The oldest and most asked question towards Universalists. I was asked this yet again. As usual I dont have a clear answer prepared. What is the best response to someone who wants to know why they should avoid sin.
Here is their exact quote:
"So what is the punishment for sin? What's to stop me from doing whatever I want? I wont go to hell. I'll eventually get to heaven. And if there's no hell and we all go to heaven then why should I try to further the Gospel? Why? There's no point. Everyone will get there sooner or later. I'm just gonna party like it's 1984 man! Rock and roll!"
How do I answer this?
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 26, 2007, 07:01:36 PM
"So what is the punishment for sin? What's to stop me from doing whatever I want? I wont go to hell. I'll eventually get to heaven. And if there's no hell and we all go to heaven then why should I try to further the Gospel? Why? There's no point. Everyone will get there sooner or later. I'm just gonna party like it's 1984 man! Rock and roll!"
How do I answer this?
Our heavenly Father has made us subject to the futility of sin "not willingly" or "not by any choice of our own", but by reason of Him who has made it so. The Scriptures declare that in one man (by one man's disobedience), we have been "made" sinners, or the "whole race has been constituted / rendered sinners". The whole mass of mankind has been rendered sinners in one man, and the whole race of mankind will be rendered/ constituted righteous in one Man, the Man from the glory, the Last Adam!
Yes, there is most certainly punishment for sin, but punishment has one purpose and one purpose only, change and transformation, or correction, not unending correction, but change that leads to the peaceable fruits of righteousness.
We all reap what we sow. That is really how you answer it. You might be saved in Jesus Christ from eternal torture and torment, and might be saved in Jesus Christ concerning your annialiation, but you still will have to pay the cost of making bad decisions when we sin. It causes stress, tears, fears and being thrown to and fro in every wave that comes your way, and it isn't just us who deal with those consequences, our neighbor, our children, or children's children have to deal with the consequences of our one sinful act or lifestyle. When you want to continue to consciously sin, it is a selfish decision.
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 26, 2007, 07:01:36 PM
The oldest and most asked question towards Universalists. I was asked this yet again. As usual I dont have a clear answer prepared. What is the best response to someone who wants to know why they should avoid sin.
Here is their exact quote:
"So what is the punishment for sin?
Death
Quote
What's to stop me from doing whatever I want?
The threat of eternal torment in fire sure hasn't stopped "christians" from sinning. And God sure isn't stopping anyone from sinning either. So what's to stop anyone from sinning?
One does not "sin" in "love." Yet "believers" commit the greatest sin by hating their fellow mankind to the extent that they promote their neighbors whom they have been commanded to love, to instead be eternally torched. Go figure where the greatest sinners are. They are sitting in the pews.
Quote
I wont go to hell.
If one wants to be a blinded slave of the devil their entire lives, then that's what they are and that will bring anti-reward enough right here in this world. We reap what we sow. I always remind "christians" that I still accept every eternal torment scripture, as being unto our CAPTORS "as it pertains to our flesh and minds" who are "not us."
Quote
I'll eventually get to heaven. And if there's no hell and we all go to heaven then why should I try to further the Gospel? Why? There's no point. Everyone will get there sooner or later. I'm just gonna party like it's 1984 man! Rock and roll!"
Servants under threat are exactly that. They merely serve to save their own hides. If that threat is removed, then we see who "they" really are, and God is not fooled by them "keeping" from sinning under threat. He knows "who" they are in any case whether they keep a wrap on it or not eh?
squint
All great answers! Thanks!
Now, I already have some ammo for this but say the person sinning isn't a Christian and is claiming to have a happy life. How would you evangelize this person? Assuming they are (so far at least) not reaping any major consequences of their ongoing sinful lifestyle. In other words what does a Universalist say to evangelize the lost? Why should they accept Jesus as their Saviour?
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 27, 2007, 12:04:10 AMWhy should they accept Jesus as their Saviour?
Because He is. Why should you accept your grandfather is your grandfather? Because he is.
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 27, 2007, 12:04:10 AMIn other words what does a Universalist say to evangelize the lost?
There are people who have no hope, when you present that hope, they have hope again. Wouldn't you like to know that you are not what you have been told?
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 27, 2007, 12:04:10 AM
All great answers! Thanks!
Now, I already have some ammo for this but say the person sinning isn't a Christian and is claiming to have a happy life. How would you evangelize this person? Assuming they are (so far at least) not reaping any major consequences of their ongoing sinful lifestyle. In other words what does a Universalist say to evangelize the lost? Why should they accept Jesus as their Saviour?
Someone coming to belief will not always cease from "sinning" in any case.
Tell them the truth:
They are Gods offspring and should live accordingly. (Acts 17:23-29)
1 John 4:7-
Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God.
Knowing this, they "come to the fold" by The Shepard of hearts, 'cause they already are His. I gave up on the 4 step routine long ago.
willieH: Hi ES... welcome to Tentmaker! :thumbsup:
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 26, 2007, 07:01:36 PM
The oldest and most asked question towards Universalists. I was asked this yet again. As usual I dont have a clear answer prepared. What is the best response to someone who wants to know why they should avoid sin.
Here is their exact quote:
"So what is the punishment for sin? What's to stop me from doing whatever I want? I wont go to hell. I'll eventually get to heaven. And if there's no hell and we all go to heaven then why should I try to further the Gospel? Why? There's no point. Everyone will get there sooner or later. I'm just gonna party like it's 1984 man! Rock and roll!"
How do I answer this?
This is the most typical confrontation of UR... I have encountered it many times... here is what I say to them...
Quote from: ES"So what is the punishment for sin? What's to stop me from doing whatever I want? I won't go to HELL. I'll eventually get to heaven."
My answer: So what you are saying is:
"what you WANT" is to do other that what GOD WANTS? :dontknow:
If you are so inclined, then GOD has NOT yet called you, for when GOD calls... his TRUE SERVANTS respond, because upon that CALL, they NOW seek to do
HIS WILL...
Your words... "whatever
I WANT" ...is not about
HIS WILL, rather is about
YOURS... and displays what you actually
"want"!
Quote from: ES"And if there's no hell and we all go to heaven then why should I try to further the Gospel? Why? There's no point."
My answer: CHRIST commanding is NOT
reason enough to spread the Gospel? You display by your words that you have NOT been called by Him, for it is HIS WILL that calls for the furthering of the Gospel...
