesus and follow his ways will be united with God in Heaven. And we know Hell is a false idea. But in the Universalistic teachings (or so what I've read, as I'm new to this line of thinking), everybody will ultimately be reconciled to God, because Jesus saved them. Well, what about those that continually refuse to repent? I know the Bible talks about those kind of people (I'm too tired right now to find the exact verses). You know the verses that talk about the chaff being cast away, the unfruitful branches being burned, those who are cast into the lake of fire, (and many other things)? Well, what if they themselves (as in, their individual selves and individual awareness) aren't preserved and are destroyed, but the soul eventually absorbs back into God? What I mean is, their personal sense of individuality is completely removed, and they are brought back into God? So say those who follow Jesus and repent and become like him, keep their individuality and retain their memories, and are given into a literal "heaven" that most people think of heaven as (with streets of gold and such), but those that don't follow him are essentially destroyed, but their matter is drawn back into God?

I know I am not the best at writing this out, this is kinda hard to describe, but I hope you get what I am talking about. I don't know where this fits in, but in reading the Gospel of Thomas and having the spirit of God personally show you the meaning of his sayings, it really seems to me like this is a possibility.

[Paul Hazelwood]

Well, what about those that continually refuse to repent?

I'm writing from the perspective of traditional religion rather than making an assumption of what you believe, so keep that in mind as you read.

Typically the assumption is that our free will allows us to make choices apart from Gods intention or "will".   There is no such truth in scripture.   If our will is totally free then we have the power to cause God to fail, since that is not possible, then we cannot have a will that is free to do anything apart from Gods intention.

If John 6:44 (and its witness scripture) is true,  and Eccesiastes 3:1 (and its witness scripture) is true, then with only those two scripture truths alone we can come to a reasonable conclusion that everyone will be drawn to Jesus at the Time of Gods choosing.

My Son put it in a good way, While we make choices, God knows how to eventually cause us to believe.

[willieH]

willieH: Hi Implosion!    to TENTMAKER! 

I know that Christian Universalism teaches that all people will be reconciled into heaven (or with God), but I really feel there might be more. I'm sure this has probably already been discussed, and in that case I really want to hear what you have to say about it. Anyways, here is what I have come across:

We know that those who accept Jesus and follow his ways will be united with God in Heaven. And we know Hell is a false idea. But in the Universalistic teachings (or so what I've read, as I'm new to this line of thinking), everybody will ultimately be reconciled to God, because Jesus saved them. Well, what about those that continually refuse to repent?

Repentence is a fact which shall be accomplished in ALL human beings, by the conclusion of the LAST DAY... (John 12:48)

The JUDGMENT of GOD is a TEACHER... (Is 26:9)

Just as you have bowed at the knee and confessed with the tongue that JESUS CHRIST is LORD... so shall ALL MEN:  (Phil 2:10-11 / Rom 14:11 / Is 45:23)

CONFESSION of CHRIST as LORD, can only be done by the empowerment of the HOLY SPIRIT (1 Cor 12:3) ...this coincides with Rom 10:13

Such CONFESSION is not done of one's will, rather it is part of the WORK of GOD... which draws each one (John 12:32) and then reveals Himself to each individual in due time (1 Tim 2:3-6)

There is no verse that states that if this is not SPIRITUALLY accomplished in YOU in this NATURAL lifetime (before your NATURAL death), that you cannot be SPIRITUALLY saved...

SALVATION is a SPIRITUAL (not NATURAL) matter...

I know the Bible talks about those kind of people (I'm too tired right now to find the exact verses). You know the verses that talk about the chaff being cast away, the unfruitful branches being burned, those who are cast into the lake of fire, (and many other things)? Well, what if they themselves (as in, their individual selves and individual awareness) aren't preserved and are destroyed, but the soul eventually absorbs back into God? What I mean is, their personal sense of individuality is completely removed, and they are brought back into God? So say those who follow Jesus and repent and become like him, keep their individuality and retain their memories, and are given into a literal "heaven" that most people think of heaven as (with streets of gold and such), but those that don't follow him are essentially destroyed, but their matter is drawn back into God?

This is quite a statement there Implosion... and within it are several discussions contained...

In the end ALL shall be absorbed into YHVH, as our destiny is for HIM to be ALL in ALL of us... (1 Cor 15:28)

HIS WILL is the only WILL to be done... 

