The delay of Christ's coming - a BIG problem to universal salvation!

[B_T]

Read the following article:

http://recollections.blogsome.com/2006/06/06/universalism-and-gods-delay/

Especially this:

The reason for God's delay, in other words, is God's patience (a bone that Jason has also been chewing on recently). As Peter goes on to say,

    The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and everything that is done on it will be disclosed.

Now, here's where my problems with universalism arise. On the one hand, nothing about Peter's passages are what De Rose calls "killer" verses for attacking universalism. On the contrary, God's fervent desire that all (De Rose's favorite word) will come to repentance and his equally fervent desire that none will perish seem to speak in favor of universalism. And the reference to the "destruction of the godless," like so many similar passages in the New Testament, is not knockdown proof that there will be no future chances for repentance even after death. Consider, for instance, that in the context Peter is talking about the Genesis Flood, which is an example of a case where God destroyed the godless and yet gave humanity a second chance. (Incidentally, the Flood myth might be a useful story for the universalist. To any anti-universalist who thinks that God's destruction of the earth must represent the "final chance" for humanity, the universalist could offer the Flood as a counterexample.)

[Andromeda_Organa]

How is it a problem?

[martincisneros]

It's more of a problem for those that misunderstand and in some cases follow the devil in villifying the Postmillenial and Word of Faith messages of global conquest with the Gospel.  The idea that seems to be conveyed without visiting the link, which I don't really intend to, but their argument seems to be that the world doesn't seem to be getting better.  But that's more of an attack against a view of an approaching millenium since the 2Peter 3 passage looks beyond to the New Earth. 

Christian Universalism hinges upon the finished work of Christ on the Cross, Christ's faithfulness to complete all of the aspects of His mission from our Father, and the day to judge it by isn't any day in the present or the next eon or eons, but the day to judge of the validity of the doctrine is when He's going to abdicate in 1Corinthians 15:24,28 'cause it's after that that our Father is supposed to be all in all.

[jabcat]

A word study of 'destruction' is interesting in this context.  IMO, certain things (anything in us that isn't pure) will be destroyed...but the word comes from the same word (apollumi) that also addresses the lost sheep, the lost (prodigal) son, and the lost coin...they were brought back/returned/renewed  :boogie:.

Also, as far as Jesus' coming.  In some respects, the preterist POV may have it right, in that Jesus has "come" many times...maybe He did "come" in a manner of judgment in 70 AD...My personal opinion however, is that doesn't preclude Him from coming again, and eventually in His glorified body to live amongst us.

God's blessing, James.

[jabcat]

I looked at the definition of myth, and see the use of it as a "sacred story...with symbols"....I learned something today...yay!!!!!

[martincisneros]

Even scientifically, the evidence is mounting for Omega Point Theory, which is the scientific version of Ephesians 1:10, the last two chapters of Revelation, and perhaps 1Corinthians 15:24,28.  I'm still not understanding how Tipler's against Superstring Theory, though, unless it's certain models of the Superstring Theory that he opposes.  Everything that I've understood thus far of Omega Point Theory doesn't preclude Superstring Theory, or certain versions of it, since as with all scientific theories you're generally pointing at a field or a collection of theories [all going by the same name, or very close except in the journals where the specifics are identified as to whose model of this or that] with some being version(s) more highly favored than others depending on the latest evidences, mathematical proofs, etc.

[martincisneros]

I looked at the definition of myth, and see the use of it as a "sacred story...with symbols"....I learned something today...yay!!!!!

sorta like theories being sacred math with symbols :laughing7:

[jabcat]

Ha!  Man, I count on my fingers.

[martincisneros]

Ha!  Man, I count on my fingers.

Just means you're in the Outer Court of Math.  Math likewise has an Outer Court, an Inner Court, and a Holy of Holies.  Don't feel discouraged that you count on your fingers.  Some folks would consider themselves mathematical atheists! :mshock:

I won't say that Math is in the image of God, yet, but it may be the only thing that a fallen man in a fallen world can produce of the image of God.  But that's a philosophical headache about whether or not wisdom is His image and whether or not math is wisdom or just the building blocks for wisdom on building everything.  Seems to have an easy answer at face value, but so does the chick or egg question.

Math really winds up being another form of Mammon, so it's ironic that man's making it squeal the truth incrementally more and more.  It's likely the outer edge of the Outpouring of the Holy Spirit where the signs and wonders in the earth and in the heavens are supposed to accompany it.  So that although Math has it's own outer court, holy place, and holy of holies, the kind of math itself, that's oncoming, is part of the outer court of the Outpouring of the Holy Spirit.