If CHRIST has truly CALLED you, and you are now HIS SERVANT, then you shall SERVE HIM... by doing as He commanded... not hoping or expecting to be rewarded for that service... It is NOT up to us to question that command, but to obey it and fulfill its CALL upon our lives...
The results, should they contain HELL or HEAVEN, are not to even be considered by us as our
motive to further the Gospel... The RESULTS are to be left to HIM...
If we are motivated by the anticipation of gaining HEAVEN, ...then selfishness is our motive and we are trying to EARN or WORK our way to HEAVEN
by spreading the Gospel...
Quote from: ES"Everyone will get there sooner or later. I'm just gonna party like it's 1984 man! Rock and roll!"
My answer: Another display of NON-CONVERSION... for if you were BORN AGAIN, or CONVERTED,
such an alternative as noted above would not appear...
This kind of comment only displays that the one making it wishes to CLING to SIN, and that CHRIST's WILL to SAVE His Children, is not the motivator in that experience... rather, what this one might GAIN is his/her motivation...
pEAce... :Sparkletooth:
In
JESUS
...willieH :handshake:
The question, why should I refrain from sinning if I'll eventually get to heaven anyway?, seems to be a very immature question to me. It seems akin to asking "Why shouldn't I break my leg if doctors can set it and it will eventually heal?" or "Why shouldn't I travel from New York to Chicago by flying across the Atlantic, Eurasia, and the Pacific and then taking a connecting flight from Los Angeles? I'll still get there in the end."
You might also point out to him that doing the right thing simply to get a reward or to avoid a punishment in the first of Kohlberg's six stages of moral development (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development). The question doesn't seem qualitatively differt from "why shouldn't I rob a store if I won't get caught?"
Quote from: Jacob1207 on August 27, 2007, 04:30:38 AM
The question, why should I refrain from sinning if I'll eventually get to heaven anyway?, seems to be a very immature question to me. It seems akin to asking "Why shouldn't I break my leg if doctors can set it and it will eventually heal?" or "Why shouldn't I travel from New York to Chicago by flying across the Atlantic, Eurasia, and the Pacific and then taking a connecting flight from Los Angeles? I'll still get there in the end."
You might also point out to him that doing the right thing simply to get a reward or to avoid a punishment in the first of Kohlberg's six stages of moral development (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development). The question doesn't seem qualitatively differt from "why shouldn't I rob a store if I won't get caught?"
Very good
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 26, 2007, 07:01:36 PM
The oldest and most asked question towards Universalists. I was asked this yet again. As usual I dont have a clear answer prepared. What is the best response to someone who wants to know why they should avoid sin.
Here is their exact quote:
"So what is the punishment for sin? What's to stop me from doing whatever I want? I wont go to hell. I'll eventually get to heaven. And if there's no hell and we all go to heaven then why should I try to further the Gospel? Why? There's no point. Everyone will get there sooner or later. I'm just gonna party like it's 1984 man! Rock and roll!"
How do I answer this?
Kind of reminds me of the old saying, " If God wanted men to fly, he would have gave them wings." God gave the law of gravity, but men fly anyway on built wings. And God is not against them flying. Just because God gave laws, does not mean he is trying to restrict men from breaking them. Sin is a law, that God put into reality, and put men into that reality, knowing full well that men would submit to that law of sin. Notice Gen.3:5;" For God KNOWS that in the day, (not the next day), in THAT day you eat from your environment, you will be influenced by what you ate"( Interpretation mine). God already knew before men sinned, that they would sin. And men wouldnot have sinned if it was not introduced into their environment. Belief in Universal Salvation is a belief that God will still give humanity Salvation, no matter what their effort to avoid sinning will produce. The effort to avoid Laws that God put into motion is admirable, but there is only so much one can do. Gravity is going to pull against anything on earth that defies it, no matter how strong that thing could be. So it is with Sin. There is no such thing as a " Sin Avoiding Artist." All are affected by sin, no matter what they believe in.
One will sin weather they believe in Universal Salvation or not. Its the results of sin that really is at the core of certain beliefs. Some believe sin will result in canceling out salvation, others do not see that happening. A belief in Universal Salvation is not a go ahead and Sin belief. Its an Understanding that the core responsibility for sin has to do with the one who was chosen to defeat sin. The one who created the environment of Sin, is the one who was responsible for giving his life to cover humanity's part in it. So while humanity is " Yet in their Sins", still sinning, the debt has been paid by Christ and we are covered. Even though we are all fatality's, all sinning, our insurance coverage is just that good. It may not seem fair to cover a sinner who is guilty, but that is what this true grace is about.
Now if humanity must pay for their own sins, then yes, each sin we committ, we need to cover it ourselves and be held responsible for them each and every time. And that is the core mentality of the eternal hell doctrine, it is men paying for their sins, each and everyone of them a billion times over a trillion. And this belief requires humanity to suffer , even greater than Christ himself suffered. Because if eternal hell punishment is true, then there will exist a race of beings who's suffering will far surpass that of Jesus suffering. And if you are going to calculate mens sins and say its not fair and just for them to get away with it and be forgiven, how, in the name of reason, could one justify the eternal magnification of pain and never ending misery, and think that to be fair?
So which is more fair? Eternal forgiveness of all sin, or the required every moment continual repayment of each and every sin that men committ?
Peace.
Brilliant answer Mickiel, the rest too, good answers.
Hey ES, looked at the site yesterday, too tired to come and assist you I need a break from debate for awhile. This is a typical question and like Mickiel says, these guys work their salvation, they do not rest in God's grace.
Yes we avoid sin, yet we sin, the only difference between unsaved and us we try to avoid sin.
When one asks a question like this I question their morality anyhow, it is a dumb question but you need to answer in love.
BIC
It seems that this question coming up so often says a lot about the condition of mankind today. The attitude is so often "What's in it for me"? It seems when I grew up, we were taught to be good and to do what was good just so we could be good. It was about having self-respect. Today, we are concerned that all kids have good self-esteem instead. Self-respect comes from an inner knowing of what is good and living up to that in your life. But, self-esteem says that you should feel good about yourself, even if you are a murderer or pedophile or rapist.
Why should I not sin if there is no hell is saying that I will only do what is good to gain a reward or to avoid a punishment. It matters little if I feel that I am a good person, it only matters if the payment for being good is worth what it takes to say No to sin.
Once a person is truly born-again, they are no longer looking for excuses to sin. They are looking for a way to be righteous and to please God without sin. Heaven or Hell should never factor into the equation when one knows the Lord. On the other hand, for a lost person who does not have the Lord in their lives, this may be the kind of question they would ask because they are selfish and self-seeking by nature.
