Gary Amirault gets the Skull and Crossbones Award

[legoman]

Just found this:

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/GaryAmirault.htm

Universalist Gary Amirault

of Tentmaker.org gets

The Skull and Crossbones Award


Gary Amirault of Tentmaker.org gets the infamous Skull and Crossbones Award for his dangerous teachings. He spreads his beloved doctrine and heresy of Universalism (everyone will be saved) as Christian truth. That teaching is also known as the Doctrine of Inclusion, Ultimate Reconciliation, Universal Salvation, Universal Redemption or Universal Restoration. Gary Amirault propagates this false doctrine primarily by:

● presenting partial truths as the whole truth

● citing something instead of the Scriptures for evidence —namely the ante Nicene fathers, who believed in Universalism (giving the false impression they all believed the same way, which they didn't)

● distorting the few Scriptures and not comparing them to other related Scriptures

● misapplying God's love while overlooking His justice and righteousness

● wrongly thinking God's will in salvation is always done among man

Among other things, Amirault teaches:



Those Christians who believe everyone will ultimately be saved do NOT believe so from wishful thinking or "sloppy agape" as they so often are accused of—they believe so because it is plainly written in EVERY SINGLE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE. So dear reader, if you accuse those who believe Jesus will save all mankind of being a heretic, you are accusing someone of simply believing what is plainly written in the Bible. (All caps emphasis is his.)

Unfounded statements like that can mislead the gullible and those unacquainted with the Scriptures.

3 Groups of Scriptures

Both Universalism and Amirault are unquestionably defeated primarily by three large groupings of Scriptures:

1) All the many Scriptures which teach there is a place of torment in fire after death awaiting the impure in heart. Sometimes this place is referred to as hell, the fiery furnace, lake of fire, etc. (If all were going to heaven there would be no such place of fiery punishment for some. The truth is there are now people in this horrible place suffering—Judas Iscariot, the people who resided in Sodom when destroyed by fire, etc.)

2) All the many Scriptures which teach there are two types of people—the children of God and the children of the devil; the saved and the lost; the righteous and the wicked; the spiritually alive and the spiritually dead; etc. (If all were going to heaven there could only be one type of people—the redeemed, saved, child of God, etc.)

3) All the many Scriptures which teach there are conditions, on man's part, to initially receive and retain salvation after it is received. The conditions for initial salvation are repentance from sin and a submissive faith in Jesus Christ for forgiveness and salvation (Acts 20:21; 2 Pet. 3:9; etc.). The conditions for final salvation are endurance to the end and holiness (Mt. 10:22; Heb. 3:14; Rev. 2:10,11; 1 Cor. 15:2; 1 John 2:24-26; Mt. 5:8; Heb. 12:14; etc.). Those same conditions can be refused, resisted, ignored, neglected, etc. by man. See John 5:40; Acts 7:51; James 5:19,20etc. (If all were going to heaven merely because Jesus died for everyone, then there would be no conditions for either initial or final salvation since Jesus' death would be that only factor to enter heaven.)

If one would add up the Scriptural evidence from those three groupings against Universalism it would be massive. Hence, Gary Amirault (and all others like him) have to distort, deny, contradict and/or avoid all those Scriptures to embrace the dangerous doctrine that all will go to heaven because Jesus died for everyone.

■ WARNING: Gary Amirault is not correctly handling the Scriptures and, therefore, is spreading a fine-sounding lie (and heresy) as God's truth to the eternal and spiritual detriment of all those who believe it.

To learn the truth, read through the entire New Testament for yourself. To benefit by that knowledge put it into practice. Jesus taught:



He replied, "My mother and brothers are those who hear God's word and put it into practice." (Luke 8:21)

For more information on Universalism, please read this http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/universalism.htm and

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/Godswill.htm

*****************

■ NOTE: Dan Corner is available and willing to debate Gary Amirault (or any others) on Universalism. (Gary likes to debate this subject, but backed out of one such verbal debate with Dan in November '08, even after they both already agreed to such, by placing restrictions on how many Scriptures could be cited as evidence! Amirault also refused the invitation to have a text debate with Dan.)

Graphics copyright Evangelical Outreach

[legoman]

Hope people don't mind me posting this type of thing, but I believe we have to know what is being said out there.  If anyone is trying to share the truth, this is the kind of thing they will run into and we have to be strong in our convictions and know how to answer these attacks and misrepresentations.

