I've been engaged in a discussion on universal salvation here:
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?p=42919&posted=1#post42919
I post as 'Gabriel'.
Won't anyone join the fun?
They are missing the concept of the ages. So they are coming to the conclusion that the result of the end of one age is the result for all time.
Do the ages stop altogether when the elect [the saints] come to rule and reign with Christ? Or do things progress from there until God is all in all?
How do they explain God being all in all when Christ hands the kingdom over to the Father--in some future age-- if some [most] are still separated in the lake of fire?
Quote from: Molly on January 15, 2011, 11:12:10 PM
They are missing the concept of the ages. So they are coming to the conclusion that the result of the end of one age is the result for all time.
Do the ages stop altogether when the elect [the saints] come to rule and reign with Christ? Or do things progress from there until God is all in all?
How do they explain God being all in all when Christ hands the kingdom over to the Father--in some future age-- if some [most] are still separated in the lake of fire?
:thumbsup:
Okay, I tried . . . I went to the site and tried to read some of the stuff and when I read your posts . . . it felt like someone trying to provoke a sleeping dog to wake up and the dog wasn't having any of it. I didn't read through the whole thread because those responding just don't have the eyes to see what you're seeing. Nor are they interested in seeing the scales fall because according to their understanding, their vision is just fine and it's yours that's got problems.
A mind that is closed is a fortress that becomes impenetrable. They simply aren't at the place where they could even comprehend that just maybe, what Jesus did wasn't just for those in the world that would just happen to be at the right place at the right time to hear the gospel and respond positively to it, but that he also redeemed those who were homeless and had no opportunity to hear the gospel preached, to those where were born into paganisms where there was no hope of the child ever hearing about Jesus due to being rasied in a family that despises Christians, God, Christ . . .the blood of Jesus just can't reach those people, it can only reach the ones' who's minds willingly accept what he did was for "them".
It really felt like you were trying to pursuade them how valuable this gift is that you've been given and not only do they not see it as valuable, they don't even recognize what it is in the first place.
Religion is the hardening compound that makes up the brick houses around us. The only thing that can penetrait that is the Father's will. It's coming, they just aren't aware of it yet.
Quote from: Molly on January 15, 2011, 11:12:10 PM
They are missing the concept of the ages. So they are coming to the conclusion that the result of the end of one age is the result for all time.
Do the ages stop altogether when the elect [the saints] come to rule and reign with Christ? Or do things progress from there until God is all in all?
How do they explain God being all in all when Christ hands the kingdom over to the Father--in some future age-- if some [most] are still separated in the lake of fire?
I agree, even though I'd rather use the word "eon" than "age", as there can be several ages within an eon, to my understanding.
Maybe you should direct them to teh Divine Calendar. http://www.concordant.org/expohtml/TheEons/TheDivineCalendar.html
Hi SC,
You will never win the debate with the hardcore firecrackers.
But remember there is always a silent majority that reads and conciders your posts.
I know for example some of this forum had similar debates elsewhere.
They once in a while got contacted by people that never posted in public.
So your message may have touched more hearts than you know.
:2c:
Quote from: Aleax on January 16, 2011, 12:27:24 PM
Quote from: Molly on January 15, 2011, 11:12:10 PM
They are missing the concept of the ages. So they are coming to the conclusion that the result of the end of one age is the result for all time.
Do the ages stop altogether when the elect [the saints] come to rule and reign with Christ? Or do things progress from there until God is all in all?
How do they explain God being all in all when Christ hands the kingdom over to the Father--in some future age-- if some [most] are still separated in the lake of fire?
I agree, even though I'd rather use the word "eon" than "age", as there can be several ages within an eon, to my understanding.
Maybe you should direct them to teh Divine Calendar. http://www.concordant.org/expohtml/TheEons/TheDivineCalendar.html
wow. That was an amazing article. Thank you!
:cloud9: Ditto that :thumbsup:
I wonder why this teaching is so hidden from the church? Everyone seems to miss it. If you are not taught it from the beginning, then you have to wait until the grace of God makes it available to you [which in my case has taken years lol]. And, it is grace, because everything about it is hidden, right down to the translation of the original words used to describe it.
3Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
--Heb 11
[the worlds[aions]] "were framed"
G2675
καταρτίζω
katartizō
kat-ar-tid'-zo
From G2596 and a derivative of G739; to complete thoroughly, that is, repair (literally or figuratively) or adjust: - fit, frame, mend, (make) perfect (-ly join together), prepare, restore.
Has anyone read through the debate? They are really being civil towards me, yes? :thumbdown:
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 16, 2011, 07:14:46 PM
Has anyone read through the debate? They are really being civil towards me, yes? :thumbdown:
I read through it. They are being nasty and smug and arrogant, which even if they were right, is so unfortunately the wrong spirit that one knows them by their fruit. It's sad. Because I sense they think they are pleasing God and they want to please him. It's the same old story.
I suggest you change your argument. Why not drop this concept of the eons on them and see what they do?
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 16, 2011, 07:14:46 PM
Has anyone read through the debate? They are really being civil towards me, yes? :thumbdown:
This is why I am done with these debates anywhere but here. I was involved with one a wekk or so ago and told myself, never again. I have no desire to speak to those unwilling to listen. If someone is truly seeking I am more than happy to share my beliefs. If not, I will leave it be.
I'm not sold on the eons argument. I cannot honestly say that aionios never means 'eternal' in the bible.
Quote from: Molly on January 16, 2011, 07:46:20 PM
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 16, 2011, 07:14:46 PM
Has anyone read through the debate? They are really being civil towards me, yes? :thumbdown:
I read through it. They are being nasty and smug and arrogant, which even if they were right, is so unfortunately the wrong spirit that one knows them by their fruit. It's sad. Because I sense they think they are pleasing God and they want to please him. It's the same old story.
I suggest you change your argument. Why not drop this concept of the eons on them and see what they do?
Quote from: Molly on January 16, 2011, 05:45:08 PM
Quote from: Aleax on January 16, 2011, 12:27:24 PM
Quote from: Molly on January 15, 2011, 11:12:10 PM
They are missing the concept of the ages. So they are coming to the conclusion that the result of the end of one age is the result for all time.
Do the ages stop altogether when the elect [the saints] come to rule and reign with Christ? Or do things progress from there until God is all in all?
How do they explain God being all in all when Christ hands the kingdom over to the Father--in some future age-- if some [most] are still separated in the lake of fire?
I agree, even though I'd rather use the word "eon" than "age", as there can be several ages within an eon, to my understanding.
Maybe you should direct them to teh Divine Calendar. http://www.concordant.org/expohtml/TheEons/TheDivineCalendar.html
wow. That was an amazing article. Thank you!
No prob :Sparkletooth:
However, there are varying opinions on the eons too, the chart by the Savior of All fellowship is somewhat different: http://www.martinzender.com/Zenderature/the_eons.htm
And the chart drawn by Dora van Assen has eight eons in total: http://www.lighthouselibrary.com/pdf/VAN%20ASSEN,%20DORA/GRAPHIC%20No.%203%20-%20COMPLETE%20VISION%20[Dora%20Van%20Assen].pdf
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 16, 2011, 08:04:38 PM
I'm not sold on the eons argument. I cannot honestly say that aionios never means 'eternal' in the bible.
Quote from: Molly on January 16, 2011, 07:46:20 PM
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 16, 2011, 07:14:46 PM
Has anyone read through the debate? They are really being civil towards me, yes? :thumbdown:
I read through it. They are being nasty and smug and arrogant, which even if they were right, is so unfortunately the wrong spirit that one knows them by their fruit. It's sad. Because I sense they think they are pleasing God and they want to please him. It's the same old story.
I suggest you change your argument. Why not drop this concept of the eons on them and see what they do?
In my opinion "aionios" does mean both "eternal" and "age-lasting". The context decides which translation should be used. "Aionios God" obviously means "eternal God". However, the Bible does speak of at least five "aions". Because of this I believe in the theology of the eons, for five distinct "eternities" wouldn't make any sense whatsoever.
Quote from: Aleax on January 16, 2011, 08:46:48 PM"Aionios God" obviously means "eternal God".
It does not. imo....
God of the ages doesn't limit God's lifespan. It merely states He's the owner/creator of the ages/time.
He is the God of the ages, and all the ages are 'framed' according to his plan.
This is such a deep and exciting study. I am just standing on the outside looking in with awe.
One thing I just read in aleax's paper is that God gave governance over to man in this aeon. Let all the men who have ever lived get their fill of man's governance such that they will never again ask for a king to rule over them [who is other than King Jesus]. Recently I read that government translates to govern=control and ment=mind--control of the mind. Do I want my mind controlled by men? No. Yet, as someone said, it's a fulltime job to see the nose in front of your face--we are so [continually] deceived.
The ugliness, the cruelty, the unending suffering that man's governance leads to should convince anyone eventually that man cannot rule himself. But this is the eon we are in today, that 'evil age' that we have been rescued from by our Dear Lord.
There are other things going on as well. Things in the heavenlies that modern man no longer considers real. Things that impact us as daily events and as believers. Believers have lost the knowledge and understanding of these things and how they impact the ages. There is so much to know, that knowledge of a little bit of it can lead to conclusions that are, if not totally wrong, at least, distorted. So, it's not so much a matter of teaching someone else, as learning ourselves.
5And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.
6And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.
7If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.
8And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
--Luke 4
Quote from: Aleax on January 16, 2011, 08:14:47 PM
Quote from: Molly on January 16, 2011, 05:45:08 PM
Quote from: Aleax on January 16, 2011, 12:27:24 PM
Quote from: Molly on January 15, 2011, 11:12:10 PM
They are missing the concept of the ages. So they are coming to the conclusion that the result of the end of one age is the result for all time.
Do the ages stop altogether when the elect [the saints] come to rule and reign with Christ? Or do things progress from there until God is all in all?
How do they explain God being all in all when Christ hands the kingdom over to the Father--in some future age-- if some [most] are still separated in the lake of fire?
I agree, even though I'd rather use the word "eon" than "age", as there can be several ages within an eon, to my understanding.
Maybe you should direct them to teh Divine Calendar. http://www.concordant.org/expohtml/TheEons/TheDivineCalendar.html
wow. That was an amazing article. Thank you!
No prob :Sparkletooth:
However, there are varying opinions on the eons too, the chart by the Savior of All fellowship is somewhat different: http://www.martinzender.com/Zenderature/the_eons.htm
And the chart drawn by Dora van Assen has eight eons in total: http://www.lighthouselibrary.com/pdf/VAN%20ASSEN,%20DORA/GRAPHIC%20No.%203%20-%20COMPLETE%20VISION%20[Dora%20Van%20Assen].pdf
Thanks! I think the point is not that we necessarily have to be totally accurate in our understanding of the ages [or eons], but just that we need to know they exist so that we do not draw erroneous conclusions based on our lack of knowledge of them.
For instance, if we are in the age of law where our belief [of the age] is that we are Hebrews and therefore God's chosen people, then all those Jews converting to Christianity are going to look like heretics to us and enemies and worthy of death and just plain wrong. Hence, they kill Jesus and all the apostles.
Equally so, these Christians that see that only the elect will be saved in this age [to rule and reign with Christ] are not wrong so much as short sighted. They are ignoring that this is not the last age, nor the one after this, for that matter.
They want scripture that will prove to them that someone can make it out of the lake of fire. But, that requires not just a scripture, but a change of heart and an openess to God's plan of the ages to see it.
The discussion has moved to here:
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3708
Does anyone leave the lake of fire?
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 17, 2011, 12:01:56 AM
The discussion has moved to here:
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3708
Does anyone leave the lake of fire?
To my simple understanding and to keep it simple--
12But this man, after he had offered
one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
--Heb 10
"forever" in this passage is
eis diēnekes which means into perpetuity and continually.
So the effects of his sacrifice for sin is never ending, until there is
no more sin.We see this state reached in 1 Cor 15.
1 Corinthians 15:24
Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
26
The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27For 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.
28And 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. --1 Cor 15
This is looking way down the line to 'the end' where God is all in all. When this point is reached, how can there still be people being tormented in hell? Instead, we see Paul telling us there is no more death, no more sin, just God all in all.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 16, 2011, 02:55:52 PM
Hi SC,
You will never win the debate with the hardcore firecrackers.
But remember there is always a silent majority that reads and conciders your posts.
I know for example some of this forum had similar debates elsewhere.
They once in a while got contacted by people that never posted in public.
So your message may have touched more hearts than you know.
:2c:
The bolded line reminded me of how, a few weeks ago, the subject of afterlife came up at the church I'm attending.
Only one person stated he firmly believes everyone dying without Jesus will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
Several people argued that the Bible isn't clear on the fate of the unbelievers.
One person said he considered repentance beyond grave possibly Biblical.
Someone suggested Annihilation.
But the thing that surprised me was only one guy was 100% convinced ET (that is, of those who commented on the issue).
As you said there may be more people open to tradition-shattering ideas than one might think.
I told myself I wouldn't ever enter one of these debates again. My spirit is willing but my flesh is weak. :bigGrin:
I put my :2c: in...but if the abuse starts flying I'm out.
Shawn,
You don't need to read the answers. They only have 3 answers; so just make a standard reply that adresses all 3 points :winkgrin:
The thread looks closed.
Quote from: Paul Hazelwood on January 18, 2011, 08:19:51 PM
The thread looks closed.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?s=1ea3b1547eb194dade605074cfa9c7e9&t=3708&page=29
oh, I saw now where it can be reopened if you are ready to make a case. I will have to read through the whole thing when I get time.
From just a few reads , you will simply have to state your case and move on.
When one person maintains that the word in a translation is the only way a word is used, (the word many is not the only use of "PAS") you first have to try to educate someone about word usage when it comes to scripture. That will only lead to them saying you haven't made your case.
So if you intend to get the thread reopened, you probably should consider all of their poor arguments and include them in one post so as to present the case and show why their porr arguments are not valid against any biblical doctrinal position.
Such as an argument that says if God will save everyone anyway, there is no reason for Jesus. and the argument one used that demanded you show a verse that tells of an escape from the lake of fire.
The poster wants you to show a verse that contradicts an asserted belief, when that issue is a matter of word meaning. If it is shown through scripture that God will correct all, then there is no assumption or use of any word that demands someone will remain in the lake of fire endlessly, it is redundant and a poor pattern of words.
They may not believe God will correct all, but when placed in that context, they cannot reasonably argue that you must show a verse stating something scripturally obvious.
However, being reasonable isn't always something to expect from others who are having their traditional beliefs challenged, so that is why I say, make one post stating your case and move on.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 18, 2011, 08:27:24 PM
Quote from: Paul Hazelwood on January 18, 2011, 08:19:51 PM
The thread looks closed.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?s=1ea3b1547eb194dade605074cfa9c7e9&t=3708&page=29
ah, ok
They already deleted the username I registered with. Not surprising.
LOL I was banned before I even posted anything, in the thread the Roy dude talks about Gabriels supporters and tracking ips.
Gabe needs some scriptural support over there but they won't let me in either. They said to add 777 to your name so I tried that and that didn't work either.
Every part of me is banned before I even start.
What is this? I thought we had the keys to the gates of hell... :laughing7:
Quote from: Paul Hazelwood on January 18, 2011, 08:42:55 PM
LOL I was banned before I even posted anything, in the thread the Roy dude talks about Gabriels supporters and tracking ips.
Keys of the dark site/side
http://proxify.com/
http://hidemyass.com/
http://www.web300.info/
http://proxy.org/
For those trying to register:
Quote
In an effort to combat the seemingly endless spammers, CWS is instituting a new policy. All new members MUST include the numbers '777' in their username: thus, if your chosen username is 'JohnDoe', you must select '777JohnDoe', or 'JohnDoe777'. This will help us to sort out the automated spambots, and the human-assisted spambots whose humans don't read before registering. After registering, your username can be changed by contacting any Moderator via PM. Thanks for your understanding.
Quote
Tell your buddies who are trying to join, to check their spam folders; automated emails are sometimes filtered.
If they get a message that their email is banned, they can click the 'Contact Us' link, at the bottom of any page. I'll help them get registered. They'll need to include their requested username, a valid email address, and their IP address in the message
Be sure to armor up first . . . they seem to embrace warfare over rest over there.
They are accusing me of lying over there, and I was told more than once that I'm the child of Satan.
Fascinating.....
The discussion seems to have been moved here:
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3718
I hope to see more of you there.
I personally cant have ongoing participation in situations like that. I hope you don't get too hurt over there. I often can only make a statement or two and move on - they either hear it, or God hasn't given the desire and ability to see yet. Take care over there, it sounds mean.
I understand, jabcat.
concerned for you, brother. depending on what your ministry is, stay as long as you're led. but even Jesus said if they won't hear you, shake the dust from your feet and move on. blessings.
You also have to be aware that the moderators expect members to agree with them.
I see there the lake of fire thread was closed because the thread starter declared Gabriel refuted and then requested it to be closed.
I might see if I can skirt around the ban and post a few things, to see what happens.
Paul, did you see my post where I quote some pertinent registration information?
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 19, 2011, 01:37:55 AM
Paul, did you see my post where I quote some pertinent registration information?
Yes I see it now, I will try some time this evening to get set up.
I saw where they were pushing for "one verse that shows people leaving the Lake of Fire".
And the city has no need of sun or moon, for the glory of God illuminates the city, and the Lamb is its light. 24 The nations will walk in its light, and the kings of the world will enter the city in all their glory. 25 Its gates will never be closed at the end of day because there is no night there. 26 And all the nations [the kings of the earth] will bring their treasures into the city. Rev. 21 (the ecclesia will be kings, helping bring in the rest). :2c:
jabcat, can you explain how this passage is suggesting that people leave the lake of fire?
ha! I was just adding some things/editing as you posted this. As I understand, this is a picture either after or during Lake of Fire (I believe during, because I personally believe God is either the Lake of Fire [our God's a consuming Fire] and/or the Lake of Fire is His direct Presence/the spiritual condition He sets for repentance.) So I see this as possibly saying as people repent and confess (every knee bowing, every tongue confessing Jesus is Lord, which can only be done (lit. trans.) IN the Holy Spirit, and anyone who calls on the Lord will be saved), i.e., "leave the Lake of Fire/Its direct influence", so then the ecclesia who are called out and saved in this liftime, described as ruling and reigning with Christ (shepherding the nations) are bringing converts (treasures) into the Holy City. The gates are always open!
Also, as Molly pointed out earlier, the leaves of the tree of life are healing the nations. I see this as the process just prior to Christ handing all over to the Father and God becoming All in All. Of course most ET'ers won't see it, but more of the picture of the consummation occurs elsewhere besides Rev. - the "each in his own order" verses.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 19, 2011, 05:12:50 AM
jabcat, can you explain how this passage is suggesting that people leave the lake of fire?
The lake of fire is a metaphor that is no more literal than "Jesus taking bread... saying, "Take, Eat. This IS MY body" :wink1:
Paul
jabcat,
Great thoughts.
Are you not at all inclined to go there and join the discussion?
I agree Paul. Our God is a consuming Fire is not saying God is what we would literally see when a house is burning down. His presence is fire - cleansing, creating movement, changing from one form to another - nothing can stay the same in His presence.
Samuel, thanks, I hope it helps. My personality is such that I'm probably better on those type of sites planting seeds and moving on, hopefully getting people to thinking a bit. Maybe you, people like PaulHazelwood, Taffy, legoman, etc. are better at being in those situations where you've got to be able to let the bullets bounce off without hardly noticing and keep on trudging. I over-think things, wonder what makes people tick, get too consumed with the emotion and process of things to be very effective on those sites where people are just intent on arguing and "winning". I need to not get too caught up with that, as I get distracted, side-tracked, and struggle with other aspects of it besides just sticking with what needs to be said. I need to let "cooler heads prevail". :laughing7:
Hopefully I can be a help and support back here at "home base". :bigGrin:
25 Its gates will never be closed at the end of day because there is no night there.
--Rev 21
The gates of the holy city will NEVER be closed...
This is a double negative [and we all know how they love double negatives lol]" ou mē " strengthening the denial--never--in no case--will never never be closed--
And this is the chapter after those are cast into the lake of fire, chapter 21. There are still those outside the city [in the lake of fire? yes. in the dark? yes] in chapter 22.
15For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
--Rev 22
But no matter because the gates of the holy city are not and never ever [double negative] will be closed, and [new]'kings' of the earth are walking through the gates daily [ch 21] as they are washed in the blood of the Lamb. And, Jesus is calling all--
the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
--Rev 22
This is happening right now as we speak, [and will continue into the ages,] for judgment begins at the house of God.
Tell them to keep reading after chapter 20. Keep reading.
Jabcat, I totally understand. Perhaps they might benefit were you to plant a couple seeds. :bigGrin: I know, I'm relentless. Lol.
Molly,
Excellent thoughts. I take it you caught Benjie's hang up on the double negative? LOL. What do you say, molly? come lend me a hand over there.
I managed to sign up over there, just pondering how to proceed. I have a busy week (I'm on course), so I won't have much time to post for now.
Its funny my first attempt at registering was banned too - it said my email address was banned! LOL I don't know why my personal home email address would be banned - unless they got it from bibleforums.org (where I was banned for posting). Sigh... anyways I used an alternate email, registered with the "777" extension thing, and it worked ok.
But the thread turned very bad. Samuel, I think you should have just laid out your case, summarize all the scripture that supports UR. Unfortunately the questioning, accusing and bantering back and forth is not productive. Accusations back and forth with no substance on the topic.
May post later - getting tired now.
Thanks, lego.
I'm all about having genuine discussion. I'm all about dialog. I'm not into monologue. It's not my learning style or my teaching style. I keep discussions focused and I promote slow, careful, and considerate exchanges of ideas. I think defining terms, asking questions, and being as specific as possible are essential to conducive discussion.They are crucifying me for it.
QuoteWhat do you say, molly? come lend me a hand over there.
Gabe, I can't get in lol. I tried about 6 times. Just take whatever parts of our thoughts that make sense to you and post them yourself. There are also some great links we could look up for you to post.
Here's some more:
25 Its gates will never be closed at the end of day because there is no night there. --Rev 21
See the cause and effect? Because there is no night there--the gates will never be closed.
It is night which closes the gates of the holy city. Jesus has ushered in his kingdom of light and it is only darkness that shuts the gates against men.
13But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.--Mat 23
Sound familiar? lol
No problem - I understand. I'm all for honest questioning and discussion as well. But when multiple pages of the thread is basically discussing what posters did/said ie "he said she said" - basically personal accusations back and forth, then the peace needs to be restored before a dialogue can continue.
Like I said -not really sure how to proceed. They were demanding answers, I say give'em the answers, although they are probably not in a state to receive them currently. But you have to start with the really solid stuff.
God will have all men to be saved.
All men will see the salvation of God.