John
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 26, 2007, 07:01:36 PM
Here is their exact quote:
"So what is the punishment for sin? What's to stop me from doing whatever I want? I wont go to hell. I'll eventually get to heaven. And if there's no hell and we all go to heaven then why should I try to further the Gospel? Why? There's no point. Everyone will get there sooner or later.
I'm just gonna party like it's 1984 man! Rock and roll!"
How do I answer this?
I really wonder at statements like these... Don't they love the Lord? Were they actually happy in their sin? Have they not felt drawn to the Father? Well, I would have to go back to the 70s for my partying and I'm telling you I was miserable then! I now have someone and something to live for!
Many UR believer also believe that people will be punished for sin, both on earth in the flesh and possible after death. The only main thing that sets UR apart from ET is that ET teaches that people will be punished for:
100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years x forever! :mshock: :Pray: :Chinscratch: :whistleshake: :drama: :drama: :teaching: :teaching: :eek: :director: :bdh: :spank: :Shoot: :hammerhead: :soap: :Gtantrum: :Gtantrum: :hysteric: :hysteric:
Quote from: arcticmonster2003 on August 27, 2007, 03:08:35 PM
Many UR believer also believe that people will be punished for sin, both on earth in the flesh and possible after death. The only main thing that sets UR apart from ET is that ET teaches that people will be punished for:
1000000000000000000000000000000000 years x forever! :mshock: :Pray: :Chinscratch: :whistleshake: :drama: :drama: :teaching: :teaching: :eek: :director: :bdh: :spank: :Shoot: :hammerhead: :soap: :Gtantrum: :Gtantrum: :hysteric: :hysteric:
The wages of sin is death, period. We also reap what we sow on this earth as Craig said. I do not believe God will punish anyone with a literal fire. I might ask, "how much punishment does one need anyhow"? That is really not a question but a statement. :sigh:
How did this post get so wide, my goodness. :mshock:
CHB
I like the words of William Barclay in his essay "I Am a Convinced Universalist":
QuoteI am a convinced universalist. I believe that in the end all men will be gathered into the love of God. In the early days Origen was the great name connected with universalism. I would believe with Origen that universalism is no easy thing. Origen believed that after death there were many who would need prolonged instruction, the sternest discipline, even the severest punishment before they were fit for the presence of God. Origen did not eliminate hell; he believed that some people would have to go to heaven via hell. He believed that even at the end of the day there would be some on whom the scars remained. He did not believe in eternal punishment, but he did see the possibility of eternal penalty. And so the choice is whether we accept God's offer and invitation willingly, or take the long and terrible way round through ages of purification.
Gregory of Nyssa offered three reasons why he believed in universalism. First, he believed in it because of the character of God. "Being good, God entertains pity for fallen man; being wise, he is not ignorant of the means for his recovery." Second, he believed in it because of the nature of evil. Evil must in the end be moved out of existence, "so that the absolutely non-existent should cease to be at all." Evil is essentially negative and doomed to non-existence. Third, he believed in it because of the purpose of punishment. The purpose of punishment is always remedial. Its aim is "to get the good separated from the evil and to attract it into the communion of blessedness." Punishment will hurt, but it is like the fire which separates the alloy from the gold; it is like the surgery which removes the diseased thing; it is like the cautery which burns out that which cannot be removed any other way.
Sin always carries a punishment. Goodness has its own reward. God's goal is to change us into His perfect image as found in His only begotten Son Jesus Christ. I believe there will be a purifying process of some sort to make that happen. As I overcome sin with God's help, I'm acting in His ultimate will for me.
Quote from: Craig on August 27, 2007, 01:24:43 AM
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 27, 2007, 12:04:10 AMWhy should they accept Jesus as their Saviour?
Because He is. Why should you accept your grandfather is your grandfather? Because he is.
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 27, 2007, 12:04:10 AMIn other words what does a Universalist say to evangelize the lost?
There are people who have no hope, when you present that hope, they have hope again. Wouldn't you like to know that you are not what you have been told?
May I request clarification here? One thing you said caught my interest more than the rest. "Wouldn't you like to know that you are not what you have been told?"
What have we been told we are and what then are we?
Quote from: darsemnos on August 28, 2007, 06:15:15 AM
Quote from: Craig on August 27, 2007, 01:24:43 AM
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 27, 2007, 12:04:10 AMWhy should they accept Jesus as their Saviour?
Because He is. Why should you accept your grandfather is your grandfather? Because he is.
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 27, 2007, 12:04:10 AMIn other words what does a Universalist say to evangelize the lost?
There are people who have no hope, when you present that hope, they have hope again. Wouldn't you like to know that you are not what you have been told?
May I request clarification here? One thing you said caught my interest more than the rest. "Wouldn't you like to know that you are not what you have been told?"
What have we been told we are and what then are we?
I believe Craig is saying that people are told they are despicable in God's eyes and that they must clean themselves before God will accept them. They fail, and fail, because this task is impossible to do! Only God can do it! So, they give up believing they are hopeless and destined for an Eternal Hell at worst, and at best, the grave. These people have no hope! When you invite them to the house of God, that he accepts them for who they are, that he is not angry with them, but wishes to teach and train us like Children, then a spring of hope comes up.
I can personally declare that I was hopeless before I was willing to accept UR. My way didn't work, so I might as well give it to God and give him a shot! If he fails, at least I have an excuse! Oh wait, I hear my ET brothers telling me that I am going to burn in hell for that thought! Darn! I was soooo close :P
On another note, this question was posed to me from a good friend who believes in Eternal Hell. When I responded much in the same way as WillieH, my friend decided to play the victim card and said that I was not his judge and that only God was... I flat out made it plane as day to him that the only thing that kept him from sitting and carousing was the fear of punishment and I told him right up front that he has no desire to serve God and this shows his intention. Again, I was met with hostility...
In retrospect, I am not sure that is the correct way to deal with the situation. Maybe I should just keep my mouth shut and let God reveal to him how utterly immature and rebellious his statement/question was. In fact, I believe the correct way to deal with it is to leave it to God. But, part of my loves to go in there and gut a self righteous person, but then I am reminded, how am I any better than I once was, if I simply resort to that sort of behavior?
And as for WillieH, nothing but love for you bro! You are very kind in the way you present everything, and perhaps others take it far better than my monotone, cross tone... As my brother said "Gabe, you always look angry or P---d off!" and I guess I never knew I displayed that type of demeanor, because that is not how I am... I think I am so direct that people take me very wrongly... Chalk that up to my personality, or perhaps my sin nature. Take your pick :D
Oh you have touched on a very key issue here. THE VICTIM.