BTW, I don't think this guy says anything new, I believe all his points have been addressed previously either here or on the main tentmaker page.  He throws out accusations with little evidence or understanding.

It looks like you can contact him about a debate though, that might be interesting for someone.

Peace.

[WhiteWings]

The 'award page' is hollow and without any contents. It's easy to claim something is wrong without proving things.
I followed the UR link. The keywords on that page are all/forever/fire/etc.
He makes a, not so convincing, attempt to refute the UR view on the word all.
Why only the words all? Seems obvious to me. All is the only word that directly supports UR at first reading.
While he is very much aware what the word meanings of fire/eternal/etc are in UR he doesn't discuss them.
The reason why again is simple: eternal and fire are very strong ET supporting words. So best is not write that some have a different understanding of those words.
So to summarize: The writer might have deep scriptual knowledge but surely doesn't show it and his refuting is very selective.

[martincisneros]

I'm tempted to have a little talk with Dan, but sincerely don't have the time right now.  He just needs to successfully answer my Universal Repentance series of writings point by point, Scripture by Scripture, and conclusively answer it without Evangelical cliches that have no basis in Scripture but are merely Augustianian, Aquinas, or Reformed TRADITIONS.  And beyond that, he needs to successfully prove CONCLUSIVELY that his perspective is a Cross-centered eschatology RATHER THAN a sin-centered eschatology.  What I like about the Word of Faith message, Absolute Postmillenialism, and Christian Universalism is that it's one harmonious message of the Cross from start to finish about every aspect of where we're at to where we're heading -- even if, and Dan would have a legitimate beef on this one point, [I've wanted to spank really hard many a Universalist over this myself,] many Christian Universalists have zero understanding and zero emphasis on the Cross.

[legoman]

His closing argument is full of holes:

If You Perish It Will Be Your Own Fault

Dear reader, if you go to hell it will be your own fault! God wants you to spend eternity with him, but he will not force you to love him (obey him). It is your choice to submit to the Lord Jesus or not, but it is also your eternity. There is no universalism, nor is there eternal security. We must get Biblically saved and stay saved to avoid hell, which does not always happen (Mt. 10:22; Heb. 3:14; Rev. 2:10,11).

The twelfth reason why I reject Universalism is the misuse of the above proof texts and shallow arguments advanced for a belief in such. In other words, there are no solid reasons to believe in it. Most people will go to hell, even though God would prefer to have it otherwise.

Wow, I guess God is powerless to do anything to help save any of His children.  Even though God would prefer it otherwise!  SHOCKING How weak God is.

[martincisneros]

Well, if you take Jesus' comments literally, then if you do go to Hell, then it will be totally your fault.  But aren't you glad that that's not the end of the story because of all of Creation being reheaded in Him?  The Gospel is much bigger than about the just and the unjust.  It's about the just giving themselves as a sacrifice for the unjust to bring them to God.  We had the distinguishing characteristics of the just and the unjust just simply with the Mosaic Law.  But we're assured of the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus hybridizing the entirety of Creation before Son returns the Kingdom to Father in 1Corinthians 15:28.  God's not creating justified sinners in heaven in the Evangelical way of looking at it, but He's clothing all of us in His righteousness after He's given us a thorough bath in the Blood of Jesus and the Covenants of Promise, both here and in the ages to come.  As a good Postmillenialist would point out, the gates of Hell won't prevail against the Church.

[lsmann2]

I'm going to write those folks and tell them even Satan will be reconciled back to God. Maybe they'll give me an award too!! :laughing7:

"Better a lean award, than a fat judgement" Ben Franklin

Lee

[WhiteWings]

Dear reader, if you go to hell it will be your own fault! God wants you to spend eternity with him, but he will not force you to love him (obey him). It is your choice to submit to the Lord Jesus or not

Poor David, Job, Isaiah, Daniel, ..... they never heard about Jesus.

[WhiteWings]

Lee,

Don't forget playing the Hitler card. That usually works very well too.

I wonder why I have to burn for eternity after a short life of say 80 years.
Satan is having fun for millenia and gets the same hell....

[martincisneros]

"Better a lean award, than a fat judgement" Ben Franklin

I love Ben Franklin.  His prowess with the ladies was always greatly exaggerated by his critics and fans alike but he had enough of a sense of humor to just leave it alone and not try to set anyone straight on the real situation. :icon_jokercolor:

Satan is having fun for millenia and gets the same hell....