Every knee will bow and every tongue confess and even swear allegiance.
God is reconciling all things - the world- to Himself.
He is the atonement for all sin (1 John 2:2)
He is the savior of the world (1 John 4:14)
Romans 5 is also good (though they totally missed it). Focus on this sticking point: "the many" were made sinners - the same "the many" will be made righteous.
Many doesn't always refer to all, but it can refer to all. Be precise. Many does not mean "all" or "not all" - it simply means a large amount. All can be a large amount - for example there are many people in the world. That is a large amount. All are many!
Eph 1:9-10 - God's plan in a nutshell - bring all things under one head - Christ. So then all will be made alive in Christ and ultimately God will be all in all.
They will say "all" only means "believers". Be precise. Hold them to being precise as well.
They will say God only desires all men to be saved, but He won't achieve it because of our free will. Show'em scripture that says God will achieve all that He desires. He does what He pleases. He is the sovereign one, not us.
You have to be very careful when dealing with unreceptive people - they will take any mistake you make and try to rip you apart. Prepare what to say and be precise. Don't jump in without knowing all the answers first. If you have a bad history with them (which I gathered from reading a bit) then that will make it all the harder.
You have to set the example, turn the other cheek. Its tough.
IMHO the simplest proof is to understand that God desires to save all men and He achieves everything He desires.
Sorry I started rambling here... I should really collect my thoughts a bit and post over there.
Good luck...
you didn't ramble, i thought it was very good. :thumbsup:
lego,
You are right.
But didn't you notice that I did exactly what you just said I should have done? Just review everything I said about Romans 5 and the all/many.
They simply won't consider anything I say because they despise me personally. That's why I think it would be good if folks like you, who they dont know, contributed to the debate.
I don't understand their problem with Rom 5. Paul is completely consistent using the same qualifier in his compound sentences to make them exactly parallel.
Rom 5:18 ThereforeG686 G3767 asG5613 byG1223 the offenceG3900 of oneG1520 judgment came uponG1519 allG3956 menG444 toG1519 condemnation;G2631 evenG2532 soG3779 byG1223 the righteousnessG1345 of oneG1520 the free gift came uponG1519 allG3956 menG444 untoG1519 justificationG1347 of life.G2222
Rom 5:19 ForG1063 asG5618 byG1223 oneG1520 man'sG444 disobedienceG3876 manyG4183 were madeG2525 sinners,G268 soG3779 (G2532) byG1223 theG3588 obedienceG5218 of oneG1520 shall manyG4183 be madeG2525 righteous.G1342
Rom 5:20 MoreoverG1161 the lawG3551 entered,G3922 thatG2443 theG3588 offenceG3900 might abound.G4121 ButG1161 whereG3757 sinG266 abounded,G4121 graceG5485 did much more abound:G5248
Judgment came upon pas by one, so too the free gift shall come upon pas by one.
polus were made sinners by one; polus shall be made righteous by one
Then he goes on to say that grace will abound even much more than sin. So everywhere else there is a direct and equal comparison except here--sin does not come anywhere near the amount of grace that is being poured forth to counter it.
G3956
πᾶς
pas
pas
Including all the forms of declension; apparently a primary word; all, any, every, the whole: - all (manner of, means) always (-s), any (one), X daily, + ever, every (one, way), as many as, + no (-thing), X throughly, whatsoever, whole, whosoever.
G4183
πολύς, πολλός
polus polos
pol-oos'
Including the forms from the alternate "pollos"; (singular) much (in any respect) or (plural) many; neuter (singular) as adverb largely; neuter (plural) as adverb or noun often, mostly, largely: - abundant, + altogether, common, + far (passed, spent), (+ be of a) great (age, deal, -ly, while), long, many, much, oft (-en [-times]), plenteous, sore, straitly. Compare G4118, G4119.
Moreover--this is a very powerful phrase
byG1223 the righteousnessG1345 of oneG1520 [the free gift came] uponG1519 allG3956 menG444 untoG1519 justificationG1347 of life.G2222
The Greek--
by justification of One to all men unto justification of life
In other words, one [man] has justified the life of all [men]!
Jesus is so wonderful!
Quote from: someone on that other boardIf the sin is burned away, and the person then spends eternity with God, than there is no penalty.
:sigh:
If a man robs a bank, is sentenced for 3 years and after that time is released... there is no penalty?
I forgot that for once, I actually have something useful to post. So they are arguing no-one ever gets out of the LoF? Here's someone's commentary on why he believes that whereas Paul got a glimpse of eternity, John saw only things pertaining to time.
---
Mr. Ray A. Van Dyke, compiled a comparison between the revelation given in Revelation and that given to Paul, as recorded in 1 Cor. 15:22-28. His comments are reproduced here:
"In the book of Revelation we do not have the final plan of God. Paul, in 1 Cor. 15:22-28 takes us much further into the future than does the book of Revelation. To illustrate this more clearly, study the following: 1 Cor. 15:22-28 as compared with the new heaven and new earth of Revelation 20-22:
In 1 Cor. 15:22-28, we have:
No more rule
No more authority
No more power
No more enemies
No more reigning
All subjected
No more death, death destroyed.
All made alive, immortal
In Revelation 20-22, we have:
Still rule (20:6; 22:5)
Son still reigns (22:1-5; 11:5)
Authority (21:24,25)
Power (21:24,25; 22:2
Kings (21:24-26)
Saints reign (22:5)
Second death still exists (21:5)
The nations still mortal (22:2)
-end quote
Christians who believe in universal reconciliation believe that the Bible is God's Word, and His Word cannot contradict itself, hence the inspired sacred Scriptures say in Rev. 11:15; 22:5, eis tous aionas ton aionon, "for the eons of the eons." Thus, Christ our Lord "reigns for the eons of the eons," not as the king's translators rendered, "forever and ever." Therefore, Revelation 20-22 fits into the framework of the eons, and is truth relative to the eons. First Corinthians Chapter 15 fits at the consummation (end) of the eons. We give the second Adam, Christ, as much credit and numerical ability as the first Adam, and use 1 Cor. 15:22-28 also for this truth. (Read Rom. 5:18-19.)
Consequently, Col. 1:16-20:
All in heaven and earth created in Him (verse 16)
All for Him (verse 16)
All estranged are reconciled (verse 20)
1 Corinthians 15:22:
In Adam all are dying
In Christ shall all be made alive
The literal Greek in 1 Corinthians 15:22 reads:
hosphor gar en to Adam pantes apothneskousin houtos kai en to christo pantes zoopoiethesontai.
"Even as for in the Adam all are dying, thus also in the Christ, all shall be made alive."
The more one studies this Scripture as well as dozens more like it, it becomes abundantly clear that as in Adam all died, that very same all will be made alive in Christ. There is not one in Adam that will not be made alive in Christ. It is a perfectly balanced statement which Jesus said was already set in motion.
Aldai Loudy takes on the Fallacy of Matthew 25:46
---
IV. THE GLORY THRONE JUDGMENT
Time: The Revelation of Christ in Power and Much glory
Place: The Throne of His Glory on the Earth in the Valley of Jehoshaphat
Subjects: The Living Nations (Gentiles)
Basis of Judgment: Their Treatment of Christ's Brethren, the Jews, during the Coming Indignation
Result: Some Nations "Saved," others "Chastened"
Almost every preacher who attempts a sermon on the "judgment," takes his text from Matthew 25:31-46 and expounds it as the "final judgment" in which he arraigns all humanity (the living and the resurrected dead) before the One sitting on the throne, to hear their destiny declared unto them! Our International Sunday School literature makes this awful blunder every time they attempt an exposition on the subject, leading thousands on thousands of God's saints astray from the revealed truth. How this "judgment" can be confused with the "Great White Throne Judgment" of Revelation 20:11-15 (if teachers would only read the two accounts, to say nothing of studying them), presents a bewildering problem. Let us make a simple comparison:
THE GLORY THRONE Matthew 25 THE GREAT WHITE THRONE Revelation 20
1. At Revelation of Christ One thousand years later
2. On the earth (Joel 3:2) Heaven and earth gone
3. Living nations judged The dead
4. No resurrection All resurrected
5. Three classes: "sheep,"
"kids" and "brethren" One class: the dead
6. No books mentioned Books opened: book of life opened
--
[Sorry I can't seem to get the formatting right. -A]
--
This comparison reveals facts which make it impossible for these judgments to be identical. One is on this earth, and the other takes place after the heavens and the earth have fled, and the two are separated by a period of time of more than a thousand years!
Another witness against their identity is the Greek word ethnos, translated here in Matthew 25, "nations." It occurs 164 times in the Greek Scriptures, and is translated in our common version 93 times "gentiles," 64 times "nation" or "nations," 5 times "heathen," and 2 times "people." But never, in any instance, is it applied to either the dead or resurrected. In the face of this fact, verified by the internal evidence of the Scriptures themselves, surely we will not be guilty of uniting these two judgments again.
All this comes about by trying to make the Glory Throne Judgment of "nations" a judgment of individuals. The "sheep" represent one class of nations and the "goats" or "kids" another class, while the "brethren" represent the Jews, Christ's own brethren according to the flesh.
If we will let the Scriptures speak to us as they are written, all will be clear:
"Now immediately after the affliction of those days . . . they shall be viewing the Son of Mankind coming on the clouds of heaven with power and much glory" (Matt.24:29,30).
This is His glorious epiphany, or Revelation, from heaven when every eye shall be viewing Him (Matt.24:27; Rev.1:7; 19:11- 21), whenever He may be coming to be glorified in His saints and to be marveled at in all who believe (seeing that our testimony to you was believed) in that day...(2 Thess.1:6-10). It is then that these words of our Lord Jesus will find fulfillment:
"Now, whenever the Son of Mankind may be coming in His glory, and all the holy messengers with Him, then He shall be seated on the throne of His glory, and in front of Him shall be assembled all nations, and He shall be severing then from one another even as a shepherd is severing the sheep from the kids" (Matt.25:31, 32).
So far as the record goes (and nothing else is admissible here), the personnel of this judgment consists of the "Judge and His retinue" (Matt.25:31), "the nations" (Matt.25:32; Joel 3:2, 3), and His "brethren" (Matt.25:40). These, no more and no less. If any resurrected people are there, they have to be forced into the text, for they are not given by the spirit.
This judgment of the nations is sounded again and again in the Hebrew Scriptures from Isaiah to Malachi. Familiarity with these accounts and their relation to Israel and the Millennial kingdom, should keep all from making it a final judgment. In Joel 3:1-21, we are given a very terse setting of this judgment scene:
"For behold! in those days and in that era,
In which I turn back the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,
I gather together all the nations also,
And cause them to descend into the vale of Jehoshaphat,
And I am judged with them there
As to My people and My allotment, Israel,
Whom they disperse among the nations.
* * * * *
`Mobilize and come, all nations around,
And muster!'
There cause Thy mighty ones to settle, Jehovah!
The nations are arousing and ascending to the vale of Jehoshaphat [Jehovah-JUDGE]
For there I an sitting to judge all the nations from around."
It is evident that all this refers to the nations who will be living on the earth in that day when Christ returns to establish His kingdom of glory on the earth. It has nothing whatever to do with the church or the wicked dead.
Christ will sever the nations from one another as a shepherd is severing the sheep from the kids, putting the sheep nations on His right and the kids on the left. Apparently these nations are made up largely of uncivilized peoples of the earth in that day, as they seem to know nothing of Christ. The sheep nations will be adjudged "just" for having befriended His brethren according to the flesh, showing them kindness, protection and assistance while suffering the awful affliction under the Desolator, and will be passed into the millennial kingdom and blessed with all the abundance of soulish blessings of that era, subservient to Israel. The nations who gave no consideration to the suffering and distress of His brethren during this awful affliction, will be sent away into eonian chastening (Matt.25:46).
This passage of Scripture is usually appealed to when proving eternal life for the righteous and everlasting punishment for the wicked--heaven and hell. But neither heaven nor hell, eternal life nor everlasting punishment are in view in the passage!
Another objection is usually raised concerning the eonian life given to the sheep nations, that this will be salvation by "good works;" and we readily agree that such is the case here, for faith seems not to enter into it in any way. The cause for such an objection however, is failure to apprehend that during God's eonian administrations He uses various methods of fitting mankind for fellowship with Himself. It should be remembered that the church which is the body of Christ, is graced with a salvation more transcendently glorious than all others, and at the time of this judgment scene, is already enjoying the bliss of their allotment among the celestials in heaven. The eonian salvation that becomes the portion of the nations in this judgment in no way compares with the allotment of glory lavished on the church (Eph. 2).
Quote from: Aleax on January 19, 2011, 01:43:49 PM
I forgot that for once, I actually have something useful to post. So they are arguing no-one ever gets out of the LoF? Here's someone's commentary on why he believes that whereas Paul got a glimpse of eternity, John saw only things pertaining to time.
---
Mr. Ray A. Van Dyke, compiled a comparison between the revelation given in Revelation and that given to Paul, as recorded in 1 Cor. 15:22-28. His comments are reproduced here:
"In the book of Revelation we do not have the final plan of God. Paul, in 1 Cor. 15:22-28 takes us much further into the future than does the book of Revelation. To illustrate this more clearly, study the following: 1 Cor. 15:22-28 as compared with the new heaven and new earth of Revelation 20-22:
In 1 Cor. 15:22-28, we have:
No more rule
No more authority
No more power
No more enemies
No more reigning
All subjected
No more death, death destroyed.
All made alive, immortal
In Revelation 20-22, we have:
Still rule (20:6; 22:5)
Son still reigns (22:1-5; 11:5)
Authority (21:24,25)
Power (21:24,25; 22:2
Kings (21:24-26)
Saints reign (22:5)
Second death still exists (21:5)
The nations still mortal (22:2)
-end quote
Christians who believe in universal reconciliation believe that the Bible is God's Word, and His Word cannot contradict itself, hence the inspired sacred Scriptures say in Rev. 11:15; 22:5, eis tous aionas ton aionon, "for the eons of the eons." Thus, Christ our Lord "reigns for the eons of the eons," not as the king's translators rendered, "forever and ever." Therefore, Revelation 20-22 fits into the framework of the eons, and is truth relative to the eons. First Corinthians Chapter 15 fits at the consummation (end) of the eons. We give the second Adam, Christ, as much credit and numerical ability as the first Adam, and use 1 Cor. 15:22-28 also for this truth. (Read Rom. 5:18-19.)
Consequently, Col. 1:16-20:
All in heaven and earth created in Him (verse 16)
All for Him (verse 16)
All estranged are reconciled (verse 20)
1 Corinthians 15:22:
In Adam all are dying
In Christ shall all be made alive
The literal Greek in 1 Corinthians 15:22 reads:
hosphor gar en to Adam pantes apothneskousin houtos kai en to christo pantes zoopoiethesontai.
"Even as for in the Adam all are dying, thus also in the Christ, all shall be made alive."
The more one studies this Scripture as well as dozens more like it, it becomes abundantly clear that as in Adam all died, that very same all will be made alive in Christ. There is not one in Adam that will not be made alive in Christ. It is a perfectly balanced statement which Jesus said was already set in motion.
Yes! This is great. You are not necessarily going to figure this out unless someone tells you.
Just copy and paste this and send to Mr. Roy S.
Quote from: Aleax on January 19, 2011, 02:09:25 PMThe "sheep" represent one class of nations and the "goats" or "kids" another class, while the "brethren" represent the Jews, Christ's own brethren according to the flesh.
I've been looking into that a while ago (http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/christian_life/the_sheep_and_goat_8659.msg104622.html#msg104622). Good to see that others see the same thing :thumbsup:
Quote from: aleaxAlmost every preacher who attempts a sermon on the "judgment," takes his text from Matthew 25:31-46 and expounds it as the "final judgment" in which he arraigns all humanity (the living and the resurrected dead) before the One sitting on the throne, to hear their destiny declared unto them! Our International Sunday School literature makes this awful blunder every time they attempt an exposition on the subject, leading thousands on thousands of God's saints astray from the revealed truth. How this "judgment" can be confused with the "Great White Throne Judgment" of Revelation 20:11-15 (if teachers would only read the two accounts, to say nothing of studying them), presents a bewildering problem. Let us make a simple comparison:
This article is also very illuminating. I can't tell you how many times I've read that passage and 'not seen' the word 'nations.'
Mat 25:32 AndG2532 beforeG1715 himG846 shall be gatheredG4863
allG3956 nations:G1484 andG2532 he shall separateG873 themG846 one from another,G240 G575 asG5618 a shepherdG4166 dividethG873 his sheepG4263 fromG575 theG3588 goats:G2056
"nations"G1484
ἔθνος
ethnoseth'-nos
Probably from G1486; a race (as of the same habit), that is, a tribe; specifically a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by implication pagan): -
Gentile, heathen, nation, people.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 19, 2011, 03:13:53 PM
Quote from: Aleax on January 19, 2011, 02:09:25 PMThe "sheep" represent one class of nations and the "goats" or "kids" another class, while the "brethren" represent the Jews, Christ's own brethren according to the flesh.
I've been looking into that a while ago (http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/christian_life/the_sheep_and_goat_8659.msg104622.html#msg104622). Good to see that others see the same thing :thumbsup:
People get these passages and scenes all jumbled up in their heads. I think the thought of being in the presence of Jesus is so terrifying to people that they can't think straight about it lol.
Yes, I remember when you were covering this about the sheep and the goats being nations. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Aleax on January 19, 2011, 01:29:12 PM
Quote from: someone on that other boardIf the sin is burned away, and the person then spends eternity with God, than there is no penalty.
:sigh:
If a man robs a bank, is sentenced for 3 years and after that time is released... there is no penalty?
Unfortunately in their mind the only penalty that makes "sense" is eternal torment.
Stricktly speaking God isn't the HS.
But still in a way HS is the character of God.
All that slandering the character of God perhaps is (also) blasphemy of the HS.
So perhaps the ETs get the worst instead of the best deal.
They get :spank: in LoF while they hoped for some entertainment at teh beach of LoF :beach:
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 19, 2011, 07:13:34 AM
lego,
You are right.
But didn't you notice that I did exactly what you just said I should have done? Just review everything I said about Romans 5 and the all/many.
They simply won't consider anything I say because they despise me personally. That's why I think it would be good if folks like you, who they dont know, contributed to the debate.
Yes I did see that is what you were trying to do. Unfortunately the thread was already "poisoned" - like you said you were being swarmed. Basically they had turned the thread from debating about Romans 5/Lake of fire into debating about YOU. And in their mind, if they "proved" you were dishonest/liar/whatever, they had defeated universal salvation - which is a fallacy in itself. That's why you have to keep the discussion honest and focused on the debate, not the debater. You have to keep focused on point, not get dragged into petty personal accusations back and forth. Which admittedly is hard to do when you are being swarmed! LOL.
At that point the "question and answer" format for learning is not going to work, because they are not going to answer your question directly, they will twist it around to put the ball back in your court.
What you have to do is ask your question, and give your answer at the same time. Because they will not help you out and give you your answer. They were getting frustrated with your questions, which did not help.
ie.
Explain that many does not mean "all" or "less-than-all". It means "a large amount". For example there are many stars. Did I not include some stars in that statement? NO. I was talking about ALL stars.
Many were made sinners. Does that mean some were not made sinners? NO of course not. All are sinners. You could say that it is really all minus one (Jesus) - therefore many. The many made sinners because of Adam. And because of another adam (Christ), the many will be made righteous.
Then there are many corroborating scriptures on this point. Isaiah 26:9 for example shows the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness through God's judgments. When they have learned righteousness - they ARE righteous - therefore fulfilling Romans 5.
Therefore we see that judgment does not mean "eternal punishment" but actually can mean "teaching righteousness".
Heb 9:27 is a favorite to prove you go to hell when you die. But it doesn't say that. It says you will be judged. And as we can see judgment is used for teaching righteousness. Of course they may think those in hell will be "learning righteousness" forever, if they think it is righteous that people should burn forever. At a certain point unreasonableness and illogic will be a wall you run into, and most people can't get past their own unreasonableness and stubornness, which is why they continue to believe in eternal torment.
Also sometimes you just need to take a break for a few days, let things cool off.
Peace out,
Legoman
So basicly youe are suggesting to post small article that focus on one topic/verse?
Quote from: legomanThat's why you have to keep the discussion honest and focused on the debate, not the debater.
That's precisely what I was doing! LOL
Hey Shawn, just read your post over at the "other" site . . .loved your last response. Your gentle spirit should take you much further than their smugness against you. I also found it interesting that they picked up on the fact that you're from Tent . . . I've registered but it won't activate me . . .not sure what's going on with that.
I'm not even sure I want to get too engaged over there . . .seems to be a fine line between casting your bread upon the water and casting your pearls before the swine.
Great approach you are taking though . . .honey is always greater than vinegar.
Sort of.
Basically instead of posing more open-ended questions that can always be turned around on you, post scriptural facts that cannot be refuted.
Does God want all to be saved? They don't seem to be the Calvinist... so I'm guessing they would say yes. Can God achieve His desires? This is where they will probably disagree. Show the scriptural facts.
And don't lose focus. If God wants all to be saved, then He is not going to leave any suffering forever. If God wants all to be saved, then people do not suffer forever in the lake of fire.
Where does it even say sinners stay forever in the lake of fire? AFAIK on a literal reading, it doesn't. AFAIK It says the devil, the beast, and the false prophet are the only "eternal" inhabitants of the lake of fire. So what does that mean for all the every day average sinners? (Assuming the beast and false prophet are literal people - which is an incorrect assumption).
So:
1. Present scriptural facts that cannot be refuted
2. Be precise in what you say
3. Stay focused
Let me give you an example of what I mean by being precise.
Rev 20:15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
People will read this and assume they never get out. That is imprecise. Does this verse say what happens to them in the lake of fire? NO. Does this verse say they stay in there forever? NO. Does it say they get out? NO. All we know is that those not written in the book of life are thrown into the lake of fire.
But we must stay focused on what we know. God wants to save all men. So He will do it. Therefore the lake of fire is:
1. useful towards that goal
2. not ultimately "bad"
And of course we see other examples of fire in scripture where people are "refined", "purified", "salted", etc. with fire.
Stay focused, build a case on irrefutable verses.
Of course they will try to refute the irrefutable. At a certain point you can't argue with someone who insists 2+2=5. "WHAT? 2+2=4? NO it doesn't. That is man's reasoning! This scripture here clearly says 2+2=5!" LOL. Oh well...
The thread is closed...
Quote from: legoman on January 19, 2011, 07:44:51 PM
Does God want all to be saved? They don't seem to be the Calvinist... so I'm guessing they would say yes. Can God achieve His desires? This is where they will probably disagree. Show the scriptural facts.
And don't lose focus. If God wants all to be saved, then He is not going to leave any suffering forever. If God wants all to be saved, then people do not suffer forever in the lake of fire.