In this mindset, the VICTIM blames it all ol' red guy, he made me do it.
Yet we know as I responded in Gary's thread, the flesh remains with us even after the conversion/baptism/sanctification.
The VICTIM then feels the need to work/keep his/her salvation, trying to add-to what is 100% fulfilled in Christ.
But then the church creates the VICTIM in the first place and places the VICTIM under subjugation of the LAW and the laws of the church, viz bondage, religion, tradition.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
WHO THE SON SETS FREE IS FREE INDEED. geddit? :mshock:
So to apportion blame to the person is IMO not correct, ol' red guy just needs to influence the one we may not speak against, the pastor, the anointed. Once he has the head sick, he has the whoooole body sick.
SOLUTION - GET A NEW HEAD
JESUS
Heb 4:15 For we have not a high priest
which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are,
yet without sin.
There is a scripture I am looking for about speaking out touching the anointed, can't find it now but the point is we are all anointed, just depends from whom that anointing comes eh?
Blessings
Quote from: SeekerSA on August 28, 2007, 11:16:05 AM
Oh you have touched on a very key issue here. THE VICTIM.
In this mindset, the VICTIM blames it all ol' red guy, he made me do it.
Yet we know as I responded in Gary's thread, the flesh remains with us even after the conversion/baptism/sanctification.
The VICTIM then feels the need to work/keep his/her salvation, trying to add-to what is 100% fulfilled in Christ.
But then the church creates the VICTIM in the first place and places the VICTIM under subjugation of the LAW and the laws of the church, viz bondage, religion, tradition.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
WHO THE SON SETS FREE IS FREE INDEED. geddit? :mshock:
So to apportion blame to the person is IMO not correct, ol' red guy just needs to influence the one we may not speak against, the pastor, the anointed. Once he has the head sick, he has the whoooole body sick.
SOLUTION - GET A NEW HEAD
JESUS
Heb 4:15 For we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
There is a scripture I am looking for about speaking out touching the anointed, can't find it now but the point is we are all anointed, just depends from whom that anointing comes eh?
Blessings
Hi Seeker
Nicely worded :icon_flower:
and as Tigger would say.." a DOUBLE grrrrrrrrrrrr :thumbsup:
These scriptures came to my mind reading this:-
Mar 5:25 And a certain woman, which had an issue of blood twelve years,
Mar 5:26 And had suffered many things of many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse,
Mar 5:27 When she had heard of Jesus, came in the press behind, and touched his garment.
Mar 5:28 For she said,
If I may touch but his clothes, I shall be whole. Mar 5:29 And straightway the fountain of her blood was dried up; and she felt in [her] body that she was healed of that plague.
Mar 5:30 And Jesus, immediately knowing in himself that virtue had gone out of him, turned him about in the press, and said, Who touched my clothes?
Mar 5:31 And his disciples said unto him, Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?
Mar 5:32 And he looked round about to see her that had done this thing.
Mar 5:33 But the woman fearing and trembling, knowing what was done in her, came and fell down before him, and told him all the truth.
Mar 5:34 And he said unto her, Daughter,
thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy plague Blessings
Taffy
Lamentations 3:38-40
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High
That both good and ill go forth?
Why should any living mortal, or any man,
Offer complaint in view of his sins?
Let us examine and probe our ways,
And let us return to the LORD.
The devil can't make you do anything and the serpent was punished just like Adam and Eve. Each are rewarded and punished according to their own sins. No man shall offer complaint in view of his sins, each are responsible for their actions and deeds. It does not matter that we must contend with other influences.
-grammar fix-
Quote from: Craig on August 28, 2007, 09:39:51 PM
Who is blaming or condemning other men for their sins?
That is the constant fallacy I keep seeing you addres Squint. We have all sinned, and it is not the sin that sins within us that also sins. You misunderstand Paul by this continual denial that you never sinned, but that it is sin within you sinning.
Paul said, if you desire to do good, and you do evil, then you know it is not you who sins but the sin that is within you. However, if you desire to do evil, and you do evil, that isn't the sin within you that sins, that is you.
Basically, every man is responsible and accountable for their own sins, but there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus. Through Jesus Christ, we may have sinned and have our sins, but we are nolonger dealt with according to our sins.
So basically in the end, we are all saying the same thing. Correct me if I am wrong. You deny your part in your sin, while Seeker and myself know we have sinned of our own accord. You believe you were unjustly subjected to a force you could not contend with and thankful that Jesus died for our behalf; we believe we were subjected to a force we could contend with through Jesus Christ and thankful that He died for our behalf. We all agree that our sins are not counted against us and we can walk by grace in Him who died for us.
2 Corinthians 5:9,10,14,15,18-20
So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.
For Christ's love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.
All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God.
Very well said Craig, very well.
I think this person has been influenced by a teaching I have seen before. It came from John of good news inc. They hold interesting views on sin and Satan, and have extended their belief further into that direction.
Its kind of like taking the truth, grabbing hold of sins responsibility, and completely bypassing humans involvement in it totally, almost as if Satan has done, what Jesus has done, taken our sins on his back, and because of Satan, we are not being judged.
Ones heart can go out to a teaching that looks to erase all of humanity's sins, but I would disagree with them being placed on any other shoulders than Christ.
Peace.
Very astute and well said Mickiel
Jesus Christ is our Savior! And the Savior of the World!
kept
Quote from: Kept on August 29, 2007, 04:45:57 PM
Very astute and well said Mickiel
Jesus Christ is our Savior! And the Savior of the World!
kept
Well yes, that is my view of it. Although accustomed to running into doctrines and beliefs that look to blame man for sin, and thus accuse man and see the resulting accusation result in man paying for those sins, I can see the error in that mixture of understanding being rerouted in the wrong direction. Mainstream religion has a problem factoring in Christ sacrifice as a total coverage of all those sins, so they find ways of rerouting forgiveness, or the coverage, to only those sins repented of. So they confuse the mixture, they are right about the need for repentance, but wrong about the coverage of Christ, which superseeds repentance. So they factor in eternal hell torture as the remedy for non repentance, not seeing Christ as that remedy.