That does sorta deny quite a bit of Scripture about punishments fitting the crime, equity, balance, degrees of restitution; differing weights and differing scales being an abomination to the Lord with every ounce of whatever out of all of us getting an equality of eternal torments -- when eternity is the great equalizer no matter how benign some would wish to make it for some.  If I slap someone in the face for all of eternity, kick them in the groin for all of eternity, or miraculously hit them in the head with a bat for all of eternity without having made their head into lasagna long before that -- but let's say it could go on and on with the bat for all of eternity -- isn't the eternity part the great equalizer to where even the weakest child slapping you on the face might mean next to nothing, but allowed to carry on like that for an eternity would eventually really become painful with wearing you down with something with no end in sight??

[lsmann2]

"Better a lean award, than a fat judgement" Ben Franklin

I love Ben Franklin.  His prowess with the ladies was always greatly exaggerated by his critics and fans alike but he had enough of a sense of humor to just leave it alone and not try to set anyone straight on the real situation. :icon_jokercolor:

Satan is having fun for millenia and gets the same hell....

That does sorta deny quite a bit of Scripture about punishments fitting the crime, equity, balance, degrees of restitution; differing weights and differing scales being an abomination to the Lord with every ounce of whatever out of all of us getting an equality of eternal torments -- when eternity is the great equalizer no matter how benign some would wish to make it for some.  If I slap someone in the face for all of eternity, kick them in the groin for all of eternity, or miraculously hit them in the head with a bat for all of eternity without having made their head into lasagna long before that -- but let's say it could go on and on with the bat for all of eternity -- isn't the eternity part the great equalizer to where even the weakest child slapping you on the face might mean next to nothing, but allowed to carry on like that for an eternity would eventually really become painful with wearing you down with something with no end in sight??

That's why understanding that "eternal" in the English Bibles really pertains to ages or eons. Our blessings we experience are not just for us. They will serve to bless all. God's blessings and love are inclusionary, not exclusionary!

[jabcat]

I've seen this goober before...ignorance in print.

[Doc]

His closing argument is full of holes:

If You Perish It Will Be Your Own Fault

Dear reader, if you go to hell it will be your own fault! God wants you to spend eternity with him, but he will not force you to love him (obey him). It is your choice to submit to the Lord Jesus or not, but it is also your eternity. There is no universalism, nor is there eternal security. We must get Biblically saved and stay saved to avoid hell, which does not always happen (Mt. 10:22; Heb. 3:14; Rev. 2:10,11).

The twelfth reason why I reject Universalism is the misuse of the above proof texts and shallow arguments advanced for a belief in such. In other words, there are no solid reasons to believe in it. Most people will go to hell, even though God would prefer to have it otherwise.

Wow, I guess God is powerless to do anything to help save any of His children.  Even though God would prefer it otherwise!  SHOCKING How weak God is.

Well, I hate to say this, because I don't want to start an argument or get the thread unnecessarily locked (so I'll be careful how I say this), but this stuff from Dan is an excellent illustration of why I believe that it's important to understand the Sovereign will of God. Because if it ultimately is true that it's our fault that we go to "hell" then it's also ultimately our "fault" that we are saved from it. Which would mean that we ultimately save ourselves (through the power of our decision or actions), which is unscriptural.

[WhiteWings]

Hi Doc,

I think it even goes beyond the no/free will view.
God has a plan. The outcome and timespan of that plan is know to God.
There are many ways to reach the same destination.
God can drag a billion people in a billion different ways to the same destination.
Just as well as God can have planned that even with free will people end up at the destination He determined.

So I think all will agree that in their view of no/free will Gods plan is fixed. The outcome of the plan is known. The outcome of the plan is how He wants it to be.

[martincisneros]

Because if it ultimately is true that it's our fault that we go to "hell" then it's also ultimately our "fault" that we are saved from it. Which would mean that we ultimately save ourselves (through the power of our decision or actions), which is unscriptural.