They answer: God doesn't like it but He respects them chosing hell.
QuoteWhere does it even say sinners stay forever in the lake of fire? AFAIK on a literal reading, it doesn't. AFAIK It says the devil, the beast, and the false prophet are the only "eternal" inhabitants of the lake of fire. So what does that mean for all the every day average sinners? (Assuming the beast and false prophet are literal people - which is an incorrect assumption).
The passage below shows sinners go into the fire. (if that fire is LoF or not is of little importance.
Then automaticly we arrive at the fanout Matthew 25:46. I think you know what that means.... "Eternal=eternal" "Hu? So you say eternal life is ending?"
YLTMatt 2533 and he shall set the sheep indeed on his right hand, and the goats on the left.34 `Then shall the king say to those on his right hand, Come ye, the blessed of my Father, inherit the reign that hath been prepared for you from the foundation of the world;
35 for I did hunger, and ye gave me to eat; I did thirst, and ye gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and ye received me;
36 naked, and ye put around me; I was infirm, and ye looked after me; in prison I was, and ye came unto me.
37 `Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when did we see thee hungering, and we nourished? or thirsting, and we gave to drink?
38 and when did we see thee a stranger, and we received? or naked, and we put around?
39 and when did we see thee infirm, or in prison, and we came unto thee?
40 `And the king answering, shall say to them, Verily I say to you, Inasmuch as ye did it to one of these my brethren--the least--to me ye did it .
41 Then shall he say also to those on the left hand, Go ye from me, the cursed, to the fire, the age-during, that hath been prepared for the Devil and his messengers;
42 for I did hunger, and ye gave me not to eat; I did thirst, and ye gave me not to drink;
43 a stranger I was, and ye did not receive me; naked, and ye put not around me; infirm, and in prison, and ye did not look after me.
44 `Then shall they answer, they also, saying, Lord, when did we see thee hungering, or thirsting, or a stranger, or naked, or infirm, or in prison, and we did not minister to thee?
45 `Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say to you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of these, the least, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.'
QuoteSo:
1. Present scriptural facts that cannot be refuted
2. Be precise in what you say
3. Stay focused
I've been reading a few pages and their logic can easily be refuted. The problem is that they refuse discussion
There isn't as single verse that proves UR.
By that I mean:
a] You have to prove zillions of word meanings like age, what/who is fire, all=all, especially
b] Many verses can be easily read out of context.
UR isn't based on one verse. That's good because it means it's solid. But the it also means to prove it to others you need to discuss at least 10% of the Bible...
QuoteLet me give you an example of what I mean by being precise.
Rev 20:15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
People will read this and assume they never get out. That is imprecise. Does this verse say what happens to them in the lake of fire? NO. Does this verse say they stay in there forever? NO. Does it say they get out? NO. All we know is that those not written in the book of life are thrown into the lake of fire.
Their answer: It's true the verse doesn't say no one exits. But if there is no verse that proves nobody exits it's only logical nobody exits.
QuoteBut we must stay focused on what we know. God wants to save all men. So He will do it. Therefore the lake of fire is:
All=elect/believers.
Wants=hope not fact.
QuoteOf course they will try to refute the irrefutable. At a certain point you can't argue with someone who insists 2+2=5. "WHAT? 2+2=4? NO it doesn't. That is man's reasoning! This scripture here clearly says 2+2=5!" LOL. Oh well...
Actually 2+2 IS 5 for very large value's of 2.
Quote from: Nathan on January 19, 2011, 07:42:28 PM
Hey Shawn, just read your post over at the "other" site . . .loved your last response. Your gentle spirit should take you much further than their smugness against you. I also found it interesting that they picked up on the fact that you're from Tent . . . I've registered but it won't activate me . . .not sure what's going on with that.
I'm not even sure I want to get too engaged over there . . .seems to be a fine line between casting your bread upon the water and casting your pearls before the swine.
Great approach you are taking though . . .honey is always greater than vinegar.
Thank you Nathan. It's funny because that same verse of casting my pearls before swine came to me while posting. I just hope a couple people there are ready. And you know what kind of ready I am talking about. :bigGrin:
Hang on guys. If you can't post, there appears to be a settings issue. Let me work on it and I'll try to fix it.
There, that's better. :thumbsup:
I think lego's right. I didn't see a particular notification when I moved it, I think it's in the right place now, and everyone should be able to post? PLEASE???!!!!
Ah, one good report, thanks. :) Others?
:thumbsup:
I've been following Shawns thread. A lot of talk why is OP is bad. But nobody even tries to refute his post.
FYI UR is first thaught in the sixties.
14Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, because he hath known my name.
15He shall call upon me, and I will answer him: I will be with him in trouble; I will deliver him, and honour him.
16With long life will I satisfy him, and shew Y'shu'ah.
--Psa 91
Perhaps this is a good article to discuss on the dark side? Or ask them to refute it.
(http://images.zaazu.com/img/darth-darth-vader-star-wars-saber-smiley-emoticon-000555-large.gif)
/EDIT
It could eb useful if I included the URL :mblush:
http://www.tentmaker.org/contending.htm
(I got a few more similar articles)
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 19, 2011, 09:30:33 PM
:thumbsup:
I've been following Shawns thread. A lot of talk why is OP is bad. But nobody even tries to refute his post.
FYI UR is first thaught in the sixties.
LOL, yes! The hippies came up with the idea of UR while they are tripping on acid at Woodstock.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 19, 2011, 10:09:45 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 19, 2011, 09:30:33 PM
:thumbsup:
I've been following Shawns thread. A lot of talk why is OP is bad. But nobody even tries to refute his post.
FYI UR is first thaught in the sixties.
LOL, yes! The hippies came up with the idea of UR while they are tripping on acid at Woodstock.
It was what Titus claimed.
Proving church fathers were UR is gonna be hard. -> Read they will try to side track every single bit of proof.
But even them can't maintain it started in teh sixties because there are many UR books on Google books dating back to the 1800's.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 19, 2011, 08:28:46 PM
The thread is closed...
Quote from: legoman on January 19, 2011, 07:44:51 PM
Does God want all to be saved? They don't seem to be the Calvinist... so I'm guessing they would say yes. Can God achieve His desires? This is where they will probably disagree. Show the scriptural facts.
And don't lose focus. If God wants all to be saved, then He is not going to leave any suffering forever. If God wants all to be saved, then people do not suffer forever in the lake of fire.
They answer: God doesn't like it but He respects them chosing hell.
LOL very bad response. God "respects" their choice - even though God binds people to disobedience, hardens their hearts, and sends them a strong delusion - yet he still "respects" their choice. Interesting perspective.
Quote
QuoteWhere does it even say sinners stay forever in the lake of fire? AFAIK on a literal reading, it doesn't. AFAIK It says the devil, the beast, and the false prophet are the only "eternal" inhabitants of the lake of fire. So what does that mean for all the every day average sinners? (Assuming the beast and false prophet are literal people - which is an incorrect assumption).
The passage below shows sinners go into the fire. (if that fire is LoF or not is of little importance.
Then automaticly we arrive at the fanout Matthew 25:46. I think you know what that means.... "Eternal=eternal" "Hu? So you say eternal life is ending?"
Thus why we need to be precise. Matt 25:46 doesn't mention lake of fire.
Of course the whole aionios/eternal thing is a issue, and IMHO is a bad place to start with someone who is being difficult. Not that its a problem - just that is hard to explain to someone who won't listen.
Quote
YLTMatt 25
33 and he shall set the sheep indeed on his right hand, and the goats on the left.34 `Then shall the king say to those on his right hand, Come ye, the blessed of my Father, inherit the reign that hath been prepared for you from the foundation of the world;
35 for I did hunger, and ye gave me to eat; I did thirst, and ye gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and ye received me;
36 naked, and ye put around me; I was infirm, and ye looked after me; in prison I was, and ye came unto me.
37 `Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when did we see thee hungering, and we nourished? or thirsting, and we gave to drink?
38 and when did we see thee a stranger, and we received? or naked, and we put around?
39 and when did we see thee infirm, or in prison, and we came unto thee?
40 `And the king answering, shall say to them, Verily I say to you, Inasmuch as ye did it to one of these my brethren--the least--to me ye did it .
41 Then shall he say also to those on the left hand, Go ye from me, the cursed, to the fire, the age-during, that hath been prepared for the Devil and his messengers;
42 for I did hunger, and ye gave me not to eat; I did thirst, and ye gave me not to drink;
43 a stranger I was, and ye did not receive me; naked, and ye put not around me; infirm, and in prison, and ye did not look after me.
44 `Then shall they answer, they also, saying, Lord, when did we see thee hungering, or thirsting, or a stranger, or naked, or infirm, or in prison, and we did not minister to thee?
45 `Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say to you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of these, the least, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.'
QuoteSo:
1. Present scriptural facts that cannot be refuted
2. Be precise in what you say
3. Stay focused
I've been reading a few pages and their logic can easily be refuted. The problem is that they refuse discussion
There isn't as single verse that proves UR.
By that I mean:
a] You have to prove zillions of word meanings like age, what/who is fire, all=all, especially
b] Many verses can be easily read out of context.
UR isn't based on one verse. That's good because it means it's solid. But the it also means to prove it to others you need to discuss at least 10% of the Bible...
QuoteLet me give you an example of what I mean by being precise.
Rev 20:15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
People will read this and assume they never get out. That is imprecise. Does this verse say what happens to them in the lake of fire? NO. Does this verse say they stay in there forever? NO. Does it say they get out? NO. All we know is that those not written in the book of life are thrown into the lake of fire.
Their answer: It's true the verse doesn't say no one exits. But if there is no verse that proves nobody exits it's only logical nobody exits.
QuoteBut we must stay focused on what we know. God wants to save all men. So He will do it. Therefore the lake of fire is:
All=elect/believers.
Wants=hope not fact.
More adding to the text.
Quote
QuoteOf course they will try to refute the irrefutable. At a certain point you can't argue with someone who insists 2+2=5. "WHAT? 2+2=4? NO it doesn't. That is man's reasoning! This scripture here clearly says 2+2=5!" LOL. Oh well...
Actually 2+2 IS 5 for very large value's of 2.
Funny, but absolutely contradictory.
Interesting page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_%2B_2_%3D_5
For some of these people they are living in 1984. Just replace state with religious dogma.
Quote:
Orwell's protagonist, Winston Smith, uses the phrase to wonder if the State might declare "two plus two equals five" as a fact; he ponders whether, if everybody believes in it, does that make it true? Smith writes, "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows." Later in the novel, Smith attempts to use doublethink to teach himself that the statement "2 + 2 = 5" is true, or at least as true as any other answer one could come up with.Many people have "doublethunk themselves" into believing eternal torment is true.
1984 is an excellent book for self-examination, and broadening your viewpoint, among other reasons.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 19, 2011, 10:15:26 PM
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 19, 2011, 10:09:45 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 19, 2011, 09:30:33 PM
:thumbsup:
I've been following Shawns thread. A lot of talk why is OP is bad. But nobody even tries to refute his post.
FYI UR is first thaught in the sixties.
LOL, yes! The hippies came up with the idea of UR while they are tripping on acid at Woodstock.
It was what Titus claimed.
Proving church fathers were UR is gonna be hard. -> Read they will try to side track every single bit of proof.
But even them can't maintain it started in teh sixties because there are many UR books on Google books dating back to the 1800's.
I had quite a few quotes from Origen that supported a UR stance. I will have to dig them up. What would be their counter?
shawn! Your posts over there are incredible! You have a real gift.
Quote from: Molly on January 20, 2011, 01:36:16 AM
shawn! Your posts over there are incredible! You have a real gift.
I can take no credit for that. To be perfectly honest, I just had my world turned upside down and the switch has been flipped. Just a couple weeks ago I was struggling and crying out from lawful thinking. The weight has been lifted from my chest just like when I first heard about UR. I am so excited I can barely contain myself. Those posts are just an outflowing of revelation placed into my lap.
God has used one of the members of tentmaker to confirm and reorganize some of the things God has been trying to show me for quite awhile. With other parts of my thinking he used this member to turn me 180 on spiritual issues I have struggled with all my life. Truly we can live in freedom.
I am so thankful for tentmaker, and it's wonderful members.
Wow that is awesome Shawn!
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?p=44217#post44217
Now they're are saying that Christian Universalists aren't really christians.
Quote from: HansC
I'm curious about salvation.
In particular, about the possibility of salvation, for those within the clutches of the demonic doctrine known as "Universalism."
I believe that they can come out of that doctrine and be saved, but personally I believe that as long as their souls are chained and gripped within the diabolical claws of this evil doctrine, that they are lost.
I personally believe they are unsaved. Unless, of course they have a radical reevaluation, change of heart, repent and get born again.
What's your take on the effects of this doctrine?
:cloud9: PTL Shawn.....I haven't read the site posts, but I rejoice with you in your liberty! :HeartThrob:
BTW, I'm guessing that none of us are permitted to respond to the thread where they are accusing universalists of being unbelievers, since you have to agree to the SOF to post in that section. Then again, their SOF does not say that it is necessary to reject universal salvation. But I'm sure that won't stop them from prohibiting us from responding.
Amen, Shawn
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 20, 2011, 03:07:42 AM
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?p=44217#post44217
Now they're are saying that Christian Universalists aren't really christians.
Quote from: HansC
I'm curious about salvation.
In particular, about the possibility of salvation, for those within the clutches of the demonic doctrine known as "Universalism."
I believe that they can come out of that doctrine and be saved, but personally I believe that as long as their souls are chained and gripped within the diabolical claws of this evil doctrine, that they are lost.
I personally believe they are unsaved. Unless, of course they have a radical reevaluation, change of heart, repent and get born again.
What's your take on the effects of this doctrine?
This is just sick. So is it "believe in eternal torment in hell and you will be saved", or "believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved". Demented stuff like the quote above is one reason why I can't participate much in these debates. I try to be patient, but honestly, I get angry over stuff like this - and that's not good,
or effective.
you might ask them that question Samuel; how do the scriptures say one is saved? :2c:
Anything beyond that, they're judging, IMO.
It's a test. It's only a test. :sigh:
Quote from: jabcat on January 20, 2011, 03:14:10 AM
Amen, Shawn
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 20, 2011, 03:07:42 AM
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?p=44217#post44217
Now they're are saying that Christian Universalists aren't really christians.
Quote from: HansC
I'm curious about salvation.
In particular, about the possibility of salvation, for those within the clutches of the demonic doctrine known as "Universalism."
I believe that they can come out of that doctrine and be saved, but personally I believe that as long as their souls are chained and gripped within the diabolical claws of this evil doctrine, that they are lost.
I personally believe they are unsaved. Unless, of course they have a radical reevaluation, change of heart, repent and get born again.
What's your take on the effects of this doctrine?
This is just sick. So is it "believe in eternal torment in hell and you will be saved", or "believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved". Demented stuff like the quote above is one reason why I can't participate much in these debates. I try to be patient, but honestly, I get angry over stuff like this - and that's not good, or effective.
It's just sad. I just wrote that over on those forums. Obviously, they do not believe if you believe in Jesus you will be saved. They state you must also believe in their doctrine to be saved. I find that so unfortunate. People's minds are so darkened by doctrine.
Quote from: Cardinal on January 20, 2011, 03:10:41 AM
:cloud9: PTL Shawn.....I haven't read the site posts, but I rejoice with you in your liberty! :HeartThrob:
I appreciate that Cardinal.
Good. Yes, I really should be more able to look beyond such ignorance, but it pushes some button with me. Could have something to do with growing in an extremely closed, narrow mindset of "who's OK"/"if you're not of our group there's just a little something wrong with you, you're suspect".
Those of you who feel led and have the skill set, personality, and gifting to do it, God's strength to you.
Shawn, have you attempted to post in the Christians only section of the board?
Perhaps you can respond to HansC's thread where he says universalists aren't saved (evidently, Jesus did not die to save all sinners, but in order to save people from believing that His death will save all sinners). I am not permitted to post there, as they have deemed me an unbeliever. Actually, they called me the child of satan.
Let the fruit of the Spirit be displayed. Continue to give them no (legitimate) reason to besmirch the name of the Lord or the belief that He is able to completely do His will - that He will not lose any. 99 is not enough. :HeartThrob:
Are the people on that board typical of Christians in churches?
Or are they plants?
Comparing salvation to a free gift at a tupperware party?
Which free gift you can't get unless you come to the party [and buy more tupperware?]
I'm starting to get seriously concerned...
HansC writes:
Quote
While the universalist argument has no Scriptural foundation, relays upon a deliberate distortion, and in essence is the basic devil's argument "ye shall not die." Buying into the devil's argument can lead to death.
We are not actually saved by having all doctrine right. However some doctrine can actually instill such false beliefs that they actually prevent people from getting saved.
For example, why bother to receive God, if you believe you already have God inside.
WOW.
:cloud9: I went over there looking for what you wrote Shawn, but I can't find it.... :dontknow:
Quote from: Cardinal on January 20, 2011, 07:42:44 AM
:cloud9: I went over there looking for what you wrote Shawn, but I can't find it.... :dontknow:
I started one about Christian Double talk...based on a post here. I also posted in several other topics in the open forums. But, I can no longer post there. It's absolutely draining. I hold out hope that these believers can be freed from the bondage of doctrine. I have said what needed said and now I will be back home to post. And, I do consider this home. You guys/gals are a breath of fresh air in the Kingdom. I love you all.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 20, 2011, 04:00:54 AM
Shawn, have you attempted to post in the Christians only section of the board?
Perhaps you can respond to HansC's thread where he says universalists aren't saved (evidently, Jesus did not die to save all sinners, but in order to save people from believing that His death will save all sinners). I am not permitted to post there, as they have deemed me an unbeliever. Actually, they called me the child of satan.
I am done posting there. And honestly Samuel for your own spiritual sanity I would suggest you leave them be. As for being called a child of satan well I have been called similar on other boards before coming here. When you buck doctrine you will get a backlash from people in love with their understanding. It is a sad state of affairs.
Quote from: shawn on January 20, 2011, 01:26:52 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 19, 2011, 10:15:26 PM
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 19, 2011, 10:09:45 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 19, 2011, 09:30:33 PM
:thumbsup:
I've been following Shawns thread. A lot of talk why is OP is bad. But nobody even tries to refute his post.
FYI UR is first thaught in the sixties.
LOL, yes! The hippies came up with the idea of UR while they are tripping on acid at Woodstock.
It was what Titus claimed.
Proving church fathers were UR is gonna be hard. -> Read they will try to side track every single bit of proof.
But even them can't maintain it started in the sixties because there are many UR books on Google books dating back to the 1800's.
I had quite a few quotes from Origen that supported a UR stance. I will have to dig them up. What would be their counter?
I've many too. Actually I have a whole book...
http://home.online.nl/spamfree/The_prevailing_doctrine.htm
http://home.online.nl/spamfree/PrevailingUniversalism.pdf
Their counter? Easy:
a] They say you are attacking their believes and are not wanting to discuss. They just keep repeating that just like they did in your Double Talk thread. Just bla bla but no arguments.
b] They will just answer with a bunch of hell verses to refute it.
c] Claim the quotes are wrong.
d] Or as one ET once wrote on YouTube. Yes UR was the main doctrine in the early centuries and many church fathers believed it. Fortunately Augustine came and set things straight by removing the veil so people could see the lie of UR.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 20, 2011, 05:04:21 AM
HansC writes:
Quote
While the universalist argument has no Scriptural foundation, relays upon a deliberate distortion, and in essence is the basic devil's argument "ye shall not die." Buying into the devil's argument can lead to death.
WOW.
All people die/died upon today. I think all denominations agree on that.
So my guess is they link that death to the after life -> Hell / LoF
But according to their own doctrine people are very much alive in those places.
So they also say "you shall not die"
Quote from: shawn on January 20, 2011, 08:10:04 AM
Quote from: Cardinal on January 20, 2011, 07:42:44 AM
:cloud9: I went over there looking for what you wrote Shawn, but I can't find it.... :dontknow:
I started one about Christian Double talk...based on a post here. I also posted in several other topics in the open forums. But, I can no longer post there. It's absolutely draining. I hold out hope that these believers can be freed from the bondage of doctrine. I have said what needed said and now I will be back home to post. And, I do consider this home. You guys/gals are a breath of fresh air in the Kingdom. I love you all.
Inspired move. At some point shake off the dust, and soak in the balm of Gilead.
21 Since my people are crushed, I am crushed;
I mourn, and horror grips me.
22 Is there no balm in Gilead?
Is there no physician there?
Why then is there no healing
for the wound of my people? Jer. 8
:HeartThrob:
and while my glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by. Ex. 33:22
Quote from: jabcat on January 20, 2011, 08:54:31 AM
Quote from: shawn on January 20, 2011, 08:10:04 AM
Quote from: Cardinal on January 20, 2011, 07:42:44 AM
:cloud9: I went over there looking for what you wrote Shawn, but I can't find it.... :dontknow:
I started one about Christian Double talk...based on a post here. I also posted in several other topics in the open forums. But, I can no longer post there. It's absolutely draining. I hold out hope that these believers can be freed from the bondage of doctrine. I have said what needed said and now I will be back home to post. And, I do consider this home. You guys/gals are a breath of fresh air in the Kingdom. I love you all.
Inspired move. At some point shake off the dust, and soak in the balm of Gilead.
21 Since my people are crushed, I am crushed;
I mourn, and horror grips me.
22 Is there no balm in Gilead?
Is there no physician there?
Why then is there no healing
for the wound of my people? Jer. 8
:HeartThrob:
Thank you for those verses Jab.
Quote from: legoman on January 20, 2011, 12:25:31 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 19, 2011, 08:28:46 PM
The thread is closed...
Quote from: legoman on January 19, 2011, 07:44:51 PM
Does God want all to be saved? They don't seem to be the Calvinist... so I'm guessing they would say yes. Can God achieve His desires? This is where they will probably disagree. Show the scriptural facts.
And don't lose focus. If God wants all to be saved, then He is not going to leave any suffering forever. If God wants all to be saved, then people do not suffer forever in the lake of fire.
They answer: God doesn't like it but He respects them chosing hell.
LOL very bad response. God "respects" their choice - even though God binds people to disobedience, hardens their hearts, and sends them a strong delusion - yet he still "respects" their choice. Interesting perspective.
That contradiction was expressed in the Double Talk list Shawn posted over there.
They completely ignore the list. They only wrote about bad intentions. There was only one small reference to the list that that was teh famous "out of context" quote.
QuoteQuote
QuoteWhere does it even say sinners stay forever in the lake of fire? AFAIK on a literal reading, it doesn't. AFAIK It says the devil, the beast, and the false prophet are the only "eternal" inhabitants of the lake of fire. So what does that mean for all the every day average sinners? (Assuming the beast and false prophet are literal people - which is an incorrect assumption).