Now, what this belief about not accusing men of sins, but totally placing them on Satan is doing, is rerouting the sins all to him, and totally bypassing humanity, and placing the blame on Satan. The error in that mixture is still just as confusing. It does get to the root of who should be accused of sin, Satan, the source, but it is bypassing some important issues in its tital wave of movement. One, it was God who has locked all men into disobedience, not Satan. It was God who created Satan, he didnot create himself. It was God who intimated all this process of sin, and that is why God took the responsibility for it, and it is he who has shouldered the blame for it.
Satan cannot shoulder this responsibility, only God can. It cannot be rerouted to Satan, the responsibility must be Gods. God charged the responsibility to Christ and put it on his shoulders. Jesus alone must bear the cross, the responsibility, the burden of sin. Only Christ can remove the quilt of Sin, no on else can be blamed, nobodyelse can be the Savior. Jesus became sin for us, he bore the responsibility, it cannot be placed on Satan. And I think this belief is confusing those lines in , its effort to remove sin from men, it is placing far too much of that burden on Satan. And I know what Satan will do with that gesture, he's going to cause even more confusion, if you treat him, as if he has done something, that only Christ has done. Taken on the sin of humanity.
So it can get confusing. Satans role is to deceive and mislead, not to bear the sins of humanity.
Peace.
Beautiful Post Mickiel :girlheart: :HeartThrob:
God is amazing in His goodness!
kept
I hold that the wages of sin resulting in GUILT is SPIRITUAL DEATH or estrangement from G-d (this becomes our focus).
The Holy Word never says physical death was a punishment.
I also don't necessarily think Yeshua was perfect in His flesh (but much more perfect then I can ever be), since he was Mikvahed by John for repentance of sin, (I got some issues with some things), but He is now alive in a PERFECT SPIRIT.
I hold to a Jerusalem based view of the soul....meaning we are in our souls now (not the hellenistic view of bodiless souls). In this all men are already created as a perfect spirit, and given an animal type soul body, which eventually returns to the ground.
We are to be bodily resurrected now / firstborn from the dead peeps(those who see and enter into Kingdom ahead of time), and when we die we will be in our perfected spirit state as Paul stated in his commentary in 1 Cor. 15.
Was it a sin (transgression of G-ds law) to partake in the knowledge of all things?
What did G-d say?
Its a SIN if you eat this, and I will kill you?
No, He said if you eat you will die.
Life of man is really not contained in the BLOOD (this is the life of the animal soul / ref. Lev. 17), life of man is really contained in the SPIRIT (Yeshua is trying to teach).
The RESULT of knowledge of all things, was man would be estranged from G-d by his own GUILT, not punishment by his creator in his personal forever torment in bodiless soul doctrine by the god of hades. G-d by His Grace and Mercy allowed man to physcially die so man could be ultimately reunited with His Creator in spirit.
Quote from: wilmont on August 30, 2007, 01:20:39 AM
Was it a sin (transgression of G-ds law) to partake in the knowledge of all things?
What did G-d say?
Its a SIN if you eat this, and I will kill you?
No, He said if you eat you will die.
Life of man is really not contained in the BLOOD (this is the life of the animal soul / ref. Lev. 17), life of man is really contained in the SPIRIT (Yeshua is trying to teach).
The RESULT of knowledge of all things, was man would be estranged from G-d by his own GUILT, not punishment by his creator in his personal forever torment in bodiless soul doctrine by the god of hades. G-d by His Grace and Mercy allowed man to physcially die so man could be ultimately reunited with His Creator in spirit.
Interesting. I have seen certain things in your writtings, which lead to other things. I have 2 questions for you, if you would endulge me. Are you a Druid? Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and came to earth, died and was ressurected?
If I can change that to 3, do you believe the bible is the written word of God?
Peace.
Quote from: Mickiel on August 30, 2007, 02:25:19 AM
Quote from: wilmont on August 30, 2007, 01:20:39 AM
Was it a sin (transgression of G-ds law) to partake in the knowledge of all things?
What did G-d say?
Its a SIN if you eat this, and I will kill you?
No, He said if you eat you will die.
Life of man is really not contained in the BLOOD (this is the life of the animal soul / ref. Lev. 17), life of man is really contained in the SPIRIT (Yeshua is trying to teach).
The RESULT of knowledge of all things, was man would be estranged from G-d by his own GUILT, not punishment by his creator in his personal forever torment in bodiless soul doctrine by the god of hades. G-d by His Grace and Mercy allowed man to physcially die so man could be ultimately reunited with His Creator in spirit.
Interesting. I have seen certain things in your writtings, which lead to other things. I have 2 questions for you, if you would endulge me. Are you a Druid? Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and came to earth, died and was ressurected?
If I can change that to 3, do you believe the bible is the written word of God?
Peace.
A Druid? LOL
I believe Yeshua is the son of G-d.
That G-d did resurrect him.
That he was in his ark for 40 days.
And then G-d took his perfect spirit home (Eccl. 12:7).
I am not a follower of the Gnostic, Mystery religions of the Nicenes, which later re-interpreted and made a new Bible.
The NT was not given to replace, surplant the Tanach, but was compiled many years later, for a group of replacers, who thought they were replacing Israel.
New assembly called Church replaces Israel
New Bible replaces Tanach
New god replaces former mean G-d
New instruments of escaping hades (salvation) including priests and magic blood and flesh.
Quote from: wilmont on August 30, 2007, 10:37:27 AM
I believe Yeshua is the son of G-d.
That G-d did resurrect him.
That he was in his ark for 40 days.
And then G-d took his perfect spirit home (Eccl. 12:7).
I am not a follower of the Gnostic, Mystery religions of the Nicenes, which later re-interpreted and made a new Bible.
The NT was not given to replace, surplant the Tanach, but was compiled many years later, for a group of replacers, who thought they were replacing Israel.
New assembly called Church replaces Israel
New Bible replaces Tanach
New god replaces former mean G-d
New instruments of escaping hades (salvation) including priests and magic blood and flesh.
Well thank you for your explanations, they explain much to me that I have already discerned. I have seen many views of God, and examined many interpretations of those views. Part of a life of belief, will always involve interpretation and change. And although change is a wonderful thing, it is not always wonderful, if the change interupts the interpretation of truth. Then there are root issues that spring forth. If the interpretation brings us closer to God, then we are headed in the right direction, we may not properly understand the interpretation, but at the least, we are headed toward one day understanding it.
This is why God needs to be involved in our understanding, because without his involvement, at some level, we can be easily misdirected.