I know I am not the best at writing this out, this is kinda hard to describe, but I hope you get what I am talking about. I don't know where this fits in, but in reading the Gospel of Thomas and having the spirit of God personally show you the meaning of his sayings, it really seems to me like this is a possibility.

It is your business what you believe Implosion, and far be it from me to even wish to convince you of anything... however... If you are in a search for TRUTH, then I do recommend to you, that you confine the parameters of your beliefs to Scripture, and not peripheral writings such as the gospel of Thomas.

In discussion, you are entitled to enter quotes from such a writing, but quoting writings such as the gospel of Thomas, will give no more basis for truth, than a quote from a John Grisham novel...

If however you wish to note Scripture, ...whether or not your view is actually  TRUTH, ...at least you bring to the table, the commonly acceptable references on which to base it...

There is a reason why the "gospel of Thomas" and other supposed "gospels" (such as the "gospel" of Judas or, of Phillip, of Mary, of Peter, of the Hebrews, of the Egyptians, of the Nazoreans, etc.) are not considered Scripture... and that reason is that, whether we believe or not...

GOD does maintain control over what is or is not considered His WORD.

And enacts that control within the doings of man concerning it.

pEaCe...
...willieH 

[Implosion]

Well WillieH, I believe that those other gospels you mentioned are 100% just as much a source of truth as of the official canon of scripture. The "Bible" as we have now is simply a collection of manuscripts and writings, which is exactly what the other gospels are. Don't forget that the original Authorized Version of the Bible contained 80 books, instead of the 66 we have today. I also would hope you have read about why, how, and who decided what would be in the Bible and what wouldn't.

Just because something isn't in the Bible, doesn't mean it isn't just as inspired by God as what is in the Bible. ESPECIALLY, when this particular book we are talking about is presumed to be older than what we have in the official Gospels. Which would be essentially be even closer to the actual words Jesus spoke.

[willieH]

willieH: Hi Implosion...

So glad you so enjoyed my WELCOME to you... 

You like getting down to business...    fine with me!   

Well WillieH, I believe that those other gospels you mentioned are 100% just as much a source of truth as of the official canon of scripture.

Well young Implosion, ...as I stated in my first post to you, ...you are welcome to believe what you will...  As I also told you, it is not on my agenda to CONVINCE you of anything...  So please, don't try to convince me of "those other gospels"... it is a waste of time...

Might I ask, are you a Catholic, Implosion?  If so, it is understandable that you have taken a defensive position on behalf of the gospel of Thomas... 

If you are a seeker of TRUTH, you must decide what you are willing to consider in order to arrive at that "truth"...  Each must decide for himself, and let the other do the same... I have made a suggestion which gives us common ground on which to stand in discussion...

If you have decided that Apocryphal books are INSPIRED, then you will meet with opposition in discussion, from most NON-Catholic Christian believers... one of which is myself...  I would oppose quotations from the book of Mormon for the same reason.

You are welcome to place your faith and beliefs in any writings you choose, but if we are to discuss Biblical doctrine... then the "Biblical Canon" is our only common ground!

The "Bible" as we have now is simply a collection of manuscripts and writings, which is exactly what the other gospels are. Don't forget that the original Authorized Version of the Bible contained 80 books, instead of the 66 we have today.

Don't YOU forget that I suggested to you that GOD has control over what IS and what IS NOT His Word, ...the common ground amongst believers in CHRIST, is the Canon... 66 books, not 80... 

Believe what you will...

That both the Catholic Church, and most all other Christian churches accept the Canon, is the common ground upon which all "Christians" can communicate...

For example, an insistence by SDA'S (which consider Ellen White's writings as inspired or) Christian Scientists (which consider Mary Baker Eddy's writings inspired) or Mormons ( which consider the writings of Joseph Smith, ...the book of Mormon),  shall block communication when these "peripheral" writings are brought into discussion... in the same way that the APOCRYPHA will...

I also would hope you have read about why, how, and who decided what would be in the Bible and what wouldn't.

My dear new friend... I would like to focus on ...WHO... has actually decided these "changes"...

 :omg:  You percieve that MEN have decided these changes, ...and just left poor ol' GOD out of it??  Is that what you truly believe Implosion???  ...  :omg: 

How can you even consider the WORD of GOD as being tossed about by whims of SINFUL MEN, as GOD "indifferently stands by", as MEN do this?!?!   