The passage below shows sinners go into the fire. (if that fire is LoF or not is of little importance.
Then automaticly we arrive at the fanout Matthew 25:46. I think you know what that means.... "Eternal=eternal" "Hu? So you say eternal life is ending?"
Thus why we need to be precise. Matt 25:46 doesn't mention lake of fire.
Assuming they agree with that their anwer will be: But it's fire anyway. Or prove it's not LoF. Or where doesn the Bibe state there is another fire/helllisg place?
QuoteOf course the whole aionios/eternal thing is a issue, and IMHO is a bad place to start with someone who is being difficult. Not that its a problem - just that is hard to explain to someone who won't listen.
I'm sure you have read plenty of ET posts and know Matthew 25:46 is very frequently quoted. And then you no longer can get out of the age-debate.
It's a package deal.
QuoteLet me give you an example of what I mean by being precise.
Rev 20:15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
People will read this and assume they never get out. That is imprecise. Does this verse say what happens to them in the lake of fire? NO. Does this verse say they stay in there forever? NO. Does it say they get out? NO. All we know is that those not written in the book of life are thrown into the lake of fire.
Their answer: It's true the verse doesn't say no one exits. But if there is no verse that proves nobody exits it's only logical nobody exits.[/quote]They will, and did, answer with a question. Show us one verse that says people exit LoF.
What happens inside? It's fire so are in pain and gnash teeth and have no rest.
QuoteQuoteBut we must stay focused on what we know. God wants to save all men. So He will do it. Therefore the lake of fire is:
All=elect/believers.
Wants=hope not fact.
More adding to the text.[/quote]No that's simply what the word means. So it has to be proven what it means when linked to God. Do all His wishes get carried out? Or is desire to punish bigger than His desire to save. I'm simply saying they will not accept a single verse.
Welcome Shawn. Blessings and peace. "My peace I leave with you, not as the world gives...and the world can't take it away".
I agree WW. If they want to believe what they believe bad enough, they can find ways to "prove it" (whether it's accurate or makes sense or not). Facts as plain as the nose on your face can be twisted.
Another good reason to state what one feels led to share and move on, IMO. If it's their time to see, they'll begin to see. If not, they'll/we'll stay blinded. Otherwise, a seed has been planted for later germination. :thumbsup:
Quote from: jabcat on January 20, 2011, 09:26:24 AM
Welcome Shawn. Blessings and peace. "My peace I leave with you, not as the world gives...and the world can't take it away".
I agree WW. If they want to believe what they believe bad enough, they can find ways to "prove it" (whether it's accurate or makes sense or not). Facts as plain as the nose on your face can be twisted.
Another good reason to state what one feels led to share and move on, IMO. If it's their time to see, they'll begin to see. If not, they'll/we'll stay blinded. Otherwise, a seed has been planted for later germination. :thumbsup:
Just got done reading about planting seeds. "Seeds are not to be forced, but they are to be planted", "There are seasons to planting". Good stuff.
I was thinking whether there would be any efficacy in pointing them to testimonies of people who had a pro-UR vision/revelation. Gary Amirault, Hannah Whitall Smith, George DeBenneville, Charles Slagle etc.
Probably not, though. Their counter? Easy:
a] those people never got any revelation, but are lying to promote their beliefs
b] those people actually did get a revelation, but were deceived by satan or his minions
c] those people never got any revelation, but were just imagining things
But yeah, I agree, seeds aren't to be forced.
Some seeds fall on rocks. That forum is full of rocks in a desert....
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 20, 2011, 11:02:47 AM
Some seeds fall on rocks. That forum is full of rocks is a desert....
Imagine how frustrated God must get with us!
John 11:35
Jesus wept.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 20, 2011, 09:15:25 AM
Quote from: legoman on January 20, 2011, 12:25:31 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 19, 2011, 08:28:46 PM
The thread is closed...
Quote from: legoman on January 19, 2011, 07:44:51 PM
Does God want all to be saved? They don't seem to be the Calvinist... so I'm guessing they would say yes. Can God achieve His desires? This is where they will probably disagree. Show the scriptural facts.
And don't lose focus. If God wants all to be saved, then He is not going to leave any suffering forever. If God wants all to be saved, then people do not suffer forever in the lake of fire.
They answer: God doesn't like it but He respects them chosing hell.
LOL very bad response. God "respects" their choice - even though God binds people to disobedience, hardens their hearts, and sends them a strong delusion - yet he still "respects" their choice. Interesting perspective.
That contradiction was expressed in the Double Talk list Shawn posted over there.
They completely ignore the list. They only wrote about bad intentions. There was only one small reference to the list that that was teh famous "out of context" quote.
QuoteQuote
QuoteWhere does it even say sinners stay forever in the lake of fire? AFAIK on a literal reading, it doesn't. AFAIK It says the devil, the beast, and the false prophet are the only "eternal" inhabitants of the lake of fire. So what does that mean for all the every day average sinners? (Assuming the beast and false prophet are literal people - which is an incorrect assumption).
The passage below shows sinners go into the fire. (if that fire is LoF or not is of little importance.
Then automaticly we arrive at the fanout Matthew 25:46. I think you know what that means.... "Eternal=eternal" "Hu? So you say eternal life is ending?"
Thus why we need to be precise. Matt 25:46 doesn't mention lake of fire.
Assuming they agree with that their anwer will be: But it's fire anyway. Or prove it's not LoF. Or where doesn the Bibe state there is another fire/helllisg place?
QuoteOf course the whole aionios/eternal thing is a issue, and IMHO is a bad place to start with someone who is being difficult. Not that its a problem - just that is hard to explain to someone who won't listen.
I'm sure you have read plenty of ET posts and know Matthew 25:46 is very frequently quoted. And then you no longer can get out of the age-debate.
It's a package deal.
QuoteLet me give you an example of what I mean by being precise.
Rev 20:15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
People will read this and assume they never get out. That is imprecise. Does this verse say what happens to them in the lake of fire? NO. Does this verse say they stay in there forever? NO. Does it say they get out? NO. All we know is that those not written in the book of life are thrown into the lake of fire.
Their answer: It's true the verse doesn't say no one exits. But if there is no verse that proves nobody exits it's only logical nobody exits.
They will, and did, answer with a question. Show us one verse that says people exit LoF.
What happens inside? It's fire so are in pain and gnash teeth and have no rest.
QuoteQuoteBut we must stay focused on what we know. God wants to save all men. So He will do it. Therefore the lake of fire is:
All=elect/believers.
Wants=hope not fact.
More adding to the text.[/quote]No that's simply what the word means. So it has to be proven what it means when linked to God. Do all His wishes get carried out? Or is desire to punish bigger than His desire to save. I'm simply saying they will not accept a single verse.
[/quote]
--
Hi WW,
Yes you are right there is always a response to whatever is said. And you know all the counter-responses to what you just wrote above.
They will see what they want to see. But hopefully a seed will grow there.
I agree at a certain point you have to get into aion/aionios translations - that is where many people cannot believe it. They have faith in the English words and translators.
Reading over their responses to Shawn, I'm not sure I want to discuss much over there. But I will still try to lay out a solid case. Not just yet - maybe tomorrow. I want to prepare my introduction well so it cannot be claimed to be "attacking". Must proceed with patience and caution.
Quote from: legoman on January 20, 2011, 04:00:33 PM
Hi WW,
Yes you are right there is always a response to whatever is said. And you know all the counter-responses to what you just wrote above.
Yeah unfortunately I am right. On many boards people don't even try to listen. This one is even worse because the crew decides to lock a thread before the debate even started. Even Matt Slick had the courtesy to really debate.
I have still to decide for myself if they are just blinded or just scared and ignorant. The crew acts like they are protecting people from reading UR lies.
But all the can do in nagging about the tone of a post.
If you want to protect readers jsut post a long list of verses that impress people.
QuoteI agree at a certain point you have to get into aion/aionios translations - that is where many people cannot believe it. They have faith in the English words and translators.
Mr. Strong and Thayer are seen a respected scholar. Non UR scholars. Even they admit there is at least sometimes an age in the Bible. The plan of the ages picture may be helpful.....?
QuoteReading over their responses to Shawn, I'm not sure I want to discuss much over there. But I will still try to lay out a solid case. Not just yet - maybe tomorrow. I want to prepare my introduction well so it cannot be claimed to be "attacking". Must proceed with patience and caution.
Just my :2c: just do a frontal assualt. There was nothing bad in Shawns list. Everything none ET is classified offensive.
Or another approach I suggested earlier. What about acting like an ET?
http://home.online.nl/spamfree/index.html?page=Questions%20without%20answers.htm
http://home.online.nl/spamfree/index.html?page=Bible%20Threatenings%20Explained.htm
Ask help refuting those satanic teachings.
Maybe they will try to help. And best of all many will see the imo fine articles.
Get out your mountain climing gear. You'll need it for the uphill struggle :thumbsup:
After reading through this thread, two Scriptures have been resonating that I'd like to bring up here . . .one is in the gospels where the disciples came to Jesus, patting themselves on the back for rebuking some guy they saw casting demons out in Jesus name but he wasn't OF THEIR GROUP. And Jesus rebuked them for doing so . . .and he then stated "if they're not against us . . .they are for us. These people over at the other forum that Shawn has been visiting don't seem to be aware of this . . .amongs many other things obviously.
Luke 9
49And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. 50And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.
All this is, is doctrine . . .whether or not everyone sees it like we see it is really secondary. What "should" be primary to me, in my own life, is that my doctrine does not damage my relationship with others. If my relationship is severed, so is my ability to birth life into the other person I just cut off. So I lean more towards "UR" than any other doctrine, so what? Why would that be the factor that would cause separation between me and another person? So they "don't" believe in UR . . .so what . . .it's the same response. Relationship over religion. We can even take something as liberating as UR and turn it into the same religion of bondage to those we target if we're not careful . . .having said that, I'm in agreement with you guys who've shared your impressions on Shawn's responses over there. He's done nothing but reach out in innocense and honesty. They've taken their swords (remember, it's still resembling the Word of God) and cut him to pieces with their "knowledge" of their word.
And now, showing even more maturity, Shawn is realizing the futility of trying to till the land and plant the seed on frozen ground. The good news to all of this is . . .seasons change. Their time is coming when God is going to thaw them out . . .it's just not today is all.
The other passage . . .I gotta tell ya . .that thing that someone put out yesterday "What they say versus what they mean" I printed that off and took it with me to church last night and handed it out. In doing so I sorta explained what has been going on with this other site. In the list, there is a reference to 1 Timothy 4 . . .it's dealing with "their" reasoning for believing only the elect will go to heaven . . .well, in seconds, someone read a passage out of 1 Timothy 6 . . .I still don't know how they ended up there . . .I asked if they knew ahead of time that that's what it said.
1 Timothy 6
3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, 4 they are conceited and understand nothing. They have an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions 5 and constant friction between people of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.
I know talk forums kinda wince a little at this kind of stuff, but again, there's nothing wrong with discussion . . .and this Scripture I'm sharing is not to force on you or anyone, it's just something that I see NEEDS to be applied TO ME . . .and if it fits others . . .that's a good thing to.
:cloud9: I went over there and read a few of their posts and Shawn's and it's pretty obvious to me, at BEST you got to drop some seeds for later germination, but that ground over there does not look well plowed to me. :sigh: Sometimes it takes years for fruit to come forth. :2c:
Here's an example of some of the christian charity I'm receiving via private messages over there:
HistoryB writes:
"inquisition
It would be a party to put you on the stake, good times to be had by all."
"You know what your doing son of Satan."
"ha
What a despicable person you are, always lying. Go away troll your nothing but trouble here"
"go away
No one wants you. All you do is torment, go somewhere else all you are is making everyone's life miserable. Grow up and get out your mother's basement and go get a job you troll"
Nice guy, eh?
:sigh: Lovely.....know them by their fruits, comes to mind.....
Here is a pm from RoyS, the charitable moderator over there:
Quote
You are the child of your father; the father of lies. Why be honest with anyone, about anything.
We're 'not having it', because it's a false doctrine, as has been explained to you countless times, WITH SCRIPTURE. You, on the other hand, can't produce a single verse to support your position. Where's that 'case', you promised to post? Another lie?
:cloud9: Harold Lovelace compiled 600 UR scriptures. Google him and give them 600 to refute...... should leave them scratching their heads for awhile, and who knows, maybe there are some lurkers there who don't have quite as much to lose as those you're trying to reach, because they've already been humbled to receive. :dontknow:
Gabe, where do you think Roy was going with all that questioning of having to have faith to be saved? He was taking you down a path and you were agreeing with him and then he abruptly stopped and called you the usual names. Do you think he realized that he was about to prove that even universalists will be saved because they are believers, because they have faith? I think he was trying to set a trap and then figured out he was about to be caught in his own trap... Or maybe he was going somewhere with it and got frustrated... :dontknow:
Quote from: Nathan on January 20, 2011, 05:09:28 PM
After reading through this thread, two Scriptures have been resonating that I'd like to bring up here . . .one is in the gospels where the disciples came to Jesus, patting themselves on the back for rebuking some guy they saw casting demons out in Jesus name but he wasn't OF THEIR GROUP. And Jesus rebuked them for doing so . . .and he then stated "if they're not against us . . .they are for us. These people over at the other forum that Shawn has been visiting don't seem to be aware of this . . .amongs many other things obviously.
Luke 9
49And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. 50And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.
All this is, is doctrine . . .whether or not everyone sees it like we see it is really secondary. What "should" be primary to me, in my own life, is that my doctrine does not damage my relationship with others. If my relationship is severed, so is my ability to birth life into the other person I just cut off. So I lean more towards "UR" than any other doctrine, so what? Why would that be the factor that would cause separation between me and another person? So they "don't" believe in UR . . .so what . . .it's the same response. Relationship over religion. We can even take something as liberating as UR and turn it into the same religion of bondage to those we target if we're not careful . . .having said that, I'm in agreement with you guys who've shared your impressions on Shawn's responses over there. He's done nothing but reach out in innocense and honesty. They've taken their swords (remember, it's still resembling the Word of God) and cut him to pieces with their "knowledge" of their word.
And now, showing even more maturity, Shawn is realizing the futility of trying to till the land and plant the seed on frozen ground. The good news to all of this is . . .seasons change. Their time is coming when God is going to thaw them out . . .it's just not today is all.
The other passage . . .I gotta tell ya . .that thing that someone put out yesterday "What they say versus what they mean" I printed that off and took it with me to church last night and handed it out. In doing so I sorta explained what has been going on with this other site. In the list, there is a reference to 1 Timothy 4 . . .it's dealing with "their" reasoning for believing only the elect will go to heaven . . .well, in seconds, someone read a passage out of 1 Timothy 6 . . .I still don't know how they ended up there . . .I asked if they knew ahead of time that that's what it said.
1 Timothy 6
3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, 4 they are conceited and understand nothing. They have an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions 5 and constant friction between people of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.
I know talk forums kinda wince a little at this kind of stuff, but again, there's nothing wrong with discussion . . .and this Scripture I'm sharing is not to force on you or anyone, it's just something that I see NEEDS to be applied TO ME . . .and if it fits others . . .that's a good thing to.
Personally, I love discussion especially about our Lord Jesus. I enjoy healthy discourse. I enjoy iron sharpening iron. But, I know that is too easy to state something thinking you are doing something helpful when it's actually divisive. And, even worse when in the mist of discussion that gets heated it can become less about sharperning, being sharpened and more about being right. Pride creeps in and corrupts. What you are saying certainly fits I agree tent should be different. I consider this placea an oasis. We should be careful about protecting that. And I certainly need to do my part in that.
Quote from: Molly on January 21, 2011, 08:26:08 AM
Gabe, where do you think Roy was going with all that questioning of having to have faith to be saved? He was taking you down a path and you were agreeing with him and then he abruptly stopped and called you the usual names. Do you think he realized that he was about to prove that even universalists will be saved because they are believers, because they have faith? I think he was trying to set a trap and then figured out he was about to be caught in his own trap... Or maybe he was going somewhere with it and got frustrated... :dontknow:
Molly, he was going to try to prove that because those in "hell" have already "seen", then faith is impossible. I have yet to go there today, so I don't know if he ever got around to making the argument.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 21, 2011, 05:20:39 PM
Quote from: Molly on January 21, 2011, 08:26:08 AM
Gabe, where do you think Roy was going with all that questioning of having to have faith to be saved? He was taking you down a path and you were agreeing with him and then he abruptly stopped and called you the usual names. Do you think he realized that he was about to prove that even universalists will be saved because they are believers, because they have faith? I think he was trying to set a trap and then figured out he was about to be caught in his own trap... Or maybe he was going somewhere with it and got frustrated... :dontknow:
Molly, he was going to try to prove that because those in "hell" have already "seen", then faith is impossible. I have yet to go there today, so I don't know if he ever got around to making the argument.
That is a failed argument unless you are willing to conceed that Thomas and all the apostles are now burning in hell because they did not have real faith.
Regardless RoyS's abrupt change in discussion from polite questions to "this discussion is over because you are a child of Satan" is troubling...
Quote from: legoman on January 21, 2011, 05:55:50 PM
Regardless RoyS's abrupt change in discussion from polite questions to "this discussion is over because you are a child of Satan" is troubling...
Or hopeful. He got stuck in his own lies and he knows it so he took the easy way out.
Jabcat the brain analyst must have some theory about that :laughing7:
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 21, 2011, 03:15:02 AM
Here's an example of some of the christian charity I'm receiving via private messages over there:
HistoryB writes:
"inquisition
It would be a party to put you on the stake, good times to be had by all."
"You know what your doing son of Satan."
"ha
What a despicable person you are, always lying. Go away troll your nothing but trouble here"
"go away
No one wants you. All you do is torment, go somewhere else all you are is making everyone's life miserable. Grow up and get out your mother's basement and go get a job you troll"
Nice guy, eh?
I wish I could still live in my mothers basement, save a ton on rent.
:LH:
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 21, 2011, 06:13:40 PM
Quote from: legoman on January 21, 2011, 05:55:50 PM
Regardless RoyS's abrupt change in discussion from polite questions to "this discussion is over because you are a child of Satan" is troubling...
Or hopeful. He got stuck in his own lies and he knows it so he took the easy way out.
Jabcat the brain analyst must have some theory about that :laughing7:
Who me? I need my own brain analyzed. I got troubles of my own, buddy. winkgrin:
Quote from: jabcat on January 21, 2011, 09:39:06 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 21, 2011, 06:13:40 PM
Quote from: legoman on January 21, 2011, 05:55:50 PM
Regardless RoyS's abrupt change in discussion from polite questions to "this discussion is over because you are a child of Satan" is troubling...
Or hopeful. He got stuck in his own lies and he knows it so he took the easy way out.
Jabcat the brain analyst must have some theory about that :laughing7:
Who me? I need my own brain analyzed. I got troubles of my own, buddy. winkgrin:
:goodpost:
:iagree:
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
:bowing:
:yes:
:banana:
:trampoline:
:faint:
uh oh . . .too much??
Quote from: jabcat on January 21, 2011, 09:39:06 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 21, 2011, 06:13:40 PM
Quote from: legoman on January 21, 2011, 05:55:50 PM
Regardless RoyS's abrupt change in discussion from polite questions to "this discussion is over because you are a child of Satan" is troubling...
Or hopeful. He got stuck in his own lies and he knows it so he took the easy way out.
Jabcat the brain analyst must have some theory about that :laughing7:
Who me?
How many of you are there? :grouppray:
QuoteI need my own brain analyzed.
Did you have a happy youth?
QuoteI got troubles of my own, buddy. :winkgrin:
What size jacket you are usually wearing? :wacko2:
(http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Transports/ambulance-016.gif)
Take No Notice of Nathan- Hes having His done as we speak :Whistle: :LH:
come to think of IT - so am I :happyclap: :NewB1:
At least I have found something else in common with you lot, first the maths thingy all being 2011, and now this.
But my jacket is black and costs $300 :msealed:
Back in black :thumbsup:
Don't worry about the cost..... the jacket is a gift from the hospital :laughing7:
Crap, I have a whole band in my head now :bgdance:
Actually TAFFY . . . that's really part of our creed!! I've already given you the first thing . . .we have this over the door that leads into the church interior . . .it says three things.
To "enter in" there are three things required of this house.
#1. Be Cross-eyed.
#2. (Taf) LOSE YOUR MIND
#3. Go through the wrong door.
If we were to leave the orgainized denomination we're supposedly affiliated with and go off to start on our own . . ."this" would be our by-laws.
Quote from: Nathan on January 21, 2011, 10:36:57 PM
Actually TAFFY . . . that's really part of our creed!! I've already given you the first thing . . .we have this over the door that leads into the church interior . . .it says three things.
To "enter in" there are three things required of this house.
#1. Be Cross-eyed.
#2. (Taf) LOSE YOUR MIND
#3. Go through the wrong door.
If we were to leave the orgainized denomination we're supposedly affiliated with and go off to start on our own . . ."this" would be our by-laws.
:icon_flower:
Your some PERCULIAR minister ya Know- Must sit real well with your so called peers -lol :happy3:
:icon_flower:
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 21, 2011, 10:32:12 PM
Back in black :thumbsup:
Don't worry about the cost..... the jacket is a gift from the hospital :laughing7:
:laughing7:
Thanks :myahoo: I guess you won't be needing it any more :ticked: :pointlaugh:
Crap, I have a whole band in my head now :bgdance:
Quote from: Nathan on January 21, 2011, 09:47:31 PM
Quote from: jabcat on January 21, 2011, 09:39:06 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 21, 2011, 06:13:40 PM
Quote from: legoman on January 21, 2011, 05:55:50 PM
Regardless RoyS's abrupt change in discussion from polite questions to "this discussion is over because you are a child of Satan" is troubling...
Or hopeful. He got stuck in his own lies and he knows it so he took the easy way out.
Jabcat the brain analyst must have some theory about that :laughing7:
Who me? I need my own brain analyzed. I got troubles of my own, buddy. winkgrin:
:goodpost:
:iagree:
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
:bowing:
:yes:
:banana:
:trampoline:
:faint:
uh oh . . .too much??
As Abe said, "uh, perhaps just a tad..." :prankster:
LOL ok this thread has taken an interesting turn...
anyway I am making my foray into the other forum.
Well, tie a rope around your ankle so in case you lose consciousness . . . we can pull you back in without collapsing ourselves!! Worked for the priests in the tabernacle! Maybe you should wear lilttle bells around yourself to let them know your coming as well . . .hate to see you spook em'.
Quote from: legoman on January 22, 2011, 12:05:40 AM
LOL ok this thread has taken an interesting turn...
anyway I am making my foray into the other forum.
Plz post the url of the thread.
I'l bring the snacks.
Don't be shy peepz take as much as you want!
