Getting swarmed in a debate

[jabcat]

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???!!!!

[jabcat]

Ah, one good report, thanks.  :)   Others?

[WhiteWings]

 :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.

[Molly]

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

[WhiteWings]

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)

[Samuel Cripps]

: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.

[WhiteWings]

: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.

[legoman]

The thread is closed...

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.

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).

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.

^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.'

So:
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...

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.

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.

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:

All=elect/believers.
Wants=hope not fact.

More adding to the text.

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...

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.

[shawn]

: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?

[Molly]

shawn!  Your posts over there are incredible!  You have a real gift.

[shawn]

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.

[legoman]

Wow that is awesome Shawn!

[Samuel Cripps]

http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?p=44217#post44217

Now they're are saying that Christian Universalists aren't really christians.

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?

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: PTL Shawn.....I haven't read the site posts, but I rejoice with you in your liberty!  :HeartThrob:

[Samuel Cripps]

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.

[jabcat]

Amen, Shawn

http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?p=44217#post44217

Now they're are saying that Christian Universalists aren't really christians.

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.

[jabcat]

you might ask them that question Samuel;  how do the scriptures say one is saved?   :2c:

Anything beyond that, they're judging, IMO.

[Molly]

It's a test.  It's only a test.  :sigh:

[shawn]

Amen, Shawn

http://www.christianwebsite.com/forum/showthread.php?p=44217#post44217

Now they're are saying that Christian Universalists aren't really christians.

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.

[shawn]

:cloud9: PTL Shawn.....I haven't read the site posts, but I rejoice with you in your liberty!  :HeartThrob:

I appreciate that Cardinal.   

[jabcat]

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.

[Samuel Cripps]

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.

[jabcat]

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:

[Molly]

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...

[Samuel Cripps]

HansC writes:

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.