I will only say this much more, because everytime I visit Tentmaker, I always see certain influences sweeping through its ranks. When the influences are flushed out, I usually am on the short end of that stick. But those things are going to occur, this is a free place to visit. This is not unique to Tentmaker, it is occurring everywhere that I can see that different beliefs can convene in fellowship.
It makes me yearn for the time when Gods Spirit will swoop down on a group, and every will interpit the same thing, no matter what their belief may be.
God has done this before, and I believe he will do it again.
Peace.
Hi Wilmont
Do you not believe any of the NT is truth? Im not sure I understand you.
kept
Sin is defined as missing the mark. The greatest sin that man makes is looking for a messiah that walks on two legs and saves them from sin.
The messiah, like the kingdom of God, is found within. When God overshadows a person with his holy spirit they give birth to Emmanuel (God with us). The new spirit that God sows in us is the new birth. That spirit will grow and bring about the second death within us - death to the former adamic nature. It is God's spirit within us that the becomes Yeshua (salvation of YHVH) that al men seek.
There is only one God and no other beside him.
Steve :bigGrin:
Brother in Christ
Hi Steve,
Yes, I see it the bible as inward events as well, that is what is life to me now. And Im thinking Wilmont is speaking the same but cant really tell.
I was thinking how he said
QuoteNew assembly called Church replaces Israel
New Bible replaces Tanach
New god replaces former mean G-d
New instruments of escaping hades (salvation) including priests and magic blood and flesh.
It is so true that organized religion has reduced the scripture to witchcraft. And have indeed replaced the ot with the nt. When in my experiance the OT has come alive in me and is a within book. I find Jesus Christ alive in the ot just as in the nt.
anyhoo, I dont know if your comment was to me but just chatting at ya lol :thumbsup:
kept
Quote from: Kept on August 30, 2007, 04:52:51 PM
Hi Steve,
[Snip]
anyhoo, I dont know if your comment was to me but just chatting at ya lol :thumbsup:
kept
Hi Kept :bigGrin:
I was just responding to the topic of SIN in general.
Isreal is the name that is given to the
new heart that God writes his laws upon. The new heart understands these laws and fullfills every jot and tittle of them because it sees how the natural law is only a set of pointers towards greater spiritual laws. The new heart can do this because it has the spirit of God dwelling within it and renewing it.
Psalm 51:10
Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.
Steve :bigGrin:
Brother in Christ
Quote from: Kept on August 30, 2007, 04:29:50 PM
Hi Wilmont
Do you not believe any of the NT is truth? Im not sure I understand you.
kept
I look at the NT as a COMMENTARY. What happens within fundamentalism (which I can fall prey to as well), systems are developed as if from the authority of God, so these can never change. A NT system developed over time from a particular group who chose a particular group of writings as their new BIBLE.
Quote from: Kept on August 30, 2007, 04:52:51 PM
Hi Steve,
Yes, I see it the bible as inward events as well, that is what is life to me now. And Im thinking Wilmont is speaking the same but cant really tell.
I was thinking how he said
QuoteNew assembly called Church replaces Israel
New Bible replaces Tanach
New god replaces former mean G-d
New instruments of escaping hades (salvation) including priests and magic blood and flesh.
It is so true that organized religion has reduced the scripture to witchcraft. And have indeed replaced the ot with the nt. When in my experiance the OT has come alive in me and is a within book. I find Jesus Christ alive in the ot just as in the nt.
anyhoo, I dont know if your comment was to me but just chatting at ya lol :thumbsup:
kept
Yes.
Example;
Lev. 17:11 (life of animal / creature soul is in blood)
Lev. 17:13 (you are not to eat the blood of any creature)
Jer. 31:29 (every man dies because of his own sin)
Romans 6:7 (physically dead people are totally freed from sin)
Animal blood was given FOR SACRIFICE,
not HUMAN BLOOD (Lev. 17).
This blood was not to be eaten or consumned (Lev. 17)
Why were animals given for sacrifice?
Was G-d saying the animal substitute was equal to a man who never sinned (as type in Yeshua)?
Was G-d saying that animal substitute was equivalent to a sinning man?
Why then not substitute a man for another man as the pagans did?
Because each man is responsible for his own sin (Jer. 31:29 as one example).
But yet G-d has allowed man to be totally freed from sin when we physically die (Rom. 6:7).
2 points;
Those under animal sacrifice still physically died.
Those under Yeshua sacrifice still physically died and die (good remez in Romans on this).
We all still physically die!
What can we say of the purpose of sacrifice, if we will ultimately be freed from sin when we physically die?
Sacrifice was for
SPIRITUAL DEATH until the time of physical death when we will be in perfected state (Heb. 11 and 12 again). When we loose GUILT / FLESH BLOOD is when we are in perfected state.
So does this mean that G-d has need of sacrifice so he can be appeased for a penalty?
No…..because in sacrifice
man SUBSTITUTES HIMSELF FOR HIMSELF, to be as if dead and in a spiritualy perfected state / guilt free (Rom. 6 again).
That's what Yeshua was / is (IMO) trying to TEACH, the world through the SPIRIT.
SACRIFICE YOURSELF through the SUBSTITUTE. Animal sacrifice was not given or needed FOR GOD it was GIVEN by G-D FOR MAN TO START NEW BORN AGAIN....not stay stuck in trying to appease HIM.
Its not as simple for people who are really WAY OF TRUTH minded, to just accept that a man can be a replacement for an animal sacrifce, when it is against the very word of God they claim to follow? To me it is a form of idolatry (on a personal level, not that I would try to offend) to believe that a Yeshua is just a replacement for an animal, and that there is some magical component to flesh blood (which they later developed doctrines to eat their god).
If a person does not believe in their version of this form of god appeasement they go to a place of firey torment that the Greeks held to.
So I hold that if the commentary does not add up (which it does not as shown in above example concerning sacrifice in what is now Pauline Christianity), then there must be another explanation that we must seek to understand.
Oh my, I laughed out loud that the Druid comment...
He coulda been like "Yeah Dude! I am on the Galadad server, and am a L50 Druid!" (Shamless DAoC reference - computer game)
ROFL... Still, the most hilarious thing I have read today and I needed a smile! :D
The word "heaven" is slightly more than half the time plural in Scripture. The commentaries like to explain it with a Latin term to sound like they know what they're talking about. They say the plural "heavens" is majestis pluralis, meaning plural only to communicate the exceeding glory of heaven. In reality there are three (3) heavens, (2 Co 12:2) corresponding to the dimensions of spirit (where peculiarly God's presence is), soul (psychic realm,) and body (the heaven of earth's atmosphere to the distant galaxies.) Jesus has passed through all the heavens (Hb 4:14) and rests up over all in the right of the Great All-Togetherness upon High (Hb 1:3.) While we are joined to Him there in ascension, we are undergoing a process with His Spirit sharing the same body in union with Him down into death and through resurrection to come into the demonstration of ascension.