(http://www.erbacher-dinkel.de/portal/system/shopthumb.php?smode=2&img=roasties_barbecue_3d12336.jpg&type=shop)
Sissy of the guns and Bible says that Universalism says that faith in this life is not relevant to salvation. Could someone maybe point out to her that it is relevant and that it is indicative of a firstfruits calling and indicative that one will be chosen to rule and reign with Christ in the next age--assuming you believe that, of course.
Or whatever you do believe of why it is relevant...
I'm not sure she is ready to hear about the Divine lottery... :laughing7:
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 22, 2011, 12:27:50 AM
Quote from: legoman on January 22, 2011, 12:05:40 AM
LOL ok this thread has taken an interesting turn...
anyway I am making my foray into the other forum.
Plz post the url of the thread.
I'l bring the snacks.
Don't be shy peepz take as much as you want!
(http://www.erbacher-dinkel.de/portal/system/shopthumb.php?smode=2&img=roasties_barbecue_3d12336.jpg&type=shop)
I started posting around here:
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3732&page=7
Gooooo Legoooo
It seems to go somewhere right now/
You presented good verses.
I hope it's enough but I fear not because they seem to be locked in circular resoning among other things. (few examples below)
They seem to agree fairly well with your views.....until death.
They believe in the ability to get saved in this life but all chances are gone at death.
I think convincing them salvation continues after death will be a huge task.
I you do nothing you lost because you can't prove your position.
If you corner them they start nagging about the tone of your messages and ultimately ban you.
Anywayz, good job and you got a lurker interested :thumbsup:
In post#70 Roy claims that "gave in John 3:16 is past tense". I'm not really sure about that. It's aorist tense.
Post#87 "You are thinking with your human 'logic'. God is so much bigger than that, you (or I) cannot begin to imagine." => That just as well means Roy possibly doesn't understand God gift is still offered after death.
#90 Nobody can come to the Son unless God draws them. And what about those that were not exposed to the Bible?
#120 So if one repents a day before death all is fine; but if one doesn't is eternal hell...
They keep going on about free will to choose Jesus and then suddenly #124:
Hi Pil,
When I say blind, I'm talking about spiritual blindness, which I believe is something slightly beyond ignorance. Ignorance means that you don't know. Blindness isn't that you don't see; it's that you can't. People who reject God do so not because they don't see the truth, but because they can't. The god of this world has blinded them with their own lusts to the point that they cannot see. They can't see their need for a savior. It's not until the Holy Spirit opens our spiritual eyes and draws us that we are able to recognize our need for a savior.
#129 "Wouldn't you agree that ignorance is simply not knowing? I would submit that people who can learn and do not are ignorant. People who cannot learn are disabled. Would you agree?"
And that's exactly what veiled is. Learning disability. And that proves they can't chose Jesus.
#125. Those in LoF are dead and one line later they are being punished.
Well, they banned me.
No reason was given, but I'm assuming it's because I'm a "liar" and because I came there to mock and ridicule and insult the members there.
LOL! I was nothing but polite over there, in stark contrast to the way I was treated. Perhaps one of you can inquire as to the reasons for my ban?
In any case, keep at it tree and legoman and whoever else might join in.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showpost.php?p=45056&postcount=117
I'd appreciate it if legoman or tree or another addresses HansC's silly argument here. Note the bait and switch he's trying to pull off. First he argued that once you "See", faith is impossible. When it was noted that Paul believed after having seen the risen Lord, HansC changed his argument.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3736&page=2
Quote from: Unclaimed TreasureOther thoughts....
The manner in which the Bible speaks of hell, in both the OT and NT, is harsh, unrelenting and stark.
While I can understand the person who wishes to believe in Universalism because of the loss of a loved one, there is something else that my gut tells me is behind the formalization of that philosophy.
And that is..."I am better than God." While not likely admitted, Gabe and his ilk come across sending the message, "Even if God would send someone to hell for eternity, I have such a great degree of compassion that I would not do so, were it in my power."
And any time someone is trying to "outGod" God, they are falling into the error of Lucifer.
Legoman, tree and all, perhaps you could give some feedback on that thread.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?p=45100#post45100
In post # 160, HisDaughter wrote:
QuoteGod's purpose doesn't "change" yet what you understand as His purpose is incorrect. Desire doesn't equate to purpose.
Someone might want to quote Ephesians 1:9-10, which reveals that God's purpose is to unite the entire creation under Christ.
It's funny to see lukewarm agreemensts with UT; but when he mentioned lucifer it suddenly was thumbs up.
I can't prove it but I fear Lucifer is another doctrinal error of them.
But I know for sure they don't know what satan's error "you shall not die" means.
I sent this pm to RoyS as an inquiry into the reasons for my ban.
Quote
Roy,
So what is the official reason I was banned? Because I'm purported to be the spawn of Satan? Because I lied to y'all years ago?
You say that I mocked the members at CWS, but where did I do that? I looked over at the EU thread and didn't see anywhere that I mocked you fine folks. (Noting that an argument is asinine is not tantamount to attacking the person making the argument).
And I note also (and so does everyone else that I had read over the discussions at CWS) that I was polite in my discussions, in stark contrast to the manner in which your members (and especially you) were treating me.
So what's the deal?
I also note that when I was answering all your questions and allowing you to set up your argument against universal salvation, you promptly abandoned your argument and opted to call me a liar and a child of Satan. Aside from noting the fact that you made yourself look a little insane there, I am wondering why you didn't just finish your argument? Is it because you realized it was a weak argument? If so, rest assured that your choice of insults made not only your reasoning skills look weak; it made you look weak. In fact, your general demeanor towards me made yourself look most unfit to be a mod at a Christian board. You said that you have no hard feelings about me, but the way you conducted yourself made it most clear that you have hatred towards me. I'll pray that you repent and chance your ways, for the sake of yourself and others. God bless you, RoyS.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 22, 2011, 05:09:01 PM
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?p=45100#post45100
In post # 160, HisDaughter wrote:
QuoteGod's purpose doesn't "change" yet what you understand as His purpose is incorrect. Desire doesn't equate to purpose.
Someone might want to quote Ephesians 1:9-10, which reveals that God's purpose is to unite the entire creation under Christ.
Lemme guess, their interpretation is:
Ephesians 1:9-10, which reveals that God's purpose is to unite all believers of creation under Christ.
I don't know what exactly they believe but it may be that they oppose UR not just because it's a save all doctrine.
I'm following some (former) TM members on another forum and there is someone that in about every post he makes mentions trinity.
Not being allowed to discuss that concept here I will just say that one of the main reasons he opposes UR is because (in his mind) it clashes with his view on Trinity. So there are many (unspoken) reasons to deny UR.
Maybe a little off-topic but not to much I think is that I recently am coming a little towards the believe that words like Aion and Aionian are over analyzed. I long expected it but now I have strong proof the first 3 (or more) books were written in Hebrew. Maybe we are fighting to much over words in perhaps not divinely inspired translations. And that automaticly leads to unresolveble conflicts. Dunno :dontknow:
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 22, 2011, 05:20:22 PM
I sent this pm to RoyS as an inquiry into the reasons for my ban.
Quote
Roy,
So what is the official reason I was banned? Because I'm purported to be the spawn of Satan? Because I lied to y'all years ago?
You say that I mocked the members at CWS, but where did I do that?
The way I understand it is becaus eyou are rejecting their fine doctrine. That's an insult to their great intelect. By not following the status quo you are causing strive like satan...
QuoteAnd I note also (and so does everyone else that I had read over the discussions at CWS) that I was polite in my discussions, in stark contrast to the manner in which your members (and especially you) were treating me.
So what's the deal?
It's just a strawman argument. I'm sure Legoman will put up a good fight. When they starting to feel cornered they will start with their child of satan game. I hope not but I think that's how it will end.
Ah, too bad, gabe.
But I'm sure ww can resurrect you. :happygrin:
If these people are legitimate, which I have trouble believing [for the mods anyway, because they are so nasty, but then I lead a sheltered life], they need a reason why God would save people beyond death and a reason why they are saved now.
Therefore, I think the best approach is that thread which never touched on it--why are the elect saved in this age? It is clear that God has predestined some to be saved now. But, why? What do they think THEY are going to be doing after death for eternity?
If you could prove to them that they are being saved now for a reason, that they will have a job to do after death, and that it will involve ministering to the other dead and living as God's plan of the ages--ruling and reigning with Christ--inheriting with Christ--they might understand why they are being saved now.
If people cannot be saved after death, what does this mean?--
37They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;
38(Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.
39And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
40God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.
--Heb 11
Check out this bewildering post from Sissy in the "does God love everyone" thread:
Quote
Universalism does not take into account that Christ needed to become a natural flesh & blood human being in order in order to be an atoning sacrifice for natural flesh & blood human beings. (Kind after kind).
The problem with Universalism attempting to carry this over into the next world is that Christ made no atoning sacrifice as a spiritual being in the next world.
Unless you enter the next world as an already atoned for being (already forgiven and justified), then there will be no longer be an atonement available for you at all.
Never heard that one before. do these people just make this stuff up as they go?
Quote from: Sissy
Universalism does not take into account that Christ needed to become a natural flesh & blood human being in order in order to be an atoning sacrifice for natural flesh & blood human beings. (Kind after kind).
The problem with Universalism attempting to carry this over into the next world is that Christ made no atoning sacrifice as a spiritual being in the next world.
Unless you enter the next world as an already atoned for being (already forgiven and justified), then there will be no longer be an atonement available for you at all.
The first remark is either a lie or someone discussing things they know nothing about. I can tell you that's fun :mshock:
The second part is very wrong. Jesus did make an atonement in Heaven. It's a huge hole in Sissy's doctrine.
http://www.thywordistruth.com/questions/qa066.html
YLTHeb 923 It is necessary, therefore, the pattern indeed of the things in the heavens to be purified with these, and the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these;
24 for
not into holy places
made with hands did the Christ enter--figures of the true--but into the heaven itself, now to be manifested in the presence of God for us;
25 nor that he may many times offer himself, even as the chief priest doth enter into the holy places every year with blood of others;
26 since it had behoved him many times to suffer from the foundation of the world, but now once, at the full end of the ages, for putting away of sin through his sacrifice, he hath been manifested;
In my limited understanding I would say the above verses are about Heaven. and, I think, even
exclude earth.
Quote from: wwIn my limited understanding I would say the above verses are about Heaven. and, I think, even exclude earth.
I think the whole thing is about heaven and a rebellion in heaven that man unwittingly became a third party to because of the reason why man was created.
The rebellion happened in heaven first.
It is the reason that Paul talks about putting on a theatre for both heaven and earth.
9For I think that God has exhibited us apostles as last of all, like men sentenced to death, because we have become a spectacle to the world [kosmos], to angels, and to men.--1 Cor 4
"spectacle" G2302
θέατρον
theatrontheh'-at-ron
From G2300; a place for public show ("theatre"), that is, general audience room; by implication
a show itself (figuratively): - spectacle,
theatre.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3732&page=16
QuoteWhile God loves the world, He is also a Just God
Please give us the scripture that says God does not "change" so that we can examine what this "change" entails.
God will always be God, He is a Just God, a Righteous God, a God who is Love, a God of Mercy and a God of Grace. In this God will never "change".
If God doesn't extend His mercy/grace towards the sinners after hey die He did change from a God giving mercy to a God refusing to give mercy.
QuoteDesire doesn't equate to purpose. Does God changes his mind regarding His desire?
Everything about God is perfect. So He has a perfect desire and He has a perfect purpose.
If two perfect things are not the same they contradict. That simply means one or both are not perfect.
So they must be the same.
QuoteWho is the "thee" in this scripture? If you go back a look at the context you will see it is Israel. If God will cause those who strive with Israel to perish how much more will he do to those who strive against Him? That word "perish means to "break, destroy, not escape, fail, lose," The next vs 12 brings it into context.
The parble of sheep, coin, and prodical son are all about perished things that got recovered.
:2c:
HansC the moderator writes:
QuoteGood post Sissy. It's really pretty simple and not hard to understand. I often wonder why the geniuses of universalism find it so difficult to understand.
Well I responded a bit more this evening... I have a feeling this is going to turn bad quickly. Apparently my "tone" is not loving, or I need to repent, or I need to not impose my fallen man's view of justice onto God (LOL as if eternal torture in fire is not a "fallen man's view" of justice)
Not sure how this will proceed, or if I should even continue - things fall on deaf ears and then you get tied to the virtual burning at the stake. (at least that is what it feels like) LOL
But I find it hard to sit by and let them get away with some of the things they are saying. Perhaps it is better to stay away as Shawn and jabcat and others have said.
4And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill? But they held their peace.
5And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other.
6And the Pharisees went forth, and straightway took counsel with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him.
--Mark 3
Quote from: SissyAnd there is nothing "lifted up" for spiritual/celestial beings to look upon (ie. no cure), and they will forever remain WITHOUT Christ.
The above quote is about healing those who look up to Jesus (or the snake lifted up in the wilderness)
But... there is also a healing tree in Jerusalem
YLTRev 222 in the midst of its broad place, and of the river on this side and on that, is a tree of life, yielding twelve fruits, in each several month rendering its fruits, and the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations;
QuoteThe crime we are talking about is one against the infinite and Holy GOD.
Eternity hardly seems long enough, but since it is the longest duration there is, it will have to do.
:mshock:
Quote from: legoman on January 23, 2011, 08:21:57 AM
Well I responded a bit more this evening... I have a feeling this is going to turn bad quickly. Apparently my "tone" is not loving, or I need to repent, or I need to not impose my fallen man's view of justice onto God (LOL as if eternal torture in fire is not a "fallen man's view" of justice)
Look at it from the bright side, Roy has nothing to refute your posts.
On that forum you are free to discuss everything as long it's done in a loving way.
Not agreeing with the mods is unloving....
QuoteNot sure how this will proceed, or if I should even continue - things fall on deaf ears and then you get tied to the virtual burning at the stake. (at least that is what it feels like) LOL
Hang on buddy. I won't be long :winkgrin:
Perhaps it's wise to prepare some posts and all submit them at the same time before you get banned. Also put all the things you intend to mention in those posts.
It won't convince them. But it could be useful for people with a defrosted heart.
For that reason I would also like to suggest you reference (including URL) to some articles on one of the better UR sites. Again not for the crew mods but for lurkers who possibly click on the link. Or in your signature.
A little seed so to speak... :winkgrin:
QuoteBut I find it hard to sit by and let them get away with some of the things they are saying. Perhaps it is better to stay away as Shawn and jabcat and others have said.
Now you know how Jesus must have felt when constantly being swarmed by the Scribes. He died. You will be banned. But the teaching lives on.... :winkgrin:
I know I would lose my temper very quickly on that forum.
It would be the ideal place for WillieH. They want verses. I'm sure Willie is able to give them 10 for each line he writes :icon_jokercolor:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pil (http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif) (http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?p=44589#post44589) Thanks for that response Titus. I appreciate it and apologise for not answering.
I will openly admit that I like to hope that universalism is true and I believe it to be ONE legitimate interpretation of scripture.
However, please believe me that my initial question is genuine because I am still trying to settle this one in my own mind. That Romans text seems very worrying to me along with some others.
One christian friend even suggested that because John3 16 is in the past tense, it implies that God lovED the world but does not now (since Jesus was crucified I suppose).[/t][/t] Quote: John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. [/t][/t] Note: "God so loved the world that He gave... "
Of course this is past tense; John was writing after the event of Christ's crucifixion. Read on: "...whosoever believes...". Present and future tense.
KJVJohn 3
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
There is a lot that can be said about that translation. First a small list of the tense, voice and mood as they are listed in the lexicon I use.
Loved + Gave
Tense-Aorist See [G5777]
Voice-Active See [G5784]
Mood -Indicative See [G5791]
Believeth
Tense-Present See [G5774]
Voice-Active See [G5784]
Mood -Participle See [G5796]
Perish
Tense-Second Aorist See [G5780]
Voice-Middle See [G5785]
Mood -Subjunctive See [G5792]
The most striking of them all is the middle voice of "Perish". It's for the persons own benefit.
I'm unable to see how classic hell benefits a person.
Perish sounds negative. We also are told it's best to not perish.
It is something negative that should be avoided if possible. But the persihing is not used as punishment.
The person is in a bad state and perish is a tool used for healing the person.
----
Love and especially Gave is interesting too.
Aorist tense is a bit strange because it's basicly no tense at all or a neutral tense.
The way I see it possibly can mean any combination of past, present and future. (Not completely accurate...)
We are told God loves the world several times so it's clear God at least loved in the past.
But it just as well can be an ongoing action. I think most believe so. Voice-Active seems to agree with that.
But what about "gave His Son"
That's exactly the same tense, voice and mood construction.
Does it mean Jesus is still being 'given' to us. I think that's the case but also think it's problematic for some because it can be reasoned Jesus is still on the cross. (Which I do not say)
Perhaps the Aorist is a bit to vague to draw firm conclusions.
But the above mentioned "perish" clearly is part of the verse. Perish looks into the future. So does the eternal (age-during) life.
So for me that means the aorist also looks into the future (+past and present)
And because "perish" is after judgement to me it means the love and sacrifice of Jesus also extents to the other life.
:2c:
Tense-Aorist
The aorist tense is characterized by its emphasis on punctiliar
action; that is, the concept of the verb is considered without
regard for past, present, or future time. There is no
direct or clear English equivalent for this tense, though it is
generally rendered as a simple past tense in most translations.
The events described by the aorist tense are classified into a
number of categories by grammarians. The most common of these
include a view of the action as having begun from a certain
point ("inceptive aorist"), or having ended at a certain point
("cumulative aorist"), or merely existing at a certain point
("punctiliar aorist"). The categorization of other cases can
be found in Greek reference grammars.
The English reader need not concern himself with most of these
finer points concerning the aorist tense, since in most cases
they cannot be rendered accurately in English translation,
being fine points of Greek exegesis only. The common practice
of rendering an aorist by a simple English past tense should
suffice in most cases.
Tense-Second Aorist
The "second aorist" tense is identical in meaning and
translation to the normal or "first" aorist tense. The only
difference is in the form of spelling the words in Greek, and
there is no effect upon English translation.
Voice-Active
The active voice represents the subject as the doer or
performer of the action. e.g., in the sentence, "The
boy hit the ball, " the boy performs the action.
Voice-Middle
The middle voice indicates the subject performing an action
upon himself (reflexive action) or for his own benefit. E.g.,
"The boy groomed himself." Many verbs which occur only in
middle voice forms are translated in English as having an
active sense; these are called "deponent" verbs, and do not
comply with the normal requirements for the middle voice.
Mood-Indicative
The indicative mood is a simple statement of fact. If an
action really occurs or has occurred or will occur, it will be
rendered in the indicative mood.
Mood-Participle
The Greek participle corresponds for the most part to the
English participle, reflecting "- ing" or "- ed" being suffixed
to the basic verb form. The participle can be used either
like a verb or a noun, as in English, and thus is often termed
a "verbal noun."
Mood-Subjunctive
The subjunctive mood is the mood of possibility and
potentiality. The action described may or may not occur,
depending upon circumstances. Conditional sentences of the
third class ("ean" + the subjunctive) are all of this type, as
well as many commands following conditional purpose clauses,
such as those beginning with "hina."
|
|
QuoteThe crime we are talking about is one against the infinite and Holy GOD.
Eternity hardly seems long enough, but since it is the longest duration there is, it will have to do.
[/quote]
With great power comes great responsibility.
Let's say I adopt a cat. He is supposed to pee in the litter box. However, since he's in a new environment and with a new owner, the chances are that at first, he sometimes takes a pee elsewhere. Now, the cat's understanding of things is a lot more limited than mine. In that light I'm obliged to cut him some slack. If I, after finding out the cat had peed on my carpet, grabbed him by tail and swung him against the wall time after time until he died, excusing my actions with "He was free to choose. He could've chosen to pee in the litter box. He disobeyed." everyone would probably call me a monster.
I think this scenario is analogous to an infinite God putting a carnal and broken creature in the world. There are different religions and holy books to choose from, but only one of them is the correct one. There isn't even general consensus on how the correct holy book should be interpreted. However, despite of that mainstream Christianity argues that men are without excuse, and everyone failing to accept Christ in this life will be sent into an eternal incinerator. "They were free to choose. They could've chosen to follow Christ. They disobeyed." And, for that, they aren't calling God a monster, but a Perfectly Just God.
With infinite power comes infinite responsibility. :2c:
As for me, sites like the one you speak of, cling to old things and only when the Holy Spirit's time is readied will they hear...
Luk 15:4 `What man of you having a hundred sheep, and having lost one out of them, doth not leave behind the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go on after the lost one, till he may find it?
Without the belief that He will find "that one," then His Love has not yet been established in what they believe. "They (that one)" has yet to be found.
Sissy called Legoman her "little Universalist".
Such tender words....
LOL
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 23, 2011, 10:03:32 AM
It would be the ideal place for WillieH. They want verses. I'm sure Willie is able to give them 10 for each line he writes :icon_jokercolor:
More isn't necessarily better. I found with willie, when I sometimes checked his verse references many were irelevant to the topic.
Quote from: thinktank on January 23, 2011, 09:07:54 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 23, 2011, 10:03:32 AM
It would be the ideal place for WillieH. They want verses. I'm sure Willie is able to give them 10 for each line he writes :icon_jokercolor:
More isn't necessarily better. I found with willie, when I sometimes checked his verse references many were irelevant to the topic.
Lemme just say, each his/her own style/opinion. And right now while WillieH banned and can't respond I find it "not done"done to discuss.
BTW no hard feelings TT :thumbsup:
Another glorious set of posts with lots of UR concepts in it Lego.
Pil is doing good too.
They seem to agree with a quite a few things. Their problem is that they think all grace ends at death (and therefore hell must be eternal)
That's nonsense (see reply #161 in this thead) but it seems Sissy's main argument.
I wonder what happens if you debunk that argument.
@Samuel: If you want an another shot; pm me for an activated account :footmouth:
I've enlisted some URs from City-Data. :bigGrin:
I sent a pm to you, whitewings! :Sparkletooth:
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 23, 2011, 11:27:33 PM
Another glorious set of posts with lots of UR concepts in it Lego.
Thanks WW! I had a busy afternoon. I function much better when its not 1:30am...
Quote
Pil is doing good too.
They seem to agree with a quite a few things. Their problem is that they think all grace ends at death (and therefore hell must be eternal)
That's nonsense (see reply #161 in this thead) but it seems Sissy's main argument.
I wonder what happens if you debunk that argument.
There is a lot of non-answers. They aren't wiling to see - but maybe something will sink in.
The problem is to believe in UR you have to give up a lot of "sacred cows"
1. people deserve to burn forever
2. God can't save everyone
3. man's free will overrides God's desire
4. certain words are misinterpreted/mistranslated in the English bible
etc.
Its a multi-front war, and the moment you gain an inch on one side someone throws another front at you.