That's a surprise traditional Matthew 25:46 argument I'm hearing out of you, that if the nature of one is necessarily endless, so's the other; i.e., if the cause of one is necessarily one thing, then the cause of the other is necessarily the same thing.  No, our wills effect absolutely everything except for our ultimate destiny.  How all of this ultimately turns out winds up going back to a man by the name of Abraham, and his relationship between Father and Son, and his not having withheld his only begotten, so that God was covenant bound to go just as far and further with the second mile.  The autopilot part of it all having to end in mercy triumphing over judgment was set in motion a long time ago, irrespective of how far any of us get off of the original flight plan.  And the horrors that face many are about how far off of the landing pad they're getting their jet.  So, the turbulence, and where necessary engine failure, and other things start kicking in -- but to all appearances, people are flying around daily where they please if their lives aren't submitted to the Name and Cross of Christ Jesus.

[sven]

they fullfill the scriptures by their behaviour

For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. (1Tim. 4:10)

[Doc]

Because if it ultimately is true that it's our fault that we go to "hell" then it's also ultimately our "fault" that we are saved from it. Which would mean that we ultimately save ourselves (through the power of our decision or actions), which is unscriptural.

That's a surprise traditional Matthew 25:46 argument I'm hearing out of you, that if the nature of one is necessarily endless, so's the other; i.e., if the cause of one is necessarily one thing, then the cause of the other is necessarily the same thing.  No, our wills effect absolutely everything except for our ultimate destiny.  How all of this ultimately turns out winds up going back to a man by the name of Abraham, and his relationship between Father and Son, and his not having withheld his only begotten, so that God was covenant bound to go just as far and further with the second mile.  The autopilot part of it all having to end in mercy triumphing over judgment was set in motion a long time ago, irrespective of how far any of us get off of the original flight plan.  And the horrors that face many are about how far off of the landing pad they're getting their jet.  So, the turbulence, and where necessary engine failure, and other things start kicking in -- but to all appearances, people are flying around daily where they please if their lives aren't submitted to the Name and Cross of Christ Jesus.

But that wasn't what I was saying at all (at least I don't think I was). What I'm saying is; Who gives us the faith to believe (and all that entails) unto experiencing our own salvation already provided to us? Is it ultimately our decision, or is it God's? I think the scripture is clear: "You did not choose me, but I chose you". And many other verses that speak to this theme.

[Doc]

Hi Doc,

I think it even goes beyond the no/free will view.
God has a plan. The outcome and timespan of that plan is know to God.
There are many ways to reach the same destination.
God can drag a billion people in a billion different ways to the same destination.
Just as well as God can have planned that even with free will people end up at the destination He determined.

So I think all will agree that in their view of no/free will Gods plan is fixed. The outcome of the plan is known. The outcome of the plan is how He wants it to be.

I agree, WW.
I think which side of the fence you land on on the issue (or even if you stay on the fence), depends on how one looks at it.

[martincisneros]

But that wasn't what I was saying at all (at least I don't think I was). What I'm saying is; Who gives us the faith to believe (and all that entails) unto experiencing our own salvation already provided to us? Is it ultimately our decision, or is it God's? I think the scripture is clear: "You did not choose me, but I chose you". And many other verses that speak to this theme.

Again, the difference between process and ultimate outcome.  Because He didn't choose all when He was saying that to the Apostles.  But we do know that ultimately all are chosen, irrespective of what happens in the meantime, and even if there's a distinguishing of the latter fruits from those that are called, chosen, and faithful.  The fact that some in the Scriptures in the book of Revelation are called, chosen, and faithful and the fact that 2Peter 1 places the burden of making our calling and election sure squarely on our shoulders, then I can't deny the fact that some are being distinguished as being faithful.  If it was THE truth rather than A truth about it being God at work within us to will and to do according to His good pleasure 100% of the time, then why was St. Paul apprehensive that he'd be found worthy, that he wouldn't have labored in vain, and why was he beating his flesh in line if God was automatically going to do that, or if what he was going through was God doing that?  See what I mean?  St. Paul didn't reflect a belief in this idea of it always being God at work, even in his own ministry -- but was deeply concerned about the Churches in 2Corinthians 12 (if I got the chapter number reference wrong, then the chapter previous to that one) -- although he was the one that was FULLY PERSUADED of how everything would ULTIMATELY turn out beyond the ages that were assigned by God as the time frame during which the peculiar work of redemption through what Jesus Christ would do would be accomplished within them.

[legoman]

But that wasn't what I was saying at all (at least I don't think I was). What I'm saying is; Who gives us the faith to believe (and all that entails) unto experiencing our own salvation already provided to us? Is it ultimately our decision, or is it God's? I think the scripture is clear: "You did not choose me, but I chose you". And many other verses that speak to this theme.