When I bring up God when talking to strangers, whether believer or not, they usually change the subject to Ethics, "Do you think such and such is a sin?" It seems there is some prior commitment that functions as a veil to keep out the unworthy that is seen in the common misconception that the aim or purpose of those in whom the light has shined is to die and go, not to "hell," but to heaven. Progress toward our actual aim is in process whether we recognize it or not, regardless of what we do or not. When accurately taught, "The rudimentary elements of the oracles of God" (Hb 5:12,) what functionally is our, "Foundation" (Hb 6:1,) we realize our aim is to,"not die, but live; and, to enter, not a place, but a state of being that corresponds to the Divine nature (1 Co 3:11.)
The container Christ is a vessel of another form than that of Adam. Acknowledging a fact does not have the same effect on our personality as being formed through experience with the interrelatedness of that fact in our system of values. While it can be accelerated by special emissaries from God, what each of us go through is for Christ, Who is the Image and Glory of God, to be fully formed in us, (Ga 4:19) to undergo metamorphosis from Adam (homo sapiens) into Christ (homo novae,) (1 Co 15:45-49) that is, from beastly man of flesh into freely expressing all Jesus is and does---corporately when we gather as well as individually---no longer defined as a short-lived individual soul in a dirt husk subject to gravity and limited perception, but in another multidimensional deathless vessel of myriad living forms: all-knowing, all-powerfull and everywhere. Our immediate development is out of everything destroying man by going through the cross into wholeness and health, liberation, enlightenment and abundance. We are destined to ultimately enforce through love this blissfull glory in all the universe and continue after this universe is folded up for a keepsake.
---James Rohde
P. S. I neglected to say that all our transformation into His image is so that God has beings that correspond to Him, are of His own kind. This is with whom He can be intimate. He wants to be loved by a bride. Sin stops progress into this change, even reverses it, producing death rather than glory, separation rather than intimacy.
Thought it worth repeating:
Quote
The container Christ is a vessel of another form than that of Adam.
Acknowledging a fact does not have the same effect on our personality as being formed through experience with the interrelatedness of that fact in our system of values.
While it can be accelerated by special emissaries from God, what each of go through is for Christ, Who is the Image and Glory of God, to be fully formed in us, (Ga 4:19) to undergo metamorphosis from Adam (homo sapiens) into Christ (homo novae,) (1 Co 15:45-49) that is, from beastly man of flesh into freely expressing all Jesus is and does---corporately when we gather as well as individually---no longer defined as a short-lived individual soul in a dirt husk subject to gravity and limited perception, but in another multidimensional deathless vessel of myriad living forms: all-knowing, all-powerfull and everywhere.
Our immediate development is out of everything destroying man by going through the cross into wholeness and health, liberation, enlightenment and abundance. We are destined to ultimately enforce through love this blissfull glory in all the universe and continue after this universe is folded up for a keepsake.
---James Rohde
A mouthful!
Quote from: eternal sanctum on August 26, 2007, 07:01:36 PM
The oldest and most asked question towards Universalists. I was asked this yet again. As usual I dont have a clear answer prepared. What is the best response to someone who wants to know why they should avoid sin.
Romans 4 says that God justifies the ungodly. Period. And to those who believe this about Him, their faith is accounted as righteousness. That's the setting for going into Romans 5 when He tells us that the same many who were made sinners through Adam are the same many being made righteous through Jesus Christ. Romans 6 comes afterwards, speaking to the same many who were made sinners through Adam that are now the same many made righteous through Jesus Christ and says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT DAMNATION when it gives a chapter-long response to this question as to why believers should present themselves to God as alive from the dead, ready for their newness of life through the same glory of the Father that raised Jesus Christ, so that being dead to all of the infirmities of Romans 7, they can rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory that it says in Romans 8 that there's therefore now no condemnation to the many who are in Christ Jesus, who formerly were the many in Adam, and along with no condemnation, there's therefore now no separation from the Love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord for the same many who were made sinners through Adam who are now the same many made righteous through Jesus Christ -- because Jesus Christ is an imitator of God Who justifies the ungodly. Period. And to those who believe on Him Who justifies the ungodly and have their faith reconned as righteousness, they'll reign through the abundance of grace and this GIFT of righteousness in this life like a King EXPRESSING THE WILL OF HIM Who has all power and all authority both in heaven and in earth!!
Kapish?
Martin, I don't disagree with anything you say. However, and though it's something I admittedly am still in need of progressed revelation/understanding on, IMO there's still a "reap what we sow" effect...still a "presenting our bodies a living sacrifice"..."if we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive our sins", etc. Perhaps the key to living what many call "a Godly life" is just what you say, walking in a "living grace", recognizing it, a mindset of "in Him I live and breathe and have my being". As you intimate, when Paul talked about struggling with the flesh, his dilemma was he couldn't do the "good" he wanted, and he ended up doing what he didn't want to do...his solution was that Jesus was His answer, His covering, His redemption from His flesh...both present and future. I believe he still wanted to please the Lord and presented himself with an attitude/wish of obedience.
I believe the initial question is an important one that folks do ask about UR, and one I've personally had to a degree. My answer to myself and to a friend that asked me the question is, 'love...because we love Him Who first loved us enough to save us all...a desire to please our Father". But again, I agree, the only way we can do that is in His grace, because my efforts will never be enough.
God's blessing, James.
Quote"So what is the punishment for sin? What's to stop me from doing whatever I want? I wont go to hell. I'll eventually get to heaven. And if there's no hell and we all go to heaven then why should I try to further the Gospel? Why? There's no point. Everyone will get there sooner or later. I'm just gonna party like it's 1984 man! Rock and roll!"
Sin Jesus fulfilled the law, and Paul said Jesus erased the handwriting against us [the law]. Therefore there is nothing God holds against mankind. So in my mind your friend can't "sin", meaning offend God.
However, he can sin/wrong others. If he wants to live imprudently, what would stop him is the natural consequence of unwise actions. If he wants to sleep around, he risks disease. If he wants to use drugs, he risks jail time.
God's opinion of us/our standing before Him and the natural consequences of actions here on earth are not the same thing.