Lego, you are doing a fine job. I appreciate it. Hang in there. Reinforcements are coming. Perhaps even I'll be back.
You guys are better men than me. God bless.
Peace, strength, comfort. James.
Legoman,
Please address this nonsense.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showpost.php?p=45205&postcount=125
Quote from: UnclaimedTreasureAs I reread the account in Acts, Paul did not see Jesus at that moment on the Damascus Road. What he saw was a brilliant light that instantly blinded him; he was knocked from his horse; and he HEARD a voice that asked, "Why are you persecuting Me?" Instantly, even as he asked the question, Paul knew who he was talking to because he asked, "Who are You, Lord?" Those with him saw the light and heard a noise like thunder, but not a voice.
Paul did see Jesus, but that was after his conversion when he was in the desert apparently being directly instructed in the faith by the Holy Spirit.
Tell them they can't understand yet because it's a secret! :happygrin:
9Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
"mystery"
G3466
μυστήριον
mustērion
moos-tay'-ree-on
From a derivative of μύω muō (to shut the mouth); a secret or "mystery" (through the idea of silence imposed by initiation into religious rites): - mystery.
[of his] "will"
G2307
θέλημα
thelēma
thel'-ay-mah
From the prolonged form of G2309; a determination (properly the thing), that is, (actively) choice (specifically purpose, decree; abstractly volition) or (passively) inclination: - desire, pleasure, will.
10That in the dispensation of the fulness 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:
11In 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:
12That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
--Eph 1
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 24, 2011, 06:37:25 AM
Legoman,
Please address this nonsense.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showpost.php?p=45205&postcount=125
Quote from: UnclaimedTreasureAs I reread the account in Acts, Paul did not see Jesus at that moment on the Damascus Road. What he saw was a brilliant light that instantly blinded him; he was knocked from his horse; and he HEARD a voice that asked, "Why are you persecuting Me?" Instantly, even as he asked the question, Paul knew who he was talking to because he asked, "Who are You, Lord?" Those with him saw the light and heard a noise like thunder, but not a voice.
Paul did see Jesus, but that was after his conversion when he was in the desert apparently being directly instructed in the faith by the Holy Spirit.
Just a question.
Why is it of any importance? Both are supernatural. The main point isn't sound or vision but instant
forced conversion. And that forced conversion is a big bonus for the UR defender.
It's nice to know, but what good does it do for the position of the ET, ED or UR?
QuoteUniversalism teaches that you can sin all you want and when you die, come into the kingdom of Heaven.
This is an objection to UR that I keep hearing over and over again. It's a misperception [I hope]. It needs to be addressed and corrected right from the start. [sales 101].
Sorry, your position isn't scriptural.
Quote:
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: [/t][/t] Quote: Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. [/t][/t] Once people are in the LoF, how do they get faith? They have the evidence right there. Faith comes by hearing... are there going to be Bible classes for the lost souls? Tell me how your scenario works.
WW: What are Jesus and His angels testing in LoF.
A list with verses + an article showing God=Fire: http://home.online.nl/spamfree/index.html?page=Fire.htm (http://home.online.nl/spamfree/index.html?page=Fire.htm)
QuoteLego, show me one verse in the bible where the lake of fire is being used for testing/purification purposes. YLTRev 14
10 he also shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, that hath been mingled unmixed in the cup of His anger, and he shall be tormented in fire and brimstone before the holy messengers, and before the Lamb,
Tormented
βασανίζω
basanizō
Thayer Definition:
1) to test (metals) by the touchstone, which is a black siliceous stone used to test the purity of gold or silver by the colour of the streak produced on it by rubbing it with either metal ==> WW just like a refiner does.
2) to question by applying torture
3) to torture
4) to vex with grievous pains (of body or mind), to torment
5) to be harassed, distressed
5a) of those who at sea are struggling with a head wind
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by Thayer's/Strong's Number: from G931
Citing in TDNT: 1:561, 96
|
|
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3775
Quote
Universalism Threads READ THIS!
All threads pertaining to the false doctrine of Universalism have been moved to a sub-forum in the Cults and Other Religions forum. No more threads or posts regarding Universalism will be allowed in any other forum.
Any attempts to promote Universalism beliefs in any other area of the forums will be subject to deletion, and disciplinary action.
LOL. Lame. Next they'll ban the subject altogether.
HansC on Universalists:
QuoteA real bunch of sugar-coated sweethearts, piping a merry tune, as they lure unsuspecting souls to eternal perdition. What amazing love, willingly promoting a doctrine of devils, seeking to thwart the work of Christ, and doing it all with a seared conscience.
Hopefully, you will wake up some day, and smell the stench of the goat herd you follow before it really is too late.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showpost.php?p=45420&postcount=277
Good grief.
YLTMatt 7
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, lord, have we not in thy name prophesied? and in thy name cast out demons? and in thy name done many mighty things?
23 and then I will acknowledge to them, that--I never knew you, depart from me ye who are working lawlessness.
Legoman,
there has been a great deal of confusion concerning what you meant when you said that John 3:18 is 'moot'.
Please, for sanity's sake, clear this up!
lol, nevermind, lego! I see now where you cleared that up. I hope they are not still unclear on your meaning.
Please give URL.
Would be a good thread for Scott/Pneuma. I remember him driving Matt Slick insane :winkgrin:
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3777
Keep in mind that I really do believe aionios means eternal, even in the hell texts.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 24, 2011, 07:48:54 PM
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3777
Keep in mind that I really do believe aionios means eternal, even in the hell texts.
Welll... nobody is perfect :laughing7:
Seems Roy likes you. I gave you a happy smilie :)
Quote from: Aleax on January 23, 2011, 02:42:54 PM
With great power comes great responsibility.
Let's say I adopt a cat. He is supposed to pee in the litter box. However, since he's in a new environment and with a new owner, the chances are that at first, he sometimes takes a pee elsewhere. Now, the cat's understanding of things is a lot more limited than mine. In that light I'm obliged to cut him some slack. If I, after finding out the cat had peed on my carpet, grabbed him by tail and swung him against the wall time after time until he died, excusing my actions with "He was free to choose. He could've chosen to pee in the litter box. He disobeyed." everyone would probably call me a monster.
:cloud9: Please, it hurts when I laugh...... :laughing7:
And sadly, this about sums up their reasoning. Tell me, if death is the last enemy to be destroyed, how exactly does death prevent Him from saving all?
Like gold I would say :icon_flower:
Quote from: Cardinal on January 24, 2011, 08:13:05 PM
Quote from: Aleax on January 23, 2011, 02:42:54 PM
With great power comes great responsibility.
Let's say I adopt a cat. He is supposed to pee in the litter box. However, since he's in a new environment and with a new owner, the chances are that at first, he sometimes takes a pee elsewhere. Now, the cat's understanding of things is a lot more limited than mine. In that light I'm obliged to cut him some slack. If I, after finding out the cat had peed on my carpet, grabbed him by tail and swung him against the wall time after time until he died, excusing my actions with "He was free to choose. He could've chosen to pee in the litter box. He disobeyed." everyone would probably call me a monster.
:cloud9: Please, it hurts when I laugh...... :laughing7:
And sadly, this about sums up their reasoning. Tell me, if death is the last enemy to be destroyed, how exactly does death prevent Him from saving all?
Death is no longer an enemy that kills saints. Now it's a friend that kills sinners. The dead sinners are not really dead. They are alive but every day they die even more, but never become really dead.
I always hoped a mod of a Christian forum would know about such simple uncomplex Bible truths.... But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt because you are ill. :icon_queen:
:cloud9: :laughing7:
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 22, 2011, 05:35:48 PM
Maybe a little off-topic but not to much I think is that I recently am coming a little towards the believe that words like Aion and Aionian are over analyzed. I long expected it but now I have strong proof the first 3 (or more) books were written in Hebrew. Maybe we are fighting to much over words in perhaps not divinely inspired translations. And that automaticly leads to unresolveble conflicts. Dunno :dontknow:
:cloud9: Just tippy-toeing :hijacked: off topic with you a little bit......read this today.......looks like you can add 4 books to your list......wouldn't be surprised if the Vatican has all the original Hebrew books in their archives.......
"New Discovery from WNAE (Hebrew Origin of Wisdom of Solomon) Well I have an important new discovery to report concerning the Apocrypha and specifically the Wisdom of Solomon. According to Melito in the second century CE, the Wisdom of Solomon was considered canonical by Jews and Christians. The Hebrew version of the Wisdom of Solomon is also mentioned by Ramban (1194-1270 CE) in the preface to his commentary on the Torah. He also quotes from the book.
We can now be certain that the Wisdom of Solomon was originally written in Hebrew and that the original Hebrew survived until at least 1611. For this I must acknowledge David Katcher for providing us with an important tip. The original 1611 edition of the King James Version has a marginal note to the word "pricked" in Wisdom of Solomon 16:11 (yes that it's the verse, and yes it is ironic) which says "Hebr. stung."
From this we know that the KJV translators had the original Hebrew of this book in their hands. (Likewise they also had the now lost original Hebrew of 1st Esdras which has several of these references to readings of the Hebrew.)
Now the Greek of Wisdom 16:11 has enekentronto "they were pricked" (KJV, Brenton)
or "they were bitten" (RSV, NEB) (the NAB has "they were stung"). Now this word can be translated "stung" (as in the NAB) but it can also be translated "pricked" as the KJV translators chose to translate in the main text. The footnote indicates that that original Hebrew does in fact have a word meaning "sting" and not "prick" here. The KJV footnote would indicate that the original Hebrew word was PARASH (Strong's 6567) the only Hebrew word for "sting" (as we see it in Prov. 23:32).
Now the Aramaic Pecrapta translator must have misread PARASH (Strong's 6567) "sting" as PARASH (Strong's 6566) "to break in pieces". The Aramaic Pecrapta translator thus wrongly translated PATZAIT "split, opened".
The Aramaic has mistranslated the original Hebrew word, and therefore could not have been translated from the Greek. This means that our Aramaic Pecrapta version is an Aramaic translation made directly from the Hebrew. Since these are cognate languages with much vocabulary and grammar in common, the Aramaic translation gives us a much better witness as to the original Hebrew than does the Greek. And were it not for this one marginal note made by the original 1611 KJV translators, we would not have this proof that the Aramaic was translated directly from the Hebrew rather than from the Greek.
Conversely the mistranslation of this word in the Aramaic Pecrapta proves the veracity of the KJV marginal note."
:cloud9: OK, CARRY ON...... :laughing7:
I posted something on this thread earlier today and for some reason, it didn't take. I've been over on the other thread a couple times, haven't been following the trojan approach today yet though, I tried to rejister last week but it ddin't let me be activated, never got the emial that apparently explains how to activate yourself. I pmed one of the not-so-aggressive mods and they said the sysem was waiting for email conformation . . . so today I tried under a different name with a different email . . .problem there 'now" is, the emial I gave them is my home email and I can't access that from here so I gotta wait.
Either way, even though I greatly appreciate the hearts of those who are active over there and I shared with you the above information so you can see I to, am still interested in chatting over there as well. But I'm not sure the direction this is going is all that healthy . . .it may be no big deal really, but for me, playing the devil's advocate in such a format as what is happening over there now seems just a bit . . .I don't know . . .dishonest? They aren't too receptive with the aproaches by those who have been open about their position, I'm not so sure puposefully concealing true identity for the benefit of attempting to advance hidden agendas is the best way to go with this either. what happens when they figure it out?
For something as great and powerful as this position in the cross is, it feels just a bit off the road for how God works in our lives. He didn't come to us in hidden form with this message of liberation, for them to come into the fulness of truth, is deception the most effective way to introduce it? No condemnation, just sharing where I am with ya is all.
Be careful.
Quote from: Cardinalto Melito in the second century CE, the Wisdom of Solomon was considered canonical by Jews and Christians. The Hebrew version of the Wisdom of Solomon is also mentioned by Ramban (1194-1270 CE) in the preface to his commentary on the Torah. He also quotes from the book.
wow. I just discovered that book. I quoted from it on here recently. I was wondering why it would have not been put in our Bible. What I've read in there is beautiful.
Quote from: NathanThey aren't too receptive with the aproaches by those who have been open about their position, I'm not so sure puposefully concealing true identity for the benefit of attempting to advance hidden agendas is the best way to go with this either. what happens when they figure it out?
Good point. People don't like being played the fool. It could backfire.
My introduction to UR before I came here was on Christian websites via PM. In the first, they were discussing the LoF in classic Christian terms, and someone came to me in instant message and said, 'A lake has shores.' I've never forgotten that lol.
The second time, I was laboring away talking to myself in my own thread on a Christian website and someone PM'd me about Tentmaker and invited me over. They sent me two videos to look at. One was by an old man who said he had studied the Bible for 40 years, and was convinced everyone was going to be saved--and that was the GOOD news. The other was by one of the usual people--maybe Ray Smith? Both videos made a big impression on me.
So maybe that is the way to reach people, lurk and pm those who seem to be seeking. It is at least one good way to do it--changed my life. :bigGrin:
Molly . . .I do believe you may be on to something there . . .personal communication/relationship . .. cast out the nets toward the center of the pond, but use the bait for those who are hungry for it. Hmmm . . .
Well I didn't last long. They banned me again. This time they banned my IP, so I can't view the forums. Is there any way around that?
I should have been more shrewd.
Quote from: Nathan on January 24, 2011, 10:56:01 PM
I posted something on this thread earlier today and for some reason, it didn't take. I've been over on the other thread a couple times, haven't been following the trojan approach today yet though, I tried to rejister last week but it ddin't let me be activated, never got the emial that apparently explains how to activate yourself. I pmed one of the not-so-aggressive mods and they said the sysem was waiting for email conformation . . . so today I tried under a different name with a different email . . .problem there 'now" is, the emial I gave them is my home email and I can't access that from here so I gotta wait.
Either way, even though I greatly appreciate the hearts of those who are active over there and I shared with you the above information so you can see I to, am still interested in chatting over there as well. But I'm not sure the direction this is going is all that healthy . . .it may be no big deal really, but for me, playing the devil's advocate in such a format as what is happening over there now seems just a bit . . .I don't know . . .dishonest? They aren't too receptive with the aproaches by those who have been open about their position, I'm not so sure puposefully concealing true identity for the benefit of attempting to advance hidden agendas is the best way to go with this either. what happens when they figure it out?
For something as great and powerful as this position in the cross is, it feels just a bit off the road for how God works in our lives. He didn't come to us in hidden form with this message of liberation, for them to come into the fulness of truth, is deception the most effective way to introduce it? No condemnation, just sharing where I am with ya is all.
Be careful.
Hi Nathan, I agree with you.
I as well don't think pretending to be something your not is the right approach. It is a bit deceptive - and even if the point you are making out of it is valid it could undermines your whole position if you are dishonest in your delivery. There is a difference if you are playing devil's advocate, but you have to be careful with deception. Be careful Samuel...
I'm not sure how much longer I will be posting there, probably till I get banned. Posting in a forum that is classified for cults is not really worth it.
...
Oh... I see you just got banned again Samuel. Sorry... but perhaps it is time to move one.
And really what is the point of posting there? Sure there may be a few lurkers, but the conversations are basically between the mods and a few fry-hards - there is no reception there at all. God will open their eyes at another time. If any lurker is truly interested, they will google and search out the concepts.
I will continue for now- and say what I need to say -until it degrades into repetition/personal attack/banning.
But if they keep kicking you out, I say let them be. We can't force them to believe. They are the ones missing out, and they are not ready to chew on the meat of universal salvation.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 25, 2011, 03:01:23 AM
Well I didn't last long. They banned me again. This time they banned my IP, so I can't view the forums. Is there any way around that?
I should have been more shrewd.
http://proxify.com/
http://hidemyass.com/
http://www.web300.info/
http://proxy.org/
Quote from: legoman on January 25, 2011, 03:14:50 AM
They are the ones missing out, and they are not ready to chew on the meat of universal salvation.
To me UR looks more than milk. It's easy. It's logical.
But if I see the linguistic acrobatics ETs have to use to force fit their puzzle pieces...
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 25, 2011, 08:37:58 AM
Quote from: legoman on January 25, 2011, 03:14:50 AM
They are the ones missing out, and they are not ready to chew on the meat of universal salvation.
To me UR looks more than milk. It's easy. It's logical.
But if I see the linguistic acrobatics ETs have to use to force fit their puzzle pieces...
Indeed. UR is logical. But you can't convince a mind who thinks 2+2=5.
Maybe you can post a rough outline. Perhaps with a few verses.
Often I read UR:
- skips judgement
- pagans enter heaven
Quote from: Molly on January 24, 2011, 11:52:34 PM
Quote from: Cardinalto Melito in the second century CE, the Wisdom of Solomon was considered canonical by Jews and Christians. The Hebrew version of the Wisdom of Solomon is also mentioned by Ramban (1194-1270 CE) in the preface to his commentary on the Torah. He also quotes from the book.
wow. I just discovered that book. I quoted from it on here recently. I was wondering why it would have not been put in our Bible. What I've read in there is beautiful.
I'm not sure if you mean the same book, but Wisdom of Solomon is one of the deuterocanonical books in the Catholic Bible. You may also like Sirach, if you like Wisdom. Those are two of my favorite books. You will find them back-to-back on this link:
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/index.shtml#wisdomI haven't read this entire thread, but I would encourage all of you to consider how you like to be treated when people come to Tentmaker and want to "teach" you. Nobody likes to be misled about someone else's purpose; nobody likes to have others preach but not also listen thoughtfully. I think everyone appreciates a personal response, give & take discussions.
:2c:
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 25, 2011, 08:37:58 AM
Quote from: legoman on January 25, 2011, 03:14:50 AM
They are the ones missing out, and they are not ready to chew on the meat of universal salvation.
To me UR looks more than milk. It's easy. It's logical.
But if I see the linguistic acrobatics ETs have to use to force fit their puzzle pieces...
But see, WhiteWings ... to
me it appears US also has to rely on linguistic acrobatics. I'm just sayin, being honest. :mblush:
I've said many times I think that any person ought to be able to hear or read the Bible without the use of concordances and deeper study tools - simply read what's there - and know Truth. And while I see how you all get to US using all of those tools and translation devices, it takes a lot of work to get there, in my opinion.
I'm just trying to explain why I don't think people are necessarily illogical or stubborn when they hear your messages ... I think they can be very open and honest and still disagree.
Quote from: LS on January 25, 2011, 06:03:07 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 25, 2011, 08:37:58 AM
Quote from: legoman on January 25, 2011, 03:14:50 AM
They are the ones missing out, and they are not ready to chew on the meat of universal salvation.
To me UR looks more than milk. It's easy. It's logical.
But if I see the linguistic acrobatics ETs have to use to force fit their puzzle pieces...
But see, WhiteWings ... to me it appears US also has to rely on linguistic acrobatics. I'm just sayin, being honest. :mblush:
:winkgrin: well there are far better acrobats...
QuoteI've said many times I think that any person ought to be able to hear or read the Bible without the use of concordances and deeper study tools - simply read what's there - and know Truth.
I disagree because I think the only way to understand the Bible is to read the originals with the mind/cultural background of people that lived 2000 years ago.
Every translation is an interpretation
QuoteAnd while I see how you all get to US using all of those tools and translation devices, it takes a lot of work to get there, in my opinion.
But why? Many say because UR is of the devil. I say because of flawed translations. The only reason I use a concordance is to get as close to the originals as possible.
Take for example "destruction" that's a perfectly simple word. The problem is that the Bible wasn't written in English.
QuoteI'm just trying to explain why I don't think people are necessarily illogical or stubborn when they hear your messages ... I think they can be very open and honest and still disagree.
I see you as one of those people.
It took the HS a few minutes to convert Saul; but my guess is it will take hours for the people on teh forum Lego is posting on.
NOt to split hairs WW, but it wasn't a few minutes for poor ol Saul . . .the guy was blind for 3 days . . .a lot of demolition had to transpire in the guy before he could truly proclaim that all the knowledge he obtained through the teachings of men, all his past credentials he compares the value to the same as a pile of . . .crap.
And to be honest, whether it's on the other forum or this one, I think we all are within an arms reach of an arm load of crap, and should the mood strike us, there are times where we're all guilty of striking others with that crap . . .we call it doctrine, belief systems, personal POVs even, but in the end, if we elevate our thinking above relationship with each other, the manna we once embraced as fresh meat becomes rotten and full of maggots.
I'm still planning on getting on over there . . .but expectations are not very high at all. Not looking for an argument, but simply attempting to share same "idea" that Tent represents, just from a different angle, but my head is telling me it's not going to matter. But for some reason, I just can't walk away from the idea of at least trying.
Quote from: Nathan on January 24, 2011, 10:56:01 PM
I posted something on this thread earlier today and for some reason, it didn't take. I've been over on the other thread a couple times, haven't been following the trojan approach today yet though, I tried to rejister last week but it ddin't let me be activated, never got the emial that apparently explains how to activate yourself. I pmed one of the not-so-aggressive mods and they said the sysem was waiting for email conformation . . . so today I tried under a different name with a different email . . .problem there 'now" is, the emial I gave them is my home email and I can't access that from here so I gotta wait.
Either way, even though I greatly appreciate the hearts of those who are active over there and I shared with you the above information so you can see I to, am still interested in chatting over there as well. But I'm not sure the direction this is going is all that healthy . . .it may be no big deal really, but for me, playing the devil's advocate in such a format as what is happening over there now seems just a bit . . .I don't know . . .dishonest? They aren't too receptive with the aproaches by those who have been open about their position, I'm not so sure puposefully concealing true identity for the benefit of attempting to advance hidden agendas is the best way to go with this either. what happens when they figure it out?
For something as great and powerful as this position in the cross is, it feels just a bit off the road for how God works in our lives. He didn't come to us in hidden form with this message of liberation, for them to come into the fulness of truth, is deception the most effective way to introduce it? No condemnation, just sharing where I am with ya is all.
Be careful.
I have to agree. The ends does not justify the means. We plant some seeds, some will grow and some will fall along the rocky ground. We should do so with honesty and love. When assaulted we turn the other cheek, forgive, and bless those who persecute us. I'm not even sure we should defense unwarranted comments about our salvation. The blood of Christ is our defense. When I felt myself being effected by the threads, I left. I can't be effective if I am working in the flesh.
Quote from: Nathan on January 25, 2011, 06:39:31 PM
NOt to split hairs WW, but it wasn't a few minutes for poor ol Saul . . .the guy was blind for 3 days . . .a lot of demolition had to transpire in the guy before he could truly proclaim that all the knowledge he obtained through the teachings of men, all his past credentials he compares the value to the same as a pile of . . .crap.
And to be honest, whether it's on the other forum or this one, I think we all are within an arms reach of an arm load of crap, and should the mood strike us, there are times where we're all guilty of striking others with that crap . . .we call it doctrine, belief systems, personal POVs even, but in the end, if we elevate our thinking above relationship with each other, the manna we once embraced as fresh meat becomes rotten and full of maggots.
I'm still planning on getting on over there . . .but expectations are not very high at all. Not looking for an argument, but simply attempting to share same "idea" that Tent represents, just from a different angle, but my head is telling me it's not going to matter. But for some reason, I just can't walk away from the idea of at least trying.
I love that thought of relationship over doctrine. We all agree that salvation comes through the blood of Christ. That alone should unify his people. But, the flesh, natural thinking, and carnality brings division among us where we forget one of the two most important commandments. Love thy neighbor as thyself.
Quote from: Nathan on January 25, 2011, 06:39:31 PM
NOt to split hairs WW, but it wasn't a few minutes for poor ol Saul . . .the guy was blind for 3 days . . .a lot of demolition had to transpire in the guy before he could truly proclaim that all the knowledge he obtained through the teachings of men, all his past credentials he compares the value to the same as a pile of . . .crap.
And to be honest, whether it's on the other forum or this one, I think we all are within an arms reach of an arm load of crap, and should the mood strike us, there are times where we're all guilty of striking others with that crap . . .we call it doctrine, belief systems, personal POVs even, but in the end, if we elevate our thinking above relationship with each other, the manna we once embraced as fresh meat becomes rotten and full of maggots.
I'm still planning on getting on over there . . .but expectations are not very high at all. Not looking for an argument, but simply attempting to share same "idea" that Tent represents, just from a different angle, but my head is telling me it's not going to matter. But for some reason, I just can't walk away from the idea of at least trying.
Many over there present the same false reasoning as we can hear from any side of an argument. They as can others present themselves as being representatives of God, so therefore everything they say is according to the true word of God.
So any "idea", any idea at all, that is not in agreement with what they believe is asserted as being against the word of God.
This site is not immune to that fallacy I have encountered and observed it here. I have encountered it in every church I have ever been in. I am not immune to it as I can start to believe the same way, but it is false.
Nathan is correct, and I wonder how the impression of having truth from our point of view will be met with anyone from that site gaining membership here and reading this thread about them?
Quote from: Paul Hazelwood on January 25, 2011, 08:02:56 PM
Quote from: Nathan on January 25, 2011, 06:39:31 PM
NOt to split hairs WW, but it wasn't a few minutes for poor ol Saul . . .the guy was blind for 3 days . . .a lot of demolition had to transpire in the guy before he could truly proclaim that all the knowledge he obtained through the teachings of men, all his past credentials he compares the value to the same as a pile of . . .crap.
And to be honest, whether it's on the other forum or this one, I think we all are within an arms reach of an arm load of crap, and should the mood strike us, there are times where we're all guilty of striking others with that crap . . .we call it doctrine, belief systems, personal POVs even, but in the end, if we elevate our thinking above relationship with each other, the manna we once embraced as fresh meat becomes rotten and full of maggots.
I'm still planning on getting on over there . . .but expectations are not very high at all. Not looking for an argument, but simply attempting to share same "idea" that Tent represents, just from a different angle, but my head is telling me it's not going to matter. But for some reason, I just can't walk away from the idea of at least trying.
Many over there present the same false reasoning as we can hear from any side of an argument. They as can others present themselves as being representatives of God, so therefore everything they say is according to the true word of God.
So any "idea", any idea at all, that is not in agreement with what they believe is asserted as being against the word of God.
This site is not immune to that fallacy I have encountered and observed it here. I have encountered it in every church I have ever been in. I am not immune to it as I can start to believe the same way, but it is false.
Nathan is correct, and I wonder how the impression of having truth from our point of view will be met with anyone from that site gaining membership here and reading this thread about them?
:thumbsup:
I have certainly been rebuked in this area. It's so easy, especially while under attack to turn offensive or defensive. It's so easy to want to prove "I am right, and you are wrong". I have been guilty of placing this value system above relationships with others more times than I can count. Let our gentleness, kindness, and our love for others be our fruit.
Quote from: ShawnI love that thought of relationship over doctrine. We all agree that salvation comes through the blood of Christ. That alone should unify his people. But, the flesh, natural thinking, and carnality brings division among us where we forget one of the two most important commandments. Love thy neighbor as thyself.
Makes you wonder how these guys did it.
10 We are fools for Christ. But you are so wise in Christ! We are weak. But you are so strong! You are honored. But we are looked down on! 11 Up to this very hour we are hungry and thirsty. We are dressed in rags. We are being treated badly. We have no homes. 12 We work hard with our own hands. When others call down a curse on us, we bless them. When we are attacked, we put up with it. 13 When others say bad things about us, we answer kindly. Up to this moment we have become the world's garbage. We are everybody's trash.
--1 Cor 4
There was more going on there than just trying to sell a doctrine. Not only was there a drive in Paul that no man could stop, but there was a power carrying him that would not be denied. He willingly took on all those hardships so God's freedom could be experienced by those whom he crossed paths with. He wasn't trying to peddle religion or a mindset. He lived "in" what he was sharing out. It sustained him, it enabled him to take on the condemnation and beatings. So much so that even as he was sitting in prison, worship rose out of him . . .to the point that prison bars, locked by others, were opened and he went out a free man. May we embrace the source and not the man.
When we find ourselves butting heads, may we see that it's not the "person" that we're butting heads against, but it's a mindset they are being influenced by. It's a prison that they're in that is trying to imprison us. But it's not the indiviual. If they don't want you to let them out, then don't. Seasons always change . . .the time will come when they'll be hungry for life to be planted in them . . .should we maintain a cordial relationship when it is winter, we'll have a field ready for the seed in the spring. If we cut them off due to the coldness, when the season changes, we'll end up with no field at all.
Paul planted in fields that were ready and he discerned fields that weren't, but he still love wth God's love, all who would listen.
Quote from: Molly on January 25, 2011, 10:32:09 PM
Quote from: ShawnI love that thought of relationship over doctrine. We all agree that salvation comes through the blood of Christ. That alone should unify his people. But, the flesh, natural thinking, and carnality brings division among us where we forget one of the two most important commandments. Love thy neighbor as thyself.
Makes you wonder how these guys did it.
10 We are fools for Christ. But you are so wise in Christ! We are weak. But you are so strong! You are honored. But we are looked down on! 11 Up to this very hour we are hungry and thirsty. We are dressed in rags. We are being treated badly. We have no homes. 12 We work hard with our own hands. When others call down a curse on us, we bless them. When we are attacked, we put up with it. 13 When others say bad things about us, we answer kindly. Up to this moment we have become the world's garbage. We are everybody's trash.
--1 Cor 4
Terrific passage Molly. I think that should be an example to us all who believe outside of mainstream Christian doctrine.
It would appear that I've finally gotten in over there . . .I stared at the text box for a bit before choosing to wait. My work day here is over. But tomorrow should be an interesting day.
Quote from: Nathan on January 25, 2011, 10:59:50 PM
It would appear that I've finally gotten in over there . . .I stared at the text box for a bit before choosing to wait. My work day here is over. But tomorrow should be an interesting day.
Good luck Nathan. I've been so busy with work and family this week that I haven't had time to post over there since Sunday. It takes time to type up a reasoned response. I keep reading what they post and think of all these things that need to be said, but I just know in the back of my mind that I will get sucked into another never-ending back and forth. If they don't want to listen, it doesn't matter what you say. So waiting is good.
Your post above is so right - if the field is not ready, it is not ready. The seed will grow another day - its up to God's timing not ours.
Having said that, I will probably try to post there tonight.
Well I see Ilene Wright from city-data joined up - so this should be entertaining if nothing else, assuming she doesn't get banned right away.
Question: who is "flamingHedge" and "spiffy"? Anyone from here? Spiffy is already banned after 15 posts. !
not here currently, not sure about past - unless they're here now under different names..
let's hope spiffy goes by something else for sure, especially that he has a different real name :laughing7:
FlamingHedge posts at CityData. I recruited him and Ilene and Scott (pneuma) and some others over there). :laughing7:
Oh, and they are inquiring as to why this thread has been moved out of sight of nonmembers.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 26, 2011, 07:02:36 AM
Oh, and they are inquiring as to why this thread has been moved out of sight of nonmembers.
Tell them they can only see the milk threads :winkgrin:
If you recruit enough it will become City Data overthere :icon_jokercolor:
My guess is that they will bad UR completely in a short while.
Quote from: jabcat on January 26, 2011, 04:51:37 AM
not here currently, not sure about past - unless they're here now under different names..
let's hope spiffy goes by something else for sure, especially that he has a different real name :laughing7:
He must be from around here. Lot's of holy smoke here :laughing7:
Someone please adress the "You shall not surely die" argument.
And for Titus: Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous
Quote from: TitusJesus said "my sheep hear my voice, and they know me and they follow me." That's who the good shepherd goes after if He loses one. He doesn't go after a sheep that belongs to someone else. He goes after His own.
John 10:16 I have other sheep, too, that are
not in this sheepfold. I must bring them also. They will listen to my voice, and there will be one flock with one shepherd.
That leaves the goats. That will be much harder to explain. Unless they simply are young sheep. But that even harder for them to agree on. (if true at all....) :winkgrin:
http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/christian_life/the_sheep_and_goat_8659.msg104622.html#msg104622http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/christian_life/the_sheep_and_goat_8659.msg104631.html#msg104631
James you made it into their Hall of Fame.
You got your own thread: http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3790
Legoman,
I see that Sissy is claiming that the word 'incorruptible' does not connote sinlessness. She is, of course, dead-wrong.
1Cor. 15:43 "It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:"
The imortal body is associated with glory and power.
1Cor 15:54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
The immortal body is associated with deathlessness, which implies union with God, for death is the state of separation from God. This same thought is echoed in 2 Tim. 1:10, where Paul associates immortality with the destruction of death. Immortality is what we are given by God through Christ's work on the Cross. Needless to say, Christ didn't die in order that people may live in sin forever!
Rom 2:7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
The immortal body is associated with glory and honor and eternal life, and we know that eternal life consists in knowing God (John 17:3).
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showpost.php?p=46156&postcount=39
For crying out loud, won't someone point out to HansC that believing that Christ will succeed in His mission to save all that he died for is not a Satanic belief! LOL
For those that aren't aware, I'm on the other forum under "crow bar" and so far, my only postings . . .all though they're kinda long . . .are in the introduction thread.
Quote from: Nathan on January 27, 2011, 10:39:26 PM
For those that aren't aware, I'm on the other forum under "crow bar" and so far, my only postings . . .all though they're kinda long . . .are in the introduction thread.
Thanks for posting all that Nathan.
Brilliant testimony. I got something out of it, even if they don't.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 26, 2011, 04:35:06 PM
James you made it into their Hall of Fame.
You got your own thread: http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3790
I'm honored. If you want, you can tell them I'm not a member and have never posted there, and have no plans to - that I don't prefer to argue with those fiercely set on defending mainstream error. Also, that there are many threads only available to members. Thank God we'll all one day be blessed to see John 4:42 ..."Now we believe, not just because of what you told us, but because we have heard him ourselves. Now we know that he is indeed the Savior of the world."
Good job, Nathan. I look forward to reading your posts. You got off to a good start, and even RoyS says he likes your attitude! Do your thing, brother.
I too was blessed by your testimony. There are some who will get it and some who will not. I have had seeds planted within my spirit for many many years. I couldn't really explain what I knew, just that I knew what we were being called to was much deeper than what the church had obtained. It was beyond denominational differences. It was beyond the pride. It was beyond the judgment and divisive natures. And, I just knew in my spirit that we just were not "getting it". I knew that ET didn't make sense.
So, when I was literally drawn to this kind of teaching, it was like a flood came over me. I was learning before I was reading. It was a wonderfully odd experience. At that moment, I knew God wanted to pull me out of the limitations of doctrine to experience His fullness. I was not only being called out of ET teachings but teachings limited by doctrine itself. Those seeds are now starting to grow, and I'm seeing many things for the first time.
Some are ready to listen, and some are not. If you posts help one person, then it wasn't in vain.
Quote from: jabcat on January 28, 2011, 01:17:06 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 26, 2011, 04:35:06 PM
James you made it into their Hall of Fame.
You got your own thread: http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3790
I'm honored. If you want, you can tell them
I'm not a member there.
Oh, OK. :bigGrin: You [or anyone]...
They are saying over there that there are no verses about being added to the book of life or being re-added after one has been blotted out.
I don't think I have ever seen a group so totally devoid of mercy. What do they think Romans 11 is about? How did they manage to miss that Jesus has added the Gentiles to the book of life, from which they benefit? Paul tells us the Jews will be grafted back in. When is this to happen if not after they have died?
15For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
16For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
17And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
20Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
--Rom 11
Well . . .I'm a somebody now!! They moved me from the "introduction" file and threw me in with the likes of you guys on the cults . . . just when you think you got away . . .SOMEBODY throws you back in!!
Quote from: Nathan on January 28, 2011, 08:03:17 PM
Well . . .I'm a somebody now!! They moved me from the "introduction" file and threw me in with the likes of you guys on the cults . . . just when you think you got away . . .SOMEBODY throws you back in!!
Yeah unfortunately the wolves have started circling :sigh:
A wolf will always go for the sheep, given a chance. That's what wolves do.
Try to stay positive, they are doing the same thing to you as they did to the rest of us... if you can continue to handle it with grace & decorum, at least you will set an example for future readers.
I just find this whole thing surreal . . . they are convinced "we're" the wolves and we think "they" are . . . wonder how God looks at all of this . . .think he's on one side or another? Or could he be in the middle with a hand on our chest and the other on theirs . . .smiling at us through the whole encounter. Crazy kids. Gettin all pumped up, ready to punch the lights out of the other . . .all because one won't accept the others philosophy.
Surely Father . . .there's a way to break these strongholds that would allow your river of life to flow freely from one side to the other . . .that we could actually embrace each other rather than try to choke each other. Lead the Way oh Lord, lead the way.
Amen. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Nathan on January 28, 2011, 09:25:34 PM
I just find this whole thing surreal . . . they are convinced "we're" the wolves and we think "they" are . . . wonder how God looks at all of this . . .think he's on one side or another? Or could he be in the middle with a hand on our chest and the other on theirs . . .smiling at us through the whole encounter. Crazy kids. Gettin all pumped up, ready to punch the lights out of the other . . .all because one won't accept the others philosophy.
Surely Father . . .there's a way to break these strongholds that would allow your river of life to flow freely from one side to the other . . .that we could actually embrace each other rather than try to choke each other. Lead the Way oh Lord, lead the way.
ya mention a fight -is it on TV? ok I jest
Best this in fighting is left at other boards- it has NO home here- :icon_flower:
All I can say is, Thank God I live in 2011 and not 1011.
I would have lasted ten minutes in 1011.
Quote from: Nathan on January 28, 2011, 09:25:34 PM
I just find this whole thing surreal . . . they are convinced "we're" the wolves and we think "they" are . . . wonder how God looks at all of this . . .think he's on one side or another? Or could he be in the middle with a hand on our chest and the other on theirs . . .smiling at us through the whole encounter. Crazy kids. Gettin all pumped up, ready to punch the lights out of the other . . .all because one won't accept the others philosophy.
Surely Father . . .there's a way to break these strongholds that would allow your river of life to flow freely from one side to the other . . .that we could actually embrace each other rather than try to choke each other. Lead the Way oh Lord, lead the way.
It's the first person/third person syndrome:
Our (first person) position is correct; their (third person) position is all wrong.
George Carlin said it well in his bit on 'stuff.' I'll paraphrase:
Our junk is stuff, their stuff is junk.
And God is on His side.
(Sorry if I'm barging in, but the word debate caught my attention)
Quote from: Nathan on January 28, 2011, 09:25:34 PM
I just find this whole thing surreal . . . they are convinced "we're" the wolves and we think "they" are . . . wonder how God looks at all of this . . .think he's on one side or another? Or could he be in the middle with a hand on our chest and the other on theirs . . .smiling at us through the whole encounter. Crazy kids. Gettin all pumped up, ready to punch the lights out of the other . . .all because one won't accept the others philosophy.
Yeah its bizarre (surreal as you said). Now they are calling you a 'slippery snake'. It seems at least some of them are convinced this is some kind of orchestrated attack from Satanists trying to do .... what I don't know. I suppose they are afraid the 'Satanists' will come and lead people astray, as if they hold some kind of devious power. Crazy stuff.
IMHO Unfortunately I think Gabe/Samuel hurt the situation a bit (sorry Gabe) by some of the deception that did occur - multiple user accounts, playing off each other, etc. I know he meant well. That stuff just gets found out - it always does. Its stuff like that just seals the deal -
they are deceptive Satanists! Burn em!. We have to be a good example. Turn the other cheek - love your enemy - all that stuff we talk about. Admittedly I'm not great at it either. Anyway - I think the environment there is already poisoned through a combination of things and how this has played out so far. You can go in with the nicest of intentions and they will accuse you of being a deceptive 'snake' demanding to 'come clean'. LOL I don't know how much 'cleaner' you could have come Nathan - you bared your life story there. I appreciate that. And now they are going to proceed to pick you to bits. I get what you are saying about scripture and following the spirit - but they are going to take you to task on that. Any little thing you say that's even the slightest ambiguous, they will blow it up in your face. Pearls and swine and all that. SPIRIT of the word - not the LETTER of the word.
But again, in some ways - its just the way it is - it has to be that way so that God's mercy will be that much greater when the truth is revealed to them.
Quote
Surely Father . . .there's a way to break these strongholds that would allow your river of life to flow freely from one side to the other . . .that we could actually embrace each other rather than try to choke each other. Lead the Way oh Lord, lead the way.
Amen.
On the upside, you guys are writing some great posts over there. Maybe the Inquisition brings out the best in people. Talk about fire. :bigGrin:
You should bring some of those posts over here. I'm learning a lot. :laughing7:
Legoman,
Our friends at CWS have hated me for 5 years. My recent "deception" changed nothing.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 28, 2011, 11:49:21 PM
Legoman,
Our friends at CWS have hated me for 5 years. My recent "deception" changed nothing.
Yeah I figured there was a long history, I can understand how you that could weigh on you. So I don't really blame you. I don't know the history. They are just using whatever happened with you as further 'proof' that universalists are deceptive satanists. :sigh:
For whatever reason, this particular message board seems very toxic. That can cause people to do strange things. One thing I noted is it seems to be just a very few posters - mostly like-minded. Mostly mods too. Its like the family ranch and anyone thats 'not with us' is of the devil. But if you notice in the main "open discussion board" there is a battle going on between Sadie & Titus about OSAS vs. no-OSAS. And their method of argument is starting to sound like the same attacks against UR. If Universalism wasn't there as a big target, they would be damning each other to hell. Its ironic because universal reconciliation is the solution to the OSAS/NOSAS debate.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 28, 2011, 11:49:21 PM
Legoman,
Our friends at CWS have hated me for 5 years. My recent "deception" changed nothing.
5 YEARS of this?? That's a testiment of sacrifice in and of itself. I don't know I want to hang around for "that" long. Is there "anyone" over there that isn't so abusive??? I mean, I've never seen it so heartless.
crow bar asked:
Quote
How long has this issue between you guys and the UR's been going on then? There seems to be such a deep hatred here against us/them. Is it their approach that has you so guarded? Or is it the message itself? Both? What would it take to at least bring the swelling down a bit? It's just sad that there's such a dissention against each other.
Roys replied:
Quote
Ask your friend, Samuel. Maybe he'll tell you his entire history here (but I doubt that).
I'd be glad to explain everything to whomever is interested.
BTW, I was only universalist that had ever posted there until I invited you guys.
QuoteI mean, I've never seen it so heartless.
That's what makes me wonder if they are for real or only pretending to be Christians. Maybe it's all a spoof. Kind of reminds me of the movie, Deliverance lol.
Your posts are great, Nathan.
The resident geocentricist at CWS, historyb, wants y'all to just go away. Don't cave into his demands. :happygrin:
He's the same guy who said he'd enjoy watching me burn on a stake. :HeartThrob:
Jeeze I don't know . . .where God has us is such a precious place that to try to continue having them crap on everything that you try to share . . .I've just never seen anything like it. they're convinced I'm over there as an act . . .I so want to just throw the Bible at them but they're so brittle, it'd just be feeding into their deluge of nasty accusations.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showpost.php?p=46825&postcount=64
Wow.
Nathan the deceiver.
Insanity.
:laughing7:
I couldnt help to take a View-Yo Bro ya deceiver-
ya talikg to Flesh GUYS- less painful to HIT your head upon a WALL- ouch!
:icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower:
Ill stay here with me flowers
Tip-toe through the tulips with me :bigGrin:
Quote from: jabcat on January 29, 2011, 02:46:55 AM
Tip-toe through the tulips with me :bigGrin:
:icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower:
:laugh2: I didn't expect that! :thumbsup:
I think I'm done over there, it's just too ugly.
Just wanted to quote Nathan (crow bar) for the sake of the CWS mods reading this.
Quote from: Nathan on January 24, 2011, 10:56:01 PM
Either way, even though I greatly appreciate the hearts of those who are active over there and I shared with you the above information so you can see I to, am still interested in chatting over there as well. But I'm not sure the direction this is going is all that healthy . . .it may be no big deal really, but for me, playing the devil's advocate in such a format as what is happening over there now seems just a bit . . .I don't know . . .dishonest? They aren't too receptive with the aproaches by those who have been open about their position, I'm not so sure puposefully concealing true identity for the benefit of attempting to advance hidden agendas is the best way to go with this either. what happens when they figure it out?
For something as great and powerful as this position in the cross is, it feels just a bit off the road for how God works in our lives. He didn't come to us in hidden form with this message of liberation, for them to come into the fulness of truth, is deception the most effective way to introduce it? No condemnation, just sharing where I am with ya is all.
Be careful.
Nathan, you need not respond to their accusations.
Quote from: Nathan on January 29, 2011, 02:56:20 AM
I think I'm done over there, it's just too ugly.
its not that pretty Bro - three post and wow- -------
heres ya go Jab :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower:
:icon_flower:
So they want everyone here that has posted there to "come clean". I'm just not sure what they want y'all to admit. That this thread exists?
You know, we could move it back out in view ....but I really don't think we want to open things up to an onslaught of people JUST LOOKING FOR TROUBLE. If they really wanted to honestly and politely discuss, that would be OK. But since namecalling, accusing others/insulting etc. is not acceptable here, and they're obviously not open to the revelation, then really what would we be accomplishing? Do you think it would help you guys somehow to put this thread back in view? MODS, INPUT?
Quote from: Nathan on January 29, 2011, 02:56:20 AM
I think I'm done over there, it's just too ugly.
I've already applied for a single room in heaven.
I might even ask for an estate with a big fence lol.