Again, the difference between process and ultimate outcome.  Because He didn't choose all when He was saying that to the Apostles.  But we do know that ultimately all are chosen, irrespective of what happens in the meantime, and even if there's a distinguishing of the latter fruits from those that are called, chosen, and faithful.  The fact that some in the Scriptures in the book of Revelation are called, chosen, and faithful and the fact that 2Peter 1 places the burden of making our calling and election sure squarely on our shoulders, then I can't deny the fact that some are being distinguished as being faithful.  If it was THE truth rather than A truth about it being God at work within us to will and to do according to His good pleasure 100% of the time, then why was St. Paul apprehensive that he'd be found worthy, that he wouldn't have labored in vain, and why was he beating his flesh in line if God was automatically going to do that, or if what he was going through was God doing that?  See what I mean?  St. Paul didn't reflect a belief in this idea of it always being God at work, even in his own ministry -- but was deeply concerned about the Churches in 2Corinthians 12 (if I got the chapter number reference wrong, then the chapter previous to that one) -- although he was the one that was FULLY PERSUADED of how everything would ULTIMATELY turn out beyond the ages that were assigned by God as the time frame during which the peculiar work of redemption through what Jesus Christ would do would be accomplished within them.

Well there is Eph 1:4 which shows some (the elect) were chosen before the foundation of the world.

But I look at it like this.  God has laid it all out for us, but we still have to DO IT.  God doesn't "automatically" do anything for us.  We will do it - we will do the works God has prepared for us (we don't know what they are though, until it happens).  Even when we are running around worrying about ourselves and others.  Example: Paul's deep concern about the Churches.  God laid it out that way and Paul did it (the worry/concern), and it was for a purpose, so Paul (and others) would learn.  That is how God teaches us I think. 

I think one of the key things to learn here is to not worry about things so much.  God has it covered, and has a plan, even when things are not going our way.

Peace.

[Doc]

But that wasn't what I was saying at all (at least I don't think I was). What I'm saying is; Who gives us the faith to believe (and all that entails) unto experiencing our own salvation already provided to us? Is it ultimately our decision, or is it God's? I think the scripture is clear: "You did not choose me, but I chose you". And many other verses that speak to this theme.

Again, the difference between process and ultimate outcome.  Because He didn't choose all when He was saying that to the Apostles.  But we do know that ultimately all are chosen, irrespective of what happens in the meantime, and even if there's a distinguishing of the latter fruits from those that are called, chosen, and faithful.  The fact that some in the Scriptures in the book of Revelation are called, chosen, and faithful and the fact that 2Peter 1 places the burden of making our calling and election sure squarely on our shoulders, then I can't deny the fact that some are being distinguished as being faithful.  If it was THE truth rather than A truth about it being God at work within us to will and to do according to His good pleasure 100% of the time, then why was St. Paul apprehensive that he'd be found worthy, that he wouldn't have labored in vain, and why was he beating his flesh in line if God was automatically going to do that, or if what he was going through was God doing that?  See what I mean?  St. Paul didn't reflect a belief in this idea of it always being God at work, even in his own ministry -- but was deeply concerned about the Churches in 2Corinthians 12 (if I got the chapter number reference wrong, then the chapter previous to that one) -- although he was the one that was FULLY PERSUADED of how everything would ULTIMATELY turn out beyond the ages that were assigned by God as the time frame during which the peculiar work of redemption through what Jesus Christ would do would be accomplished within them.

Interesting observations. I certainly agree that there is a distinction between process and ultimate outcome, and I actually think that this is what speaks to the issue that you raise regarding Paul and his personal uncertainty vs. what he knew about how everything would turn out. There always seems to be this dichotomy in scripture about the human perspective (process) vs. the divine perspective (ultimate outcome). But John makes it clear that no one has anything not given him from heaven. We are to work out (process) our salvation with fear and trembling, even though it is made equally clear it's a done deal (ultimate outcome). There is also the issue of rewards that I think Paul was also concerned about. Paul didn't want the lowest common denominator, he wanted to WIN the race even though I don't think he really had any doubt he'd finish it.

I'll go back and look at 2 Corinthians to see what pops up.