Giz
As the Lord starts extending life spans in the next few decades and people start living WAY past 100 again, a lot of this is going to wind up being "if I'd known I was going to live so long, I wouldn't of...." with bodily aches, frustrations, and pains that few amongst us have ever experienced. Medical science, through the Lord's guiding hand, will probably cure everything that we're dealing with right now, but so much of this life is "put out one fire, and another one breaks out," so there will probably be some diseases related to lifestyle that we've never heard of yet, even as the different cancers, blood sugar issues, bone issues, muscular issues, eye and ear issues, and viruses become vague memories of mankind.
There is relief in the near future for people with all of these issues that we've known up until now where people haven't quite been able to get their diet just right because of all of the modern conveniences/curses of the industrial age/technological age. Great White Sharks have over 10,000 teeth in their lifetime. Hydras, a certain type of jellyfish, bacteria, and certain other organisms are considered in biology to be "biologically immortal," meaning that if there isn't any excessive toxins that they come in contact from that they can't bounce back from, or some form of excessive trauma, then they'll literally defy the aging process century after century after century. This is the area of cutting edge research in the anti-aging field being studied at Cambridge University and various other schools, research institutes, etc. A lot of people with credible credentials are saying that 180 years to 500 years for a human being is probably the next big leap that we'll take in our science, and that this will probably be the gift of the 22nd century, if not a little sooner. God said in Isaiah that people's lives would get extended to where they'd live the same life spans as trees, once again.
I think that a lot of our "moral questions" will be resolved by these kinds of breakthroughs because of the "sowing and reaping" principle that's been mentioned. A lot of our sins that people are trying to say nowadays aren't sin probably "won't do" 200. The consequences will probably become evident -- even without any intrusional viruses, bacteria, and parasites -- when we get much past 120 years old. In the pre-grace days this lead to harder and harder hearts, so via the Vella (sp?) supernova, the incestuous situations and other factors God had to shorten the life span in order to accomplish His purposes in those previous ages. But I believe that along with the increased life spans of the very near future that we'll see increases of God's grace, God's Presence, etc., etc., that we've never seen before because of the present day ministry of Jesus Christ in His High Priestly ministry. Sin will become too old fashioned for many people, but for the sin cults of the near future that'll insist upon keeping the mysteries of iniquity alive, the horrors that they'll experience in their bodies and circumstances prior to their departing from this life will justify all of God's ways and commandments to them at the point of their death when they "meet their Maker" as the old saying goes. And as it says in Ezekiel about those coming through those judgments, they're KNOW the Lord, that He is the Lord, and they'll never open their mouths again to challenge His Way, because of their shame. The book of Isaiah says that very soon in our day that it'll become an oddity for anyone to die at 100 years old or younger.
Very interesting Martin. Thanks. So IYO, besides what you've stated, where do you see the future going wrt things like 1) the millenium, 2) Jesus' literal return, 3) judgment/GWT, 4) Lake of Fire, 5) with UR and the reconciliation of all, the resurrection? It sounds like you see scripture stating things just keep getting better and better in this age(?), or do you see an event that ushers us into a next age to which you're referring? Thanks, James.
Hi jabcat,
I do believe in an absolute global conquest through the preaching of the true Gospel prior to the resurrection of judgment, the new heavens and new earth, and Jesus being amongst us again, bodily, on the new earth. I don't believe that a single unbeliever will be left on the earth prior to the judgment day. I would refer you to the writings of B.B. Warfield and H.A.W. Meyer along these lines. Although they were Calvinists who didn't see anything regarding an each and every single individual type of Universalism, their exegesis on these points regarding everyone on the planet actually being brought to Christ is priceless. I'm not a theonomist because Paul's clear about the law being completely gone. I'm not sure what I believe about partial preterism yet. But the Scriptures are clear to me about the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness. I believe all of the Scriptures regarding God restoring the years that the locusts have eaten. I believe that Hebrews chapter 8 is at the very least, problematic for premillenial dispensationalism because I don't believe that at any point in the New Testament that the walls are rebuilt between Jew and Gentile that Paul said that Christ tore down. I believe that all of the Old Covenant promises were made to Jesus Christ, the way that Paul explains in the New Testament. I don't believe that Jesus Christ comes back to do what He emphatically told the Church to do, as the premillenialists would have us believe with regards to the discipling of the nations. He comes back, literally and bodily, simply as heir of all things to a new earth. 2Peter 3 is pretty plain that when Jesus Christ comes back, it all goes up as an offering before the Lord. No dividing of the resurrections, which would contradict Daniel, the Gospel of John, Paul's preaching in Acts, et. al. I don't believe that the Old Testament ever prophesied about two gospels, one to Jews and another one to Gentiles, but I believe that the New Covenant is the New Covenant and all of those promises are realized through Jesus Christ exclusively. Therefore, the millenium is the golden age conclusion of the Church Age. I was a dispensational premillenialist the first 31 years of my life, simple because that's what I'd always been taught, and then within the last couple of years I started noticing problems with that view in the stricter translations of the Bible, such as Rotherham's and the Concordant. In theology what I'm saying here is known as Postmillenialism, Absolute Postmillenialism, or Eschatological Universalism (which isn't connected to, but is easily supportive of the 'each and every' type of Universalism that all of us are in agreement about), and to tie this back to the original purpose of this thread: I believe that all of the greatness that's been restored through Jesus Christ, along with life, fruitfulness, and boundless love is the reason for staying out of sin. The destiny of each of us, even in this life, through Jesus Christ is absolutely glorious...if we'll just obey the Lord! Otherwise, we forego the glories that are rightfully ours through the work of Christ until the new earth.
Quite a bit to think on, thank you. God's blessing, James.
Our view of the future determines how we govern our "now" and how we treats others. Any place tolerated for "not sure if I'm going to make it; I'm barely going to make it, et. al." and the pressures of the flesh will revive and our relationships will die because we'll become the servants of sin while our view of the provision of God is skimpy, negotiable, substituteable, replaceable, irrelevant, nonsequitar, foolish, mistaken, debatable, etc.
Our view of the eschatology of our own personal lives is our own personal prosperity theology.
The flesh will always become an idol when we view God's grace as insufficient, therefore we'll have to go through such and such anyway. You simply don't have time for anyone when your flesh is requiring your undivided attention. The only reason for it to require that is uncertainty of the future, uncertainty of the provisions, and straining our fellowship with the Written Word because we're not believing that the Blood of Christ covers that particular provision that God has spoken to us about.