Quote from: Molly on January 29, 2011, 05:06:50 AM
Quote from: Nathan on January 29, 2011, 02:56:20 AM
I think I'm done over there, it's just too ugly.
I've already applied for a single room in heaven.
I might even ask for an estate with a big fence lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDdlbzSJcww
I know it's bluegrass, but what's that band like? I can't watch here from work. What you said reminded me of that old song though from when I was a kid. I saw that Bill Monroe ("The King of Bluegrass") does it too. :bigGrin:
Quote from: jabcat on January 29, 2011, 05:15:29 AM
Quote from: Molly on January 29, 2011, 05:06:50 AM
Quote from: Nathan on January 29, 2011, 02:56:20 AM
I think I'm done over there, it's just too ugly.
I've already applied for a single room in heaven.
I might even ask for an estate with a big fence lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDdlbzSJcww
LOL! That was wonderful.
You know my heart. :icon_king:
:thumbsup:
I gave them my goodbye . . . just couldn't stomach their vicious attacks . . .
OK this is getting weirder.
I think they were totally out to lunch with you Nathan, but there is something definitely wrong.
They are making some pretty heavy accusations against Gabe/Samuel - saying he is an atheist stirring up trouble by pretending to be part of one group to pit them against another group. ie. UR vs ET. Basically a troll extraordinaire. They say he has done this multiple times with different groups. They also claim he used multiple accounts (which is known already), he has posted porn links on their site, and he posted obscenities and used obscene user names. They think he is duping us here at tentmaker.
To be honest I don't know what to think.
Samuel, you can comment if you want. It might be possible that some of the above was someone else or some other confusion - but the multiple user account stuff can get really deceptive.
This whole situation saddens me - as Nathan said earlier it is surreal. It is probably true none of us would have bothered going over to that forum until this thread appeared.
I think I ought to make something clear.
While it is true that I've posted under many aliases over there, more often than not they are accusing somebody else of being me. They say that I posted porn links there, but I never did any such thing. They have always been very eager to pull the trigger and to assume the worst about me, and are very prone to accuse me of things for which they have very little evidence. I think the way they are treating Nathan is sufficient to demonstrate what I mean.
I am not an atheist. I am a Christian.
Oh, and I never signed up with the vulgar screen name RoyS attributed to me, or any other vulgar screen name for that matter. Nor did I pose as a Catholic at a Catholic forum, or as an atheist at an atheist forum.
For the record.
Well - the universalism forum is now closed over there. Probably for the better. It seems there was some resolution there for some folk at least.
Samuel, in general I think using multiple accounts was a bad idea. Its hard to know what happened there, but deception is not a good route to go. It brings into question your trust, even if you mean well.
I mean, if you didn't do all that stuff, it is hard to know. Personally, I would hope you didn't and I don't think you did, but I just don't know.
joe is saying that I clearly duped everyone. Do others feel that way? If so, why?
Quote from: legoman on January 28, 2011, 11:34:55 PM
IMHO Unfortunately I think Gabe/Samuel hurt the situation a bit (sorry Gabe) by some of the deception that did occur - multiple user accounts, playing off each other, etc. I know he meant well. That stuff just gets found out - it always does. Its stuff like that just seals the deal - they are deceptive Satanists! Burn em!. We have to be a good example. Turn the other cheek - love your enemy - all that stuff we talk about. Admittedly I'm not great at it either. Anyway - I think the environment there is already poisoned through a combination of things and how this has played out so far.
I think it was sealed even before Gabe went there. I see a bunch of people with little faith in themselfs desperately trying to hide it. To me it appears Roy knows little and mostly waits for his little moments of glory and that makes things even worse.
It can be easily seen. When they smell blood they keep very much on topic. They keep discussing that one verse. When they get in trouble they wriggle out with thinks like: Are you gabe?. Like their father. So Jesus died for nothing
Apparently they think there was some sort of concerted effort by Tentmaker to "trick" them by posing as other people, etc. While it's true that perhaps 1 or 2 members did go there under various names/accounts, and a few people discussed it in this thread, it was never a "Tentmaker planned event". I never even went there to check things out, I personally didn't see the point of it - much less encouraged anyone to do anything, other than "if you're there, plant a few seeds, be careful, move on", etc. If someone's not ready to hear, I say be loving and kind, plant a few seeds for someone else to water later and for God to germinate in His time, and move on.
They reportedly posted a post by me talking about possible directions of things, including that I'd edited out some of the discussions between 2 or 3 people about their interaction with accounts, user id's, etc., and apparently think that's some huge indictment or smoking gun or whatever. It's true I didn't want it to be broadcast that a couple of people were going there under multiple names or accounts and discussing it here - however, Tentmaker has no control over what an individual does on some other forum. That's silly. Everyone's adults and make their own decisions. If Samuel or whoever chooses to go there and post, and talks about it here, that he calls himself Fred Flinstone or whoever :laughing7:; as long as they're not breaking forum guidelines, they have the right to do that, I guess. However, again, there's no officially sanctioned Tentmaker effort to "trick" anyone over there. Honestly, I personally don't think that's the way to go about it, but then again, I'm also no one else's judge and again, people are adults not children.
So we'll see where things go. I personally don't think it's a great big deal to be ridiculed, reviled, accused, etc. IF it's by people who are hateful, mean, and not exhibiting the love of the Savior. If I'm wrong about those "qualities" in this case, please forgive me, I'm admittedly only hearing one side of the situation. Thus the 'IF'.
Anyway, easy does it, maybe this thread has about run its course, we'll see.
James.
Hi charsan. :happygrin:
Quote from: legoman on January 28, 2011, 11:58:24 PM
For whatever reason, this particular message board seems very toxic.
Jesus died for nothing and "you shall nor surely die"
QuoteBut if you notice in the main "open discussion board" there is a battle going on between Sadie & Titus about OSAS vs. no-OSAS. And their method of argument is starting to sound like the same attacks against UR. If Universalism wasn't there as a big target, they would be damning each other to hell.
A divided kingdom can't stand. Maybe slipping in a few OSAS comments breaks up the pack of wolves?
Quote from: jabcat on January 28, 2011, 08:53:59 AM
Oh, OK. :bigGrin: You [or anyone]...
You disappoint me Mr. TCB reader.
You should have used: you
+ :laughing7:
Oops. It's very possible I read the CLV that day. :wink3:
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 29, 2011, 07:20:23 AM
Oh, and I never signed up with the vulgar screen name RoyS attributed to me, or any other vulgar screen name for that matter. Nor did I pose as a Catholic at a Catholic forum, or as an atheist at an atheist forum.
For the record.
The nickname on that Catholic forum is Roy5 (five) not S.
Well I posted an apology over there. I think its best we leave them alone. Whatever happened with gabe and them definitely left a mark, even if it wasn't all gabe's doing.
FYI they are probably reading this thread - which explains some of what they were thinking.
Anyhow there's no harm in discussing the error in their view. Maybe one of them will read it and it will sink in! LOL. Let's see those scriptures!
I wish they would have acknowledged that Jesus came to save the world...
Jesus, savior of the world
Jesus, savior of the world
Calling, drawing, knocking at your door
He's Jesus, savior of the world
Hark the herald angels sing
glory to the newborn king!
Peace on earth and mercy mild
God and sinners reconciled, to
Jesus, savior of the world
Jesus, savior of the world
Calling, drawing, knocking at your door
He's Jesus, savior of the world
What can wash away my sins
nothing but the blood of Jesus
What can make me whole again
nothing but the blood of Jesus
Jesus, savior of the world
Jesus, savior of the world
Calling, drawing, knocking at your door
He's Jesus, savior of the world
Yeshua, Messiah, knocking at your door
He's Jesus and He's the savior of the world!
Pitty the hell topics are on temp-ban at City-Data.
It would be nice to challenge them for a discussion without unbiased moderation on that forum.
Well from what I saw with how they come up with their own conclusions toward an individual, I would say at this point . . .if they call it black, I'm leaning heavily toward white. And if they have a disdain toward Gabe, then I say we embrace him. I've never encountered such people . . . I feel more comfortable with guys on death row at this point. And yet it was hard to let it go . . . even though they turn you into this crazy monster, you still want to try to find a way to heal whatever it was that has brought them to such a dark place. It's just sad.
Nathan, why do you think "we" (again, I haven't been over there - I run into enough trouble without seeking it out :happy3:) have focused on them for the past few days as "we" have? What's the draw? I hate to sound like a broken record, but I just personally don't see the point in arguing with people who are so set that they absolutely won't listen... if they've trusted Jesus as their Savior, as far as I'm concerned they're my brothers and sisters. It's true we're told to love, share, let people know He's savior of all men, but not to convince them. If we truly believe God's in control, won't He ultimately take care of it in His timing? What I mean is, don't you think there's some point we're not supposed to struggle? Share the Good News, walk it out daily, and let God do the rest?
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 29, 2011, 07:40:21 AM
joe is saying that I clearly duped everyone. Do others feel that way? If so, why?
No Sam, I dont feel you duped me or anyone else. I can see how "they" would construe it to look that way. The only thing they had right was had you not have commented, we probably wouldn't have checked them out . . .but at the same time, "thats" exactly how I found this place . . .through the referal of someone who was here and also posting on other forums .. .it's how we find out where our home is I guess.
I went over there as transparent as I could possibly be, not because I was coached, but when you see people making comments like they were making . . .the claws weren't out in the conversations as bad as they were on my own thread over there, but in their discussions, you'd see comments that just looked so limited and you think that you can add some quality assistance in expanding at least some of their explanations. But I never got that far. I hoped that theyd at least give me the benefit of the doubt that I didn't come into UR on a whim, but that I was truly lead here and it wasn't through the same way as most others . . .I found it through seeing the dimensional things rather than the literal but these guys didn't seem to care at all about establishing a relationship, they were to bent out of shape over the doctrinal part . . .to be honest, I really was amazed I wasn't flipping junk back at them . . .and I was just as amazed that I got out as soon as I did. It was hard getting in, it was hard being in . . .and it was hard getting out. All around if I had to explain the experience in one word . . .I think I would go with "hard".
But no Sam . . I didn't go because you convinced me you needed help, I went because I just wanted to try to show them relationships can really reach across doctrine if you let it . . .they just wouldn't let it is all.
Quote from: jabcat on January 29, 2011, 08:58:49 AM
Nathan, why do you think "we" (again, I haven't been over there - I run into enough trouble without seeking it out :happy3:) have focused on them for the past few days as "we" have? What's the draw? I hate to sound like a broken record, but I just personally don't see the point in arguing with people who are so set that they absolutely won't listen... if they've trusted Jesus as their Savior, as far as I'm concerned they're my brothers and sisters. It's true we're told to love, share, let people know He's savior of all men, but not to convince them. If we truly believe God's in control, won't He ultimately take care of it in His timing? What I mean is, don't you think there's some point we're not supposed to struggle? Share the Good News, walk it out daily, and let God do the rest?
Well for me bro, it did a lot of things. It caused me to appreciate what I have in my own heart. And it caused me to appreciate what we have here on this forum. It helped cause me to learn that it's not the individual people that you are warring with . . .it's the carnality that's controlling them. That really helped me the most when they kept goading me with their accusations . . .it's almost like they really wanted you to get into their fight with you . . .it was really hard to try to have any kind of conversation with that constant outlandish accusing going on the entire time . . .and then declaring that "I" should come clean . . . it just boggled my mind what on earth they were talking about. All I can say is sometimes God does lead us into dark places to illuminate perhaps some of the dark places that lie in us. I hate to say it, but we've seen a thread or two on this forum that would on occasion get a little crazy in debates and perhaps this is a great lesson to learn from them. Closed minds can become the darkest fortress.
I think the "drawing" came from the passion we all have with the life in us to at least make the effort to share that light . . . I'm still trying to sort it all out myself. Maybe it's just me, but it also feels like it's made "us" over here just a little closer than we were a couple days ago . . .not sure if "that's" all that great of a thing either :laughing7:
Quote from: legoman on January 29, 2011, 07:32:44 AM
Well - the universalism forum is now closed over there.
Turn The Light On and Darkness Flees
A lady in our church shared last Sunday about how her grandaughter who is 6 came to her after turning the light on and exclaimed "look Grandma . . .I turned the dark off."
From the mouths of babes.
:bigGrin:
OK, thanks. Interesting. Reminds me of "we battle not against flesh and blood, but against powers and principalities in high places". I need to remember most battles are fought best "on my knees" (spiritually).
Quote from: RoySCWS has always been open to ALL; we've had atheists, Muslims, pagans, and every stripe of Christian that you can name.
So basicly RoyS has no problem with any doctrine if it doesn't preach Jesus was/is successful. :mshock:
QuoteIf they come here in honesty, we'll welcome them
:LH:
Quote from: jabcat on January 29, 2011, 09:26:26 AM
:bigGrin:
OK, thanks. Interesting. Reminds me of "we battle not against flesh and blood, but against powers and principalities in high places". I need to remember most battles are fought best "on my knees" (spiritually).
weapons of warfare are mighty through prayer . . .crap . . .what's the rest of that . . .
3For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4(For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
5Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
We're not fighting demons . . .just mind sets.
I think in some cases it might be both, but then that's another topic. :eyebrow: Some other time perhaps.
Matthew 6:34 "So don't worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring its own worries. Today's trouble is enough for today." :bigGrin:
This verse should be the cornerstone of Christianity. There is just no doubt what it is saying. One man's [Jesus] righteous act has justified the life of all men. There is nothing here about whether or not they accept it or whether they are good or bad. It is given to them freely. That's why the KJV translators add the words 'free gift.'
To all men, then, no matter what you think about yourself or what you have done, your life has been justified by another--the Lord Jesus. That is why he says, Go and sin no more.
Romans 5:18 (New American Standard Bible)
18So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
"justification"
G1347
δικαίωσις
dikaiōsis
dik-ah'-yo-sis
From G1344; acquittal (for Christ's sake): - justification.
G1344
δικαιόω
dikaioō
dik-ah-yo'-o
From G1342; to render (that is, show or regard as) just or innocent: - free, justify (-ier), be righteous.
19To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
20Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
21For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
--2 Cor 5
Precisely, and it is readily obvious from reading his posts that there is no reason to suspect its me. This is just one example of how shoddy their investigative techniques are. I can't tell you how many people came to their forum and were accused of being me.
Quote from: WhiteWings on January 29, 2011, 08:09:40 AM
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 29, 2011, 07:20:23 AM
Oh, and I never signed up with the vulgar screen name RoyS attributed to me, or any other vulgar screen name for that matter. Nor did I pose as a Catholic at a Catholic forum, or as an atheist at an atheist forum.
For the record.
The nickname on that Catholic forum is Roy5 (five) not S.
For those who are inclined to search out my history over there....
I posted as, of course, Gabriel.
Before that I posted as 'SamC' : http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/member.php?u=7871
I also posted as 'Apokatallasso' : http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/member.php?u=1783
And I also posted as 'Seraph' : http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/member.php?u=1244
That sums up my appearances there since 2008. Review my posts and see for yourself how I've conducted myself there.
Titus thinks I may be possessed by Satan. I suppose that explains all the comments about me being Satanic and the child of the Devil.
"Gabe is a sick, twisted pathological liar. He may even be possessed."
Oy vey!
Have any of them shared of what denominational background they come from? Sounds a little Apostolic. I just can't get over how judgmental they are without any hesitancy whatsoever. I've not been back over there since I told them I was done and I have no desire to check anymore of their responses.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 29, 2011, 07:20:23 AM
Oh, and I never signed up with the vulgar screen name RoyS attributed to me, or any other vulgar screen name for that matter. Nor did I pose as a Catholic at a Catholic forum, or as an atheist at an atheist forum.
I know not all agree on this forum but for me atheism is closer to Christianity than their anti-christianity.
It's better to deny He exists than slandering His name.
:2c:
WW, indeed.
An atheist that can treat others as they would have others treat them is considerably closer to Christ than are hate-spewing, judgmental "Christians".
Do any of you know "joeallcomm1?
:cloud9: Appears some have apologised to you Nate.....
They remind me of the Israelites who stayed at the bottom of the mount when Moses went up, because they were too afraid to hear His voice for themselves. Essentially, that's what's happening when someone clings to the letter that killeth..... :2c:
Reflecting on the above thought I had, it occured to me that God did not tell Moses to drag the fearful and unbelieving up the mountain with him. Isn't this what we try to do when we try to bring others into UR with us? There are seasons for all things under the sun; it takes discernment to know who's "in season".......
RoyS sent me an email today wherein he allegedly quotes a member here as saying the following:
Quote
As I have said before I do not know Gabe/Samuel I only met him a day before I met you guys. But whether you know this or not, coming here has been profitable, as coming here has exposed Gabe for what he is, one who causes division.
One poster here mentioned that Gabe goes around looking at what UR'ers believe (as he does not believe it himself) and posts those things he does not know anything about. Basically posting other peoples posts as if they were his own. No wonder he cannot answer the questions posed to him.
Anyway, after reading further today I wanted to let ALL, both your crowd and the UR'ers here know that Gabe does take peoples posts, and posts them as his own. I know this because in reading the post by Phil (possibly Gabe) (Gabe in a PM to me said Phil was a friend of his, that's all I really know) the lake of fire and the cross, (some of you guys from tents might recognise this from my posts there also) I recognised something I wrote years ago on tentmaker, it is not exactly word for word mind you but I recognise where he got it from.
Anyway, thanks for helping expose the divider of brethren.
This is unfortunate, and I'd very much like to clear this up with whoever said this. If you don't want to respond publicly, then I understand. I'd appreciate a pm at least.
For now, let me just say that I never once plagiarized anyone. "Pil" (not "phil") is indeed a friend of mine and I asked him to post my little study on the LOF and the Cross. I also posted that study here and at City-Data, and I've posted very similar studies elsewhere over the years. I can certainly carry my own in a debate on Universal Salvation, as I've been debating and studying the subject for 10 years now. I do not understand how anyone got this impression that I know little of the position I advance, as my posts do not display the ignorance that is being attributed to me.
Let's talk.
This is what I asked HansC:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesRohde
I'm new here. Is it normal for you to be overrun by what appear to be Moslem posts? One problem I see is you cannot pick up the conversation meaningfully with too many to chose from.
Here's his response:
Many of the new posters here are from a theological position known as universalism. There aren't any Muslims here that I know of.
What is your position on the this doctrine?
_________________________________
There are a lot of seemingly pro-Moslem posts when I went there a couple days ago. Apparently I won't get much opportunity to interact. "...but, the Word of God is not bound."
James did you look in the right section?
They have a Cults and other religions section that holds all non Christian posts. Iincluding muslem.
There is also a sub-section for UR: http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=42
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 29, 2011, 07:56:19 PM
Do any of you know "joeallcomm1?
He posts over at city-data sometimes. Very strong in UR understanding. :thumbsup:
Regarding what happened at CWS, at this point I think it is best to let it go.
For whatever reason they really have it in for Sam/gabe. Don't take what they say personally Samuel. Think of it like this:
They are very confused. They are in the dark place. They are in a prison of their own mind. They view you as an attacker, and they are trying to defend their prison - yet they don't even realize they are in prison.
The last post I made over there was in the open discussion forum about "Love is the most important thing". There are a few responses - they very quickly come to the conclusion that God's love has limits. I didn't bother trying to correct them. I mean I could try, but what would be the point? It would very quickly turn into UR "warfare".
Love never fails.
Love conquers all.
Love always protects.
And they come to the conclusion that God's love has limits. :dontknow:
They are in their prison. I can't let them out. They don't even want to come out. Only God can get them out.
Love is patient.
We have to be patient, because we know love never fails.
Thanks, Legoman. You're right.
I still don't know who wrote what I posted above.
The accusation sounds like "they're" language though. You've been over there more than any of us . . .if he can't give you all the information, then I wouldn't base anything on any of it. If all he's going to do is cherry pick a comment by some unknown person, I'd just blow it off. It's to the point now that even "if" they "appeared" to open up or confide in you, in view of their previous dispositions, I'd have to wonder if there isn't another alterior motive going on with this even.
I can tell you with MUCH confidence that I'm not the one who wrote it. Outside of that, the rest is just speculation. I've taken their site off my desktop . . .still haven't been back there and still have no desire to return. They don't just disagree, they attack without regard to the hearts of others. They're bullies and I've never been very fond of bullies.
I think you're right, Nathan. When I read it, my first thought was that they fabricated it. I also note that the word "tents" was used in reference to tentmaker, and the only time I recall reading the reference to "tents" (plural") was in one of "their" posts.
Desperation.
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 29, 2011, 06:30:02 PM
For those who are inclined to search out my history over there....
I posted as, of course, Gabriel.
Before that I posted as 'SamC' : http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/member.php?u=7871
I also posted as 'Apokatallasso' : http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/member.php?u=1783
And I also posted as 'Seraph' : http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/member.php?u=1244
That sums up my appearances there since 2008. Review my posts and see for yourself how I've conducted myself there.
How many aliases did you use before 2008?
I don't know offhand, lego. They deleted everything prior to 2008.
Quote from: legoman on January 31, 2011, 11:28:10 PM
Quote from: Samuel Cripps on January 29, 2011, 06:30:02 PM
For those who are inclined to search out my history over there....
I posted as, of course, Gabriel.
Before that I posted as 'SamC' : http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/member.php?u=7871
I also posted as 'Apokatallasso' : http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/member.php?u=1783
And I also posted as 'Seraph' : http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/member.php?u=1244
That sums up my appearances there since 2008. Review my posts and see for yourself how I've conducted myself there.
How many aliases did you use before 2008?
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3826
Well, what do you know? They are accusing yet another person of being "Gabe". And, no, I'm not homebrew777. If I had a dollar for every time they accuse some poor fellow of being me....
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3828
:dontknow:
This is getting better and better.
http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showpost.php?p=47169&postcount=3
Evidently, Sissy had a U.S. Marshal hack my computer some time ago. Apparently, they found that I'm an alcoholic who can't keep a job and that I'm addicted to drugs and vile porn.
Wow. The measures some will take...
I really don't know what's going on with this situation, but I'm beginning to fail to see the relevance or productivity of the continuance of this thread.
Gabe/Samuel, as far as I know no one here knew you before you came here. You've not broken any forum rules or posted anything reprehensible on this site. However, this whole "swarmed in a debate" thread and the interaction/accusations over at that other site is at the very least, strange and disturbing. For now, I believe this particular vein has gone on long enough. If people wish to post at any other site, that's of course everyone's own business. But TM is a safe haven for people who are truly, honestly seeking information and support in the revelation of Ultimate Reconciliation and/or for anyone being drawn to Jesus as Savior in the first place. I ask that we get back to that focus, so this thread is being locked, at least for now. For the good of those involved and for the purposes of this board, I ask that we get back to declaring Jesus as Savior of the world, and discussing/sharing what that means. Thanks, James.