[martincisneros]

There is also the issue of rewards that I think Paul was also concerned about. Paul didn't want the lowest common denominator, he wanted to WIN the race even though I don't think he really had any doubt he'd finish it.

Paul's name replaced Judas's name as one of the names on the foundation of New Jerusalem, where going up from the bottom you'd have: Peter, Paul, James, John, etc., etc.  The rewards are demensions of compassion roles, including but not limited to relieving suffering on other worlds and in other demensions and ministry to fallen angels.  What if you could be in several different places at once, like the Holy Spirit, and not only teaching but dealing with no limitations with all of the suffering that you'd be seeing?  Would that make whatever you had to go through in this life with the Written Word and with self discipline and anything else along the way to pursue obedience to Him worth those kinds of rewards?? 

What if in the "all in all" world beyond the reign of Christ -- what if you were creating planets and life? since the increase of His Kingdom shall never end...  His rewards have always been love based, as His preferred harvests for our lives in this life are love rooted.  I'm in the midst of something coming my way right now that my faith has been tracking for nearly two years [well, perhaps 18 to 20 total] that I'm starting to think is reward based more than harvest based because you can generally, even spiritually, define the boundaries of a harvest.  And all that the Holy Spirit keeps telling me about it, I'm continuously like "whah???"

That's something that the Calvinists missed a long time ago in their assertion that if the punishments of the wicked are limited, then the rewards of the righteous must be limited.  The rewards of the righteous are limited and are proportioned to their walk of faith in this world and how many of God's promises they inherited in this life and dispensed to others at His direction.  Obedience is a biggy with God -- even if it makes you look like a lamb to the slaughter, although you're more than a conquerer through Him that loved you. 

When you look at God's rewards, they do seem to be disproportionately bigger than anything you've sown for with your confession of His Written Word and your giving, but there are degrees that'll range from what some might call entry level all of the way up to but not including Father's throne (i.e. in an absolute sense -- although in all other senses, yes, that too).  We sit with Him in heavenly places and sit on His Father's throne just as He sits on Father's throne, but the Scriptures will still say all things are under His feet except for the One Who put all things under His feet -- which necessarily puts absolutely all else under the care, custody, and disciplinary work of His/Our saving reign.

[lsmann2]

That's something that the Calvinists missed a long time ago in their assertion that if the punishments of the wicked are limited, then the rewards of the righteous must be limited.  The rewards of the righteous are limited and are proportioned to their walk of faith in this world and how many of God's promises they inherited in this life and dispensed to others at His direction.  Obedience is a biggy with God -- even if it makes you look like a lamb to the slaughter, although you're more than a conquerer through Him that loved you. 

When you look at God's rewards, they do seem to be disproportionately bigger than anything you've sown for with your confession of His Written Word and your giving, but there are degrees that'll range from what some might call entry level all of the way up to but not including Father's throne (i.e. in an absolute sense -- although in all other senses, yes, that too).  We sit with Him in heavenly places and sit on His Father's throne just as He sits on Father's throne, but the Scriptures will still say all things are under His feet except for the One Who put all things under His feet -- which necessarily puts absolutely all else under the care, custody, and disciplinary work of His/Our saving reign.

That thought has really taken root in me over the last year or so. We get to see our (potential) rewards as God reveals them through Scripture. (Paul calls them crowns or wreaths) Like you stated, these rewards seem disproportional to what we really deserve.
I've really started to wonder, how much grander will be the reward for those whom God does not reveal or grant the ability to believe now, when He ultimately allows there minds to be illumined to His purposes?
There's no real Scriptural basis for this thought other than the mind blowing grace being poured out on us today. I get so caught up in "what's in it for me" type thinking, it has made me pause and ask, "If it's this great for me, how much greater will He pour out blessings on those who've had thier minds darkened by Him for now, but will be brought into belief later?"
We're saved and we know it. This is a fantastic blessed knowledge. How mind blowing will it be for others when they have this same knowedge?

[Tim B]

Those Christians who believe everyone will ultimately be saved do NOT believe so from wishful thinking or "sloppy agape" as they so often are accused of—they believe so because it is plainly written in EVERY SINGLE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE.

Wait, isn't that the complete opposite of what URists believe??

Sounds like hyperbole and/or dishonesty. Probably both.  :thumbdown:

[lsmann2]

Not sure why my last post got "quoted" in with the quote? Must have done something wrong. (Should I be confessing that in public?) :dontknow:
Lee