I choose otherwise... saying that the COMMON GROUND has been SET by GOD... and the 66 books are that COMMON GROUND, upon which ALL CHRIST believers can communicate... And that HE had EVERYTHING to do with the present group of 66 Books with which ALL Christianity finds agreement in observing Scripture!

If you cannot find the TRUTH of GOD, in those 66 CANONICAL books of the Bible,   IMO, ...you shall NOT FIND IT at all... 

They are COMPLETELY sufficient, and need no assistance from any peripheral writings be they the "Book of Mormon", or the "gospel of Thomas"... 

That is not to say that INSPIRATION is completely and absolutely confined to the Canonical books... what I am saying is that the Catholic Church agrees that the Canon is Scripture, and within their scope of Religion... so use it... 

If GOD is to be discussed with others OUTSIDE the RCC... then the Canon is that which must be used...

I am not asking you to use something you do not believe in... so please, don't ask me to do so... 

If we assemble our views from, and stand upon the common ground found within the Canon, there will certainly be much LESS confrontation between groups which find themselves affiliated with peripheral writings (such as yourself)... and those which do not...(such as me)

The Scriptures are the Scriptures young Implosion... as I said believe what you will as to what is in them, and/or ...outside them...

For you, obviously the Apocrypha has INSPIRATIONAL meaning... for me, it is MEANINGLESS... 

I have not studied the Apocrypha, nor do I care to.  Also, I have not studied the Koran, or Buddhist writings either, finding them just as unnecessary...

I spend my time amidst what the LORD has given to all Christian groups and believers, as common ground... that way, I can communicate with a Protestant, Catholic, Adventist (which I once was), Mormon, Jehovah Witness or Christian Scientist... as we stand upon the common turf known as the Biblical Canon... 

So my recommendation to you still stands...    In discussion, use any and all the 66 books which we hold IN COMMON... but leave out the peripheral writings as verification of your beliefs... for they only verify within the small circle of Apocrypha believers, ...and are just unnecessary writings to those outside that circle...

Just because something isn't in the Bible, doesn't mean it isn't just as inspired by God as what is in the Bible. ESPECIALLY, when this particular book we are talking about is presumed to be older than what we have in the official Gospels. Which would be essentially be even closer to the actual words Jesus spoke.

First... Because the gospel of Thomas is POSSIBLY older, does not in any way, verify it as closer to JESUS' spoken words... INSPIRATION of GOD, is what provides us with the WORDS of JESUS, not the age of the document...

To attribute the AGE of a writing as verification it is TRUTH, is like saying because a million people (large number) believe something is verification of that given belief as TRUTH...

What if a MILLION people that were very OLD believed Elephants could tie square knots... would that set it in stone forya? 

Second... the "fragments" of the gospel of Thomas are not proven as OLDER than any of the 4 gospels... this is at best just guesswork, in any event... no one KNOWS the true age of ANY of these fragmented documents...

Scientists believe the Universe to be 13.4 billion "years" old... without proof.  They also believe that the earth is some 4-7 Million "years" old (these guesses change yearly)...  I say, how can there be "years" prior to the earth's existence?  For a YEAR is one of EARTH's revolutions around the SUN... 

Not only that, but it is just as proveable that the earth AND Universe are a little over 6000 years old... and I believe I can PROVE it... but hey -- thats another discussion... 

In any event, the age of a document does not make it SPIRITUAL... nor INSPIRED, nor TRUTH...

You are welcome to presume away all you like, brother Implosion... your "quotes" will be largely disregarded in most Scriptural discussions... but "quote away" if you must...    What you will find is objection to those "quotes"...

You are welcome to entertain the Koran or the many ancient writings of Eastern religions, as Inspired if you so choose, ...many do, many will, ...many are mistaken...

I have said enough new brother...  ...and believe what you will... 

pEaCe...
...willieH 

[whyiloveitaly]

WillieH:

Let's remember that Jesus said a WHOLE LOT of things that were not written in the Scriptures. That doesn't mean they weren't of the Holy Spirit.
If the Jews had believed only in those who quoted the Old Testament and didn't say anything new, they would have crucified Jesus at about 5 years of age.
Don't you agree